Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Burns v. Stone Forest Industries Inc.

July 14, 1998

ROSELLA E. BURNS; TIMOTHY RAY KEENER; TED-HYUN KIM; EMIL MARTIN; BELLE MCGOVERN; BRENDA L. MIOTKE; KEITH MIOTKE; WILLIAM PARKER; LAVERN RHODES; ORRIN SAVAGE; LARRY VETTER, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS,
v.
STONE FOREST INDUSTRIES, INC., DEFENDANT-APPELLEE.



Before: William C. Canby, Jr., Thomas G. Nelson, and Andrew J. Kleinfeld, Circuit Judges.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Kleinfeld, Circuit Judge

FOR PUBLICATION

D.C. No. CV-95-06103-TMC

Appeal from the United States District Court, for the District of Oregon Thomas M. Coffin, Magistrate Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted September 11, 1997--Portland, Oregon

Opinion by Andrew J. Kleinfeld

SUMMARY

The only significant issue in this case is whether employees deprived of 60 days notice of a plant closing are entitled to get paid for each of the 60 days, or for what would have been work days during the 60 days. The Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act, 29 U.S.C. S 2101 et seq., controls. We join most of the other circuits that have ruled on the issue in construing the statute to mean work days.

FACTS

Because of restrictions on timber supply and rising costs, Stone Forest Industries shut down its plywood mill in Albany, Oregon. The company told the employees on September 26, 1994, that the mill would close two days later, September 28, but that they would be paid until November 26, 61 days after the notice. They could pick up their paychecks each payday at the personnel office. Even though the mill would be closed and they would not be working, they would get paid during the 61 days, measured by what they had worked before the shutdown, with benefits and vacation pay to be cashed out with their final paychecks.

The full time employees brought a class action for additional pay. Their theory was that they should get paid for each calendar day during the last 60 days, not just each work day. The magistrate Judge opined that they were entitled only to be paid for the work days, and because the company had paid them fully for all work days, they were entitled to no damages for the company's failure to give them the required 60 days notice before the mill shut down. The district court accepted the magistrate Judge's recommendation, and granted summary judgment to the company. The workers appeal. No party asserts that there are any issues of fact.

ANALYSIS

Congress passed a law in 1988 saying that "[a]n employer shall not order a plant closing or mass layoff until the end of a 60-day period after the employer serves written notice. . . ." 29 U.S.C. S 2102(a).

The statute carefully delineates the liability of employers who violate its terms, and provides that the remedies listed are "exclusive." 29 U.S.C. S 2104(b). The remedy relevant to the case at bar is "back pay for ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.