Ass't Sec'y & Roeder v. Life Style Homes, Inc., 91-STA-11 (Sec'y Mar. 21, 1991)

	U.S. Department of Labor Office of Administrative Law Judges

www.oalj.dol.gov

[skip navigational links] Search | A-Z Index

Find It! on DOL | OALJ Home | OALJ Law Library | About Us

September 23, 2008 DOL Home > OALJ Home > Whistleblower Collection

USDOL/OALJ Reporter
Ass't Sec'y & Roeder v. Life Style Homes, Inc., 91-STA-11 (Sec'y Mar. 21, 1991)

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

SECRETARY OF LABOR
WASHINGTON, D.C.

DATE: March 21, 1991
CASE NO. 91-STA-00011

IN THE MATTER OF

ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF LABOR
FOR OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH,
&nsp; PROSECUTING PARTY,

&nsp; AND

DAN W. ROEDER,
&nsp; COMPLAINANT,

&nsp; v.

LIFE STYLE HOMES, INC.,
&nsp; RESPONDENT.¹

BEFORE: THE SECRETARY OF LABOR

FINAL ORDER OF DISMISSAL

This proceeding arises under the employee protection provision of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (STAA), 49 U.S.C. app. § 2305 (1988), and implementing regulations at 29 C.F.R. Part 1978 (1990), and is before me for review of the Recommended Decision issued by Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Ainsworth H. Brown on March 4, 1991.

The ALJ recommends that the Secretary adopt the settlement agreement in this case. He found that the terms of the agreement, which was executed by all the parties, Complainant individually and counsel for the Assistant Secretary of Labor, appear reasonable and appropriate under the law.

Under the regulations governing the settlement of STAA cases, 29 C.F.R. § 1978.111(d), either the ALJ or the Secretary may approve adjudicatory settlements reached by participating parties. Consequently, there was no need

[Page 2]

for the ALJ to issue a recommended decision approving the settlement. My independent review of the parties' Stipulation of Settlement and Complainant's General Release,² however, persuades me that the terms of settlement are acceptable with the following qualifications.

The agreement appears to encompass the settlement of matters arising under various laws, only one of which is the STAA. As explained in Poulos v. Ambassador Fuel Oil Co., Inc., Case No. 86-CAA-1, Sec. Order, November 2, 1987, slip op. at 2, my authority over this settlement agreement is limited to matters arising under the STAA. See also Davis v. Kimstock. Inc., Case No. 90-STA-8, Sec. Approval of Settlement and Dismissal of Complaint, November 30, 1990, slip op. at 2. Accordingly, I have limited my review of the agreement to determining whether its terms are a fair, adequate, and reasonable settlement of Complainant's allegations that Respondent violated the STAA.

I also note that certain language in the agreement could be construed as a waiver by Complainant of causes of action he may have which arise in the future. See Stipulation of Settlement at 2 ¶ 5. In approving this settlement I interpret this provision as limited to a waiver of the right to sue in the future on claims or causes of action arising out of facts occurring before the date of the agreement. Davis, slip op. at 3; Johnson v. Transco Products, Inc., Case No. 85-ERA-7, Sec. Order Approving Settlement, August 8, 1985.

With the limitations set forth herein, I find the terms of the agreement fair, adequate, and reasonable and, therefore, approve the Stipulation of Settlement and General Release.

Accordingly, the complaint in this case against Life Style Homes, Inc. is DISMISSED.

SO ORDERED.

LYNN MARTIN
Secretary of Labor

Washington, D.C.

[ENDNOTES]

¹The caption is corrected to reflect the prosecuting party and the proper named person as the Respondent in accordance with 49 U.S.C. app. § 2305(c)(2)(A) (1988) and 29 C.F.R. §§ 1978.105(b)(2), 1978.108(a) (1990).

²I note in response to the ALJ's comments, that it is not imperative that the parties file the original documents. See 29 C.F.R. § 1978.111(d)(2).