A mining company can dissolve a temporary reinstatement order after the Secretary of Labor made a final decision not to prosecute a miner’s whistle-blower complaint, said an appeals court in a ruling last week.

According to the ruling by the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago in Vulcan Construction Materials L.P. v. Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission et al., in December 2010, Peter L. Dunne filed a discrimination complaint against Vulcan. The Birmingham, Ala.-based firm provides infrastructure materials, including asphalt and ready-mixed concrete, according to its website.

Mr. Dunne charged that Vulcan had terminated his employment for engaging in safety-related activity that was protected under federal statute. The Secretary of Labor initially determined that Mr. Dunne’s complaint was not frivolous, and Vulcan agreed to temporarily reinstate Mr. Dunne pending a determination of his complaint’s merits, according to the ruling.

After the secretary decided not to prosecute Mr. Dunne’s complaint before the Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission, Vulcan moved to dissolve the reinstatement order. A divided commission denied Vulcan’s motion, and the company appealed.

“Whether the temporary reinstatement order should be dissolved is a matter of statutory interpretation, completely separate from the merits of Mr. Dunne’s discrimination claim,” said the appellate court’s three-judge panel in analyzing the relevant provision of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977.

“The legislative history does not speak directly to the issues raised by the parties — how long a temporary reinstatement order should remain in effect,” said the ruling. “Temporary reinstatement continues until there is a final order on the miner’s complaint as advanced by the Secretary.”

The ruling concludes, though, that “evaluating the language of the temporary reinstatement provisions, not in isolation, but in the broader context of (the statute) we believe that the unambiguous language of the statute requires that temporary reinstatement end when the Secretary’s involvement ends.”

“We find unpersuasive the Secretary’s arguments the plain meaning of the statute renders a contrary result,” said the court, in reversing the commission’s ruling, and holding the reinstatement order can be dissolved.