U.S. Department of Labor
Office of Administrative Law Judges
1111 20th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20036
Case No. 84-ERA-22
In the Matter of
SCOTT BULLOCK,
Complainant
v.
ROCHESTER GAS AND ELECTRIC
CORPORATION,
Defendant
DECISION AND INTERIM ORDER ON MOTIONS
Under date of May 29, 1984, I issued an order to
Show Cause why Complainant's application pro se for continuance
of the hearing herein for purposes of obtaining an attorney
should not be granted upon condition that the time limitations
prescribed in 29 C.F.R. §§ 24.5 and 24.6 be thereby waived.
On May 30, 1984, prior to receipt of the Order to
Show Cause, Defendant's attorneys submitted an Answer to
Complainant's application for continuance, setting forth
numerous objections, all of which are devoid of merit.
Essentially, they take the position that Complainant should
be denied an opportunity to get a lawyer because a continuance
[Page 2]
will disrupt Defendant's precious pre-arranged schedule and
because Complainant's failure to act earlier has resulted in
Defendant's incurring unwarranted expense (presumably the
cost of additional postage to expedite the delivery of the
plethora of duplicative documents with which Defendant's
attorneys have inundated this Office). On June 4, 1984,
Defendant's attorneys transmitted an Affidavit in Response to
the Order to Show Cause, setting forth the very same captious
objections, but without any opposition to the proposed
conditions of continuance.
The expedited procedures prescribed for employee
protection statutes such as that of the Energy Reorganization
Act (42 U.S.C. § 5851) and regulations thereunder are for the
benefit of the employee who is likely to be out of a job or
otherwise economically disadvantaged by the employer's alleged
retaliation. They are not designed to provide the employer
with a means of pressuring or harassing an employee who has
"blown the whistle." Considering the obvious need of
Complainant to be represented by counsel, and the equally
obvious absence of any cognizable prejudice to Defendant,
good and sufficient cause for continuance has been undeniably
shown. In view of the application made by Complainant and
the lack of objection to the condition proposed in the order
to Show Cause, both parties are deemed to have waived the
time limitations prescribed in 29 C.F.R. §§ 24.5 and 24.6.
The parties are cautioned, however, that no further requests
for continuance of the hearing will be entertained. Moreover,
Complainant is advised that undue delay in obtaining counsel
will not be permitted.
Whether so intended or not, Defendant's tactics with
respect to the taking of depositions and discovery, as well as
to continuance, has the effect of taking advantage of an
adverse party who appears without counsel. In view of the
postponement of the hearing, preparatory steps are less
urgent, but both parties are required to comply with applicable
laws and rules within reasonable limits.
Defendant's motion to compel Complainant to appear for
the taking of his deposition and to produce documents is
granted to the extent of directing Complainant to appear and
to be deposed herein on June 18 at 4:00 P.M. Complainant is
further directed to produce at such deposition, for inspection
[Page 3]
and copying by Defendant's attorneys, the documents listed
and described in items 1 and 2 of the Notice of Deposition
and Request for Production dated May 25, 1984 herein, the
documents referred to being limited to those in the personal
possession of Complainant. The motion is otherwise denied.
Defendant's attorneys are requested to cease and desist
from burdening the Docket Clerk of this Office with needless
copies of papers, and from the questionable practice of
sending additional copies of the same papers under cover
letters to the undersigned, lest those be perceived as
taking on the color of ex parte communications as to the
merits.
ORDER
In view of the foregoing, it is
ORDERED that the hearing of this proceeding scheduled
for June 19, 1984 is hereby cancelled, subject to being
rescheduled upon twenty (20) days' notice; and it is further
ORDERED that Complainant Scott V. Bullock appear for the
taking of his deposition at the Office of Nixon, Hargrave,
Devans and Doyle, Esqs., Lincoln First Tower, Rochester, N.Y.
on June 18, 1984 at 4:00 P.M., and that he produce thereat
the documents as hereinabove directed; and it is further
ORDERED that Defendant shall cooperate in making it
possible for Complainant to attend the deposition ordered
herein without reprisal or penalty of any kind.
Dated at Washington, D.C. this 8th day of June, 1984.