Director, Office of Workers Compensation Programs, United States Department of Labor v. Rasmussen Geo Control, Incorporated v. Rasmussen
| Decision Date | 21 February 1979 |
| Docket Number | 77-1491,Nos. 77-1465,s. 77-1465 |
| Citation | 440 U.S. 29,99 S.Ct. 903,59 L.Ed.2d 122 |
| Parties | DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Petitioner, v. Genevieve O. RASMUSSEN et al. GEO CONTROL, INCORPORATED and New Hampshire Insurance Company, Petitioners, v. Genevieve O. RASMUSSEN et al |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
The Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act (Act) Amendments of 1972, to combat inflation, replaced the Act's $70 maximum limitation on weekly disability benefits with a four-step limitation scheme tied to specified percentages of the "applicable national average weekly wage" determined annually by the Secretary of Labor. § 6(b)(1). At the same time, death benefits to surviving spouses and children were increased, respectively, from 35% to 50% and from 15% to 16 2/3% of the deceased's average weekly wages. Total weekly death benefits were still limited to 66 2/3% of the deceased's average weekly wages, but the former specific dollar minimum and maximum limitations on average weekly wages were replaced by a provision dealing only with a minimum limitation tied to the applicable national average weekly wage. Thus, as amended, § 9(e) provides that "(i)n computing death benefits the average weekly wages of the deceased shall be considered to have been not less than the applicable national average weekly wage as prescribed in section 6(b) but the total weekly benefits shall not exceed the average weekly wages of the deceased." Respondents, the widow and son of a covered employee, claimed combined death benefits ($532 per week) equal to 66 2/3% of the deceased's average weekly wages. The employer, its insurance carrier, and the Director of the Department of Labor's Office of Workers' Compensation Programs (petitioners) contended that § 6(b)(1)'s limitation on disability payments (then $167 per week), was meant to apply to death benefits as well as disability benefits and that Congress's failure to place a maximum on death benefits when it amended § 9(e) was inadvertent. An administrative decision in respondents' favor was affirmed by the Court of Appeals. Held: Death benefits payable under the Act are not subject to the maximum limitations placed on disability payments by § 6(b)(1). This conclusion is supported by both the language and legislative history of the 1972 Amendments. Pp. 35-47.
(a) That the omission of a maximum limitation on death benefits was inadvertent is disproved by the legislative history of the 1972 Amendments, especially the pertinent Committee Reports, which clearly reflect the Committees' understanding that the minimum and maximum limitations on death benefits of former § 9(e) were being eliminated and that only a minimum benefits provisions tied to the applicable national average weekly wage was being substituted in their place. Pp. 37-41.
(b) Section 6(d), which provides that "determinations" under § 6 "with respect to a period" shall apply to employees currently receiving disability benefits or survivors currently receiving death benefits during such period, does not render the maximum limitations contained in § 6(b)(1) applicable to death benefits Congress' use of the word "determinations" in § 6(d) and of its verb form elsewhere in § 6 strongly suggests that it intended the term to refer only to the Secretary of Labor's annual determination under § 6(b)(3) of the national average weekly wage, not to the mathematical computation of disability benefit maximums contemplated under § 6(b)(1). This view is confirmed by § 6(d)'s legislative history. Pp. 41-44.
(c) Since both the language and legislative history of the 1972 Amendments show that Congress' omission of a ceiling on death benefits was intentional, this Court must reject petitioners' suggested interpretation of the Act. Pp. 45-47.
567 F.2d 1385, affirmed.
Kent L. Jones, Washington, D.C., for petitioner in No. 77-1465, pro hac vice, by special leave of Court.
Albert H. Sennett, San Francisco, Cal., for petitioners in No. 77-1491.
James Buckley Ostmann, Washington, D.C., for respondents in both cases. Mr. Justice REHNQUIST delivered the opinion of the Court.
In May 1973 William Rasmussen was employed as a hydrologist by Geo Control, Inc., which was under contract with the United States to perform work in South Vietnam. Rasmussen was fatally injured during the course of his employment when the vehicle in which he was riding was blown up by a land mine. His employment was within the coverage of the Defense Base Act. 42 U.S.C. § 1651 et seq., which incorporates the provisions of the Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act, 44 Stat. 1424, as amended, 33 U.S.C. § 901 et seq. (Act). It is undisputed that Rasmussen's surviving widow and son,1 respondents here, are entitled to death benefits under § 9 of the Act, 33 U.S.C. § 909; the issue dividing the parties and the Courts of Appeals 2 is whether death benefits payable under the Act are subject to the maximum limits expressly placed on disability payments by § 6(b)(1). The Act's language and legislative history persuade us that they are not.
Prior to passage of the Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act Amendments of 1972, 86 Stat. 1251, both disability and death benefits payable under the Act were subject to the same minimum and maximum limitations. Former § 6(b) limited disability benefits to no more than $70 per week and no less than $18 per week. Death benefits were limited under § 9(b) to 66SCAS1651;% of the deceased's "average weekly wages," which were "considered to have been not more than $105 nor less than $27 . . . ." 33 U.S.C. § 909(e) (1970 ed.). Accordingly, weekly death benefits, like disability benefits, could not exceed $70 nor be less than $18.3 The $70 maximum on death and disability benefits, established in 1961, gradually lost real value as inflation exacted its annual toll,4 and in 1972 Congress moved to give covered workers added protection.
