Term Paper on "Unlawful Discrimination Against Coal Miners Over Safety Concerns"

Term Paper 6 pages (2502 words) Sources: 1+

[EXCERPT] . . . .

Unlawful Discrimination of Coal Miners Over Safety Concerns

This is a case of discrimination meted out to miners for complaining about lack of safety conditions prevailing at an underground mine. The miners charge that they were dismissed from their jobs every time they protested against hazardous and life threatening working conditions especially the unsafe roof conditions and defective brakes on mining vehicles although the federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 restricts companies from dismissing or harassing miners who decline to perform their duties under unsafe working conditions. The U.S. Mine Safety and Health Administration or MSHA, a body constituted under the Labor Department, have issued a letter of infringement of occupational safety against the erring company Misty Mountain Mining Inc. The Labor Department is looking for fines of $40,000 against the company and $2,500 each against the owner and the Mine Superintendent for each of the cases. Apart from discriminations, one of the miners were also subjected to extreme physical abuse and express statements of life threatening intimidation by the Mine Electrician through the use of mining machinery or thrashing in the event the miners disobeyed them or complained about the misgivings of the bosses to the regulatory authorities. The authorities at the Mine Safety are looking for imposing a 90-day ban and probation of the electrical and mining certificates up to two years. The company authorities have all along denied the charges as false.

Discussion:

Case Study:

Misty Mountain Inc. owner Stanley Osborne and mine Superintendent Simon Ratliff is facing multiple discrimination charges by the U.S. Department of Labor for having illegally discriminated and dismissed two local miners infringing the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act. It has been alleged by the complaints that on or close to Aug 30, 2004, two miners Wendell McClain of Redfox and Coy McClain of Whitesburg were dismissed from their engagement as they reported complaints about the state of mining equipments in the No. 5 mine. They went on to allege that following a brief reinstatement, the miners were once again removed from the payrolls on Oct 14, 2004 for reporting complaints of discrimination to the MSHA. In the two cases the Secretary of Labor is asking to look into the unlawful discrimination, along with the order instructing the respondents to stop and refrain from discriminatory activities and taking the miners into back into service with payment of their outstanding dues. Besides, a civil money penalty is being sought by the Secretary against the company of a sum of $5,000 and personally making liable Osborne and Ratliff to cough up $2,500 each.

Recreating an incident that could have been fatal, one of the coal miners, Wendell McClain, aged 36 of Red Fox, stated inter alia that on a particular day as he was closing the roof in a 3-foot coal seam in August he saw a vehicle meant for scooping coal approaching towards him that had no brakes. The driver turned sharply towards the wall to avoid hitting any fellow workers, he stated. When he took up the matter with Simon Ratliff, the Mine Superintendent about the impending danger which might amount to loss of life if the brakes were not repaired, the Superintendent not only turned a deaf year to the complaint, but showed him the door. McClain said that he had also complained on an earlier occasion to Ratliff regarding roof bolts not attaining sufficient height to give proper support. McClain's brother, Coy McClain, who had also an experience of being engaged with the company as roof bolter for three months was dismissed as he expressed resentment. Similarly two other men who were in the same shift as Coy McClain also met the same fate of job dismissal for having lodged complains before the authorities. Wendell McClain and several others in their own innocent way believed that the company would listen to their complains of the occupational hazards persisting in the workplace and make minimum arrangements to repair the problems in keeping with the obligations of the company in fulfilling the provisions contained in the federal Mine Safety an Health Act, 1977.

It is pertinent to note that the federal Mine Safety and Health Act, 1977 bars companies from dismissing or harassing miners who deny work in hazardous circumstances and report matters regarding threat of safety at workplaces. The MSHA, a body under the aegis of Labor Department handed out an order stating infringement to Misty Mountain in November for not extending sufficient protection to the miners against roof and wall breaches. The workers were re-inducted in the rolls for a brief period, but once again ousted from their jobs for again complaining to the MSHA regarding their deplorable plight. However, Coy McClain, became turncoat at some point and later admitted that he promised Osborne that he would false testimony to MSHA that all is well at the mine for getting a gratification of his job back which paid him $900 per week. He admitted that he was in dire need of money as he was depositing money for his house, but company bosses came down heavily on him after his reinstatement.

Coy McClain stated that he canceled his offer to Osborne following and incident in which a mine staff battered him and intimidated him for getting the federal authorities involved. On a subsequent complain reported with the Kentucky Office of Mine Safety and Licensing charged that the Claudius Leon Dotson, a mine electrician in act of extreme audacity swirled a steel wire around McClain's neck and intimidated to drag him through machinery. Thereafter, it has been further alleged that, Dotson warned other miners that he can go to any extreme to size them up if they dare to go against the management of the mine. All along the bosses have denied all the accusations leveled against them and refused of any shred of evidence of breach of mine safety and policy of discrimination. However, the office of Mine Safety is looking for a 90-day suspension and two-year probation of Dotson's electrical and mining certificate.

