The U.S. Department of Labor has filed a civil lawsuit alleging that a North Jackson manufacturer improperly fired an employee who complained about an alleged hazardous working situation at the company.


The suit filed in U.S. District Court in Youngstown accuses the operators of North Jackson Specialty Steel of violating thhe whistleblower provision of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, making it illegal to fire or discriminate against an employee who files a complaint about safety conditions.


The government complaint alleges that operators of the South Bailey Road business fired employee Jonathan Sass in 2012, just four days after he expressed concern to management that he and a co-worker had been exposed to a dangerous situation because a safety feature controlling the operating temperature of a furnace had been intentionally disabled.


According to the complaint, Sass and another employee were assigned to operate a 12-ton vacuum induction melt furnace beginning with the evening shift on June 14, 2012.


Ordinarily, three workers were assigned to operate that furnace, but on that night, the third member of their crew had been suspended from working that shift.


Between 12:30 a.m. and 1:00 a.m. on June 15, 2012, the metal alloy which Sass and his co-worker were producing in the furnace began to overheat. Sass says did not immediately notice the overheating because he was helping his co-worker measure the alloy's composition in the laboratory adjacent to the furnace.


When he returned to the furnace's control room around 1:30 a.m., Sass discovered that the alloy was overheating and immediately instituted emergency procedures. He manually shut-off the furnace's power, took a photograph of the monitor displaying the furnace's temperature, and telephoned his supervisor, Danielle Baird, at her home. He also radioed other workers in the vicinity of the furnace to evacuate the area so as to avert the harmful effects of a possible explosion.


According to the lawsuit, in spite of the warning she had received about the situation and the danger it posed, Baird ordered Sass to re-start the furnace in an attempt to avoid having to discard the alloy that was being produced. Sass obeyed her order, but the effort to save the alloy ultimately proved unsuccessful when the furnace overheated again and then broke down.


The complaint says that Baird told Sass that the furnace had overheated because a safety feature controlling its operating temperature had been intentionally disabled.


Disturbed by the fact that neither he nor anyone else on his crew had been informed of the disabling of the furnace's safety feature, Sass complained to Baird and other members of management that they had wrongfully subjected him and other employees to a hazardous working condition.


On June 19, 2012, only four days after the furnace had broken down and Sass had complained to management about the hazard it posed, he was fired.


Sass says he was told that he was discharged because of his negligence in failing to monitor the operating temperature of the furnace which had resulted in damage to the furnace and loss of the alloy being produced.


Three days later Sass lodged a complaint with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration that he had been illegally discharged for raising issues concerning his safety and that of his former co-workers.


OSHA investigated the complaint and concluded that Sass had engaged in protected activity but was nonetheless discharged.


According to the Department of Labor, Sass frequently raised safety concerns to management about the provision and maintenance of personal protective equipment, production of metal alloys and other processes.


The labor department wants the court to issue an order permanently preventing North Jackson Specialty from violating the safety act, and seeks restoration of lost pay and benefits, compensatory and punitive damages, and compensation for attorney and other fees.


“North Jackson Specialty Steel fired this employee for reporting unsafe conditions that jeopardized the safety of all workers at the mill,” said Nick Walters, regional administrator for OSHA in Chicago. “No American worker should be subjected to dismissal for requesting safe working conditions. The department will do everything in its power to prevent this type of unlawful retaliation.”


OSHA enforces the whistleblower provisions of 22 statutes protecting employees who report violations of various airline, commercial motor carrier, consumer product, environmental, financial reform, food safety, motor vehicle safety, health care reform, nuclear, pipeline, public transportation agency, railroad, maritime and securities laws.


The company has yet to file an answer to the lawsuit.