The basic formula for determining compensation for permanent total disability—66 2/3% of the employee's average weekly wages was left unchanged by the 1972 Amendments. The Amendments, however, replaced the $70 maximum limitation on disability benefits with an entirely new limitations scheme tied to the "applicable national average weekly wage." New § 6(b)(1) provides in pertinent part:
1, 1973, and ending September 30, 1974.
"(C) 175 per centum during the period beginning October
1, 1974, and ending September 30, 1975.
"(D) 200 per centum beginning October 1, 1975." 33
The "applicable national average weekly wage" is determined annually by the Secretary of Labor. 33 U.S.C. § 906(b)(3). The Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare estimated that approximately 90% of the disabled workers covered under the amended Act would receive benefits equal to a full 662/3% of their average weekly wages. S.Rep.No.92-1125, p. 5 (1972), Legislative History of the Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers' Act Amendments of 1972 (Committee Print compiled for the Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare by the Subcommittee on Labor), p. 67 (1972) (hereinafter Leg.Hist.). The four-step phase-in of the section's maximum limitation from 125% to 200% of the applicable national average weekly wage was designed to ease the impact on covered employers of the increase in compensation payments, which Congress expected to at least double for most covered workers. Ibid.
Section 9(b) was amended in 1972 to increase death benefits to surviving spouses from 35% to 50% of the deceased's average weekly wages. Death benefits to surviving children were increased from 15% to 16 on Labor% of the deceased's average weekly wages. Total weekly death benefits payable to survivors, however, are still limited to 66s equal t% of the deceased's average weekly wage. 33 U.S.C. § 909(b). The 1972 Amendments deleted the specific dollar minimum and maximum limitations on average weekly wages and substi- tuted in their place a provision dealing only with a minimum limitation, which was tied to the applicable national average weekly wage. Section 9(e) now provides:
"In computing death benefits the average weekly wages of the deceased shall be considered to have been not less than the applicable national average weekly wage as prescribed in section 6(b) but the total weekly benefits shall not exceed the average weekly wages of the deceased." 33 U.S.C. § 909(e).
Pursuant to § 9, respondents claimed combined death benefits of $532 per week, two-thirds of Rasmussen's average weekly wages of $798. Geo Control, its insurance carrier, and the Director of the Department of Labor's Office of Workers' Compensation Programs (OWCP), petitioners here, contended that the limitations on disability payments contained in § 6(b)(1) of the Act—initially $167 per week and now $396.50 per week 5—apply to death benefits in the same manner as to benefits for permanent total disability.6 The dispute was submitted to an Administrative Law Judge, who sustained respondents' position. Petitioners appealed the adverse ruling to the Benefits Review Board, which affirmed. The legislative history of the 1972 Amendments convinced the Board that "elimination of the maximum benefit provision from Section 9(e) of the Act . . . was done consciously and intentionally" and that "failure to substitute a new maximum was . . . a deliberate action." App. to Pet. for Cert. in No. 77-1465, pp. 22A-23A. Petitioners appealed the Board's order directly to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. 33 U.S.C. § 921(c). The Court of Appeals affirmed, largely adopting the reasoning...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Director, Office of Workers Compensation Programs, United States Department of Labor v. Perini North River Associates
...cert. denied, 440 U.S. 967, 99 S.Ct. 1520, 59 L.Ed.2d 784 (1979). Tantzen and Jacksonville Shipyards were both summary dispositions, and Rasmussen was decided on the merits, see Director, OWCP v. Rasmussen, 440 U.S. 29, 99 S.Ct. 903, 59 L.Ed.2d 122 (1979). In none of these cases did we have......
-
Pearce v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, U.S. Dept. of Labor
...applied the 1972 Longshoremen's Act Amendments in deciding Defense Base Act cases. See Director, Office Workers' Compensation Programs v. Rasmussen, 1979, 440 U.S. 29, 99 S.Ct. 903, 59 L.Ed.2d 122 Aff'g 9 Cir., 1978, 567 F.2d 1385; Puig v. Standard Dredging Corp., 1 Cir., 1979, 599 F.2d 467......
-
Edmonds v. Compagnie Generale Transatlantique
...Marine Terminal Co. v. Caputo, 432 U.S. 249, 97 S.Ct. 2348, 53 L.Ed.2d 320 (1977); Director, Workers' Compensation Programs v. Rasmussen, 440 U.S. 29, 99 S.Ct. 903, 59 L.Ed.2d 122 (1979); P. C. Pfeiffer Co. v. Diverson Ford, No. 78-425 (to be reargued October Term 1979). 6 Title 33 U.S.C. §......
-
In re Subpoena to University of Nc at Chapel Hill
...to "cancel half a line." Our task is to interpret what Congress has said.... Director, Officer of Workers' Compensation Programs v. Rasmussen, 440 U.S. 29, 47, 99 S.Ct. 903, 59 L.Ed.2d 122 (1979). Williams v. United States, 240 F.3d 1019, 1037 At least with respect to Sections 512(b) & (d) ......