ALJ CLEMENT KENNINGTON DENIES CLAIMANT BENEFITS

Dennis H. Radford v. Arcelormittal LaPLACE LLC
Read full decision Here

Excerpts
Claimant contends that processed steel was sometimes prepared for shipping via barge or ship in
the plant on the landward side of the Mississippi River levee and is the functional equivalent of awharf or dock causing Claimant’s injuries to have occurred in an “other adjoining area.” Further, Claimant asserts that since the 1972 Amendments to the Act, the Fifth Circuit has recognized an emphasis on status over situs to avoid the anomaly of a worker walking in and out of coverage.

Employer maintains that Claimant does not have status under the Act in that he had noregularly assigned duties that could be considered maritime in nature. By Claimant’s own admission, Employer notes that he spent a minimal amount of time on the dock and for none of that time was Claimant involved, at least in some part, in “indisputably longshoring operations”in order to have status.

Conclusion

As Claimant was not employed in any of the occupations enumerated in the statute, his

work must have been integral or essential to the loading, unloading, building, or repairing of a

vessel to be covered under the LHWCA. Claimant cites

Boudeloche and Caputo in support of

his claim that he meets the status requirement even though Claimant admits to spending less than

five percent of his time in arguably maritime employment. These cases are distinguishable from

the case

sub judice in that the claimants in Boudeloche and Caputo were involved directly and

indisputably in traditional stevedoring and longshoring activities albeit in limited amounts but as

part of their regularly assigned job duties. Claimant here argues that his work associated with

the dock was unquestionably maritime. Claimant testified that he never performed any physical

work in connection with the repair and maintenance of the dock or machinery and that his role

was limited to observing, mentoring, and advising on various projects. These types of activities

are not “an integral or essential part of the loading, unloading, building, or repairing of a vessel”

nor are they “indisputably longshoring operations.” Claimant’s

connection to activities covered under the Act is not only indirect but so far removed from what can be considered to be maritime employment in order to have status under the Act.