U.S. Department of Labor
Office of Administrative Law Judges
211 Main Street - Suite 600
San Francisco, California 94105
Commercial (415) 974-0514
Government 8-454-0514
DATE: JAN 21 1990
CASE NO. 88-TSC-1
IN THE MATTER OF
RANDY MONTOYA,
PLAINTIFF
v.
VANCOUVER EXTRUSION COMPANY, INC.,
DEFENDANT
Before: THOMAS SCHNEIDER
Administrative Law Judge
RECOMMENDED DECISION AND ORDER APPROVING
SETTLEMENT
I find the following facts:
1. On or about October 2, 1987, Randy Montoya
("Montoya")
filed a Complaint at Case No. 88-TSC-1 alleging, inter alia, that
Vancouver Extrusion Company, Inc. ("Vanexco") had engaged in
discriminatory employment practices in violation of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act, the Toxic Substances Control Act, and/or other laws as
a result of Montoya's alleged reporting of violations by Vanexco of
environmental law to the Washington Department of Ecology.
2. Vanexco denied and continues to deny that it engaged in
any unlawful employment practices, or that it violated any state or
federal environmental laws.
3. On or about January 7, 1988, the U.S. Department of Labor,
Wage and Hour Division, notified the parties that its investigation
disclosed that Montoya's termination was not based on discrimination,
[Page 2]
but was justified.
4. On or about January 12, 1988, counsel for Montoya notified
Vanexco that Montoya had filed a Notice of Appeal and Request for
Hearing.
5. The matter was set for trial on March 1, 1988, and
thereafter continued on consent of the parties until August 15, 1988.
6. On or about August 12, 1988, the parties agreed to a
settlement of the case, and accordingly informed the Department of
Labor that the case had been settled and that there was consequently
no need for a trial. The parties contemplated that this settlement
would fully and finally resolve all claims asserted in Case No.
88-TSC-1.
7. In accordance with the terms of the agreement reached by
the parties on August 12, 1988, on October 11, 1988, the parties
executed a Settlement Agreement, which is further discussed in
paragraph 12 below.
8. In consideration of certain actions by Vanexco, Montoya
agreed, inter alia, to "forever settle, adjust and discharge all
claims of Montoya against Vanexco" and to dismiss the case filed at
No. 88-TSC-1 and all claims asserted therein "with prejudice."
9. Vanexco has performed all of its obligations under the
Settlement Agreement, and Montoya has accepted the benefits
thereunder.
10. Montoya entered into the Settlement Agreement voluntarily,
without coercion and with the assistance of counsel.
11. The settlement entered into by the parties is fair,
reasonable, and not against the public interest.
12. The parties failed to submit evidence of their agreement
to me after several telephonic requests. Thereafter, on October 12,
1989, I issued an order to show cause why the case should not be
dismissed. The parties responded, but did not produce a copy of the
settlement agreement. Pursuant to Thompson v. The Detroit Edison
Company, 87-ERA-2 (Sec'y. of Labor, Sept. 29, 1989) I ordered
production of the settlement agreement on November 23, 1989. The
agreement has been produced and is made part of the file.
[Page 3]
RECOMMENDATION
I recommend that the Secretary approve the settlement agreement
and dismiss this case with prejudice.