Mine Act:-

All mine operators and miners are covered under the Mine Act across the U.S. Under the provisions of the Mine Act, a 'mine operator' is defined as "any owner, lessee, or other person who operates, controls or manages a coal or any other mine or any independent contractor performing service or construction at such mine." A 'miner' is any person serving in any coal mine or other mine. Currently, the jurisdiction of the Mine Act extends to roughly 3, 00,000 miners and roughly 14,000 mines. Provisions of the Mine Act lays a maximum punishment of $10,000 per violation against the owners of mines for violation detected and cited. Following an amendment of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990, the ceiling limit was raised to $55,000. The infringements, which are not so grave, are immediately fixed usually receiving a 'single penalty' evaluation of $55.

Increasingly, grave infringement and infringement which are not so serious which are nor promptly set right are normally assessed applying a formula which includes six norms for determining penalty amounts by the Mine Act. Several breaches constitute of such characteristics or seriousness that application of the formula will not outcome in a suitable penalty. In these situations -most frequently concerning deaths, grievous hurt and unnecessary failure to fulfill the norms-MSHA might take steps to exempt formula and propose a particular evaluation. While building such an amount, the facts are evaluated separately reviewed to determine the punishment amount which will have a preventive impact contemplated by the Statute.

Title 30, Part 100 of the Code of Federal Regulations embodies the regulations governing the civil penalty process. The Mine Act also lays down provisions for either civil penalty against persons for knowing infringements, or criminal sanctions against mine operators who deliberately infringe upon safety and health standards. MSHA reviews specific citations and verdict for potential knowing and deliberate violations. In case proofs of willful violations are detected, the matter is reported to the Department of Justice. The Mine Act does not empower MSHA the mandate to concede its responsibilities to states or any other political subdivisions. The Mine Act does not anticipate state mine safety and health laws, except in so far as they might clash with the Mine Act of MSHA's regulations. States might have more tight health and safety standards.

Apart from the safeguards available under the Mines Act, employee protection or whistleblower provisions has been laid down in the Occupational Safety and Health Administration or OSHA. Under the OSHA, employees who believe that their employer has discriminated or taken revenge against them for making uproar or reporting safety or health concerns are open to file complains with OSHA within 30 days of happening of the alleged violation under the OSHA Act. After receipt of the timely complaint, OSHA communicates the employer and in case conciliation becomes unsuccessful, conducts an investigation. In cases where OSHA finds that the complaints filed under the provisions of its Act possess merit,… READ MORE

How to Reference "Unlawful Discrimination Against Coal Miners Over Safety Concerns" Term Paper in a Bibliography

Related Term Papers:

Discrimination Against Minorities in the Judicial System Research Paper

Discrimination against minorities is rampant in the United States civil and criminal justice system (Blumstein, 2009). The discrimination is observed to be along racial, ethnic or gender-based lines (Murphy,2009). To… read more

Research Paper 7 pages (2062 words) Sources: 5 Topic: Crime / Police / Criminal Justice

---

Discrimination Against Blacks Term Paper

Discrimination

Racism in America has long been a source of contention. The impact of slavery and subsequent segregation of the races led to a great deal of discrimination against Black… read more

Term Paper 15 pages (4121 words) Sources: 1+ Topic: Race / Ethnic Studies / Racism

---

Discrimination Against High-Risk Sex Offenders Research Paper

Discrimination Against High Risk Sex Offenders

Even when denoting truly violent offenders, demonization of any class of individual as being beyond redemption and/or devoid of humanity proves not only destructive,… read more

Research Paper 27 pages (7425 words) Sources: 15 Style: APA Topic: Sociology / Society

---

Discrimination in Housing Research Paper

In 2011, a housing advocacy group in Miami filed a lawsuit against real estate agencies and condo associations, alleging that they had refused to make units available to families with… read more

Research Paper 5 pages (1718 words) Sources: 3 Topic: Urban Studies / City Planning / Housing

---

Discrimination Against Women in Morocco Only Response to CEDAW Term Paper

Discrimination agaisnt women in Morocco only (response to CEDAW)

Discrimination against Women in Morocco

Women have been discriminated against since the beginnings of time and the process is far from… read more

Term Paper 7 pages (2199 words) Sources: 7 Style: MLA Topic: Women / Feminism

---

View 100+ more related papers  >>