430 U.S. 442 (1977)
After extensive investigation, Congress concluded in 1970 that work-related deaths and injuries had become a drastic national problem.1 Finding the existing state statutory remedies as well as state common-law actions for negligence and wrongful death to be inadequate, Congress enacted the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970.2 The Act created a new statutory duty to avoid maintaining unsafe or unhealthy working conditions.3 It empowered the Secretary of Labor to promulgate health and safety standards.4
Two new remedies were provided.5 These permitted the Federal Government, proceeding before an administrative agency, to obtain abatement orders requiring employers to correct unsafe working conditions.6 They also allowed imposition of civil penalties on any employer maintaining any unsafe working condition.7
Under the Act, inspectors representing the Secretary of Labor are authorized to conduct reasonable safety and health inspections.8 If a violation is discovered, the inspector issues a citation to the employer fixing a reasonable time for its abatement.9 In his discretion, the inspector proposes a civil penalty.10 Such proposed penalties may range from nothing for de minimis and nonserious violations to not more than $1,000 for serious violations to a maximum of $10,000 for willful or repeated violations.11 If the employer wishes to contest the penalty or the abatement order, he may do so by notifying the Secretary of Labor within 15 days.12 In that event the abatement order is automatically stayed.13 An evidentiary hearing is then held before an administrative law judge of the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.14 The judge's decision becomes the Commission's final and appealable order unless within 30 days a Commissioner directs that it be reviewed by the full Commission.15 If the employer fails to pay the assessed penalty, the Secretary may commence a collection action in a federal district court in which neither the fact of the violation nor the propriety of the penalty assessed may be retried.16
In 1972, inspectors cited petitioner Irey for a willful violation of a safety standard requiring the sides of trenches in unstable or soft material to be shored, sloped, or otherwise supported.17 In each case an employee's death had resulted.18 The Secretary proposed a penalty of $7,500.19 Petitioner Atlas was cited for a serious violation of standards requiring that roof opening covers be so installed as to prevent accidental displacement.20 The proposed penalty was $600.21 Both petitioners timely contested these citations and were afforded hearings before Administrative Law Judges of the Commission.22 The judges and later the Commission affirmed the findings of violations and accompanying abatement requirements.23 They assessed petitioner Irey a reduced civil penalty of $5,000 and petitioner Atlas the civil penalty of $600 which the Secretary had proposed.24
Petitioners respectively thereupon sought judicial review in the Courts of Appeals for the Third and Fifth Circuits.25 They challenged both the Commission's factual findings that violations had occurred and the constitutionality of the Act's enforcement procedures.26 A panel of the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit affirmed the Commission's orders in the Irey case.27 On rehearing en banc, the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit adhered to the original panel's decision.28 The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit also affirmed the Commission's order in the Atlas case.29 The Supreme Court granted the petitions for writs of certiorari limited to the question whether the Seventh Amendment prevents Congress from assigning to an administrative agency the task of adjudicating violations of OSHA.30
Whether the Seventh Amendment prohibits Congress from creating a new cause of action in the Government for civil penalties under the Occupational Safety and Health Act and assigning its adjudication to an administrative agency without providing for a jury trial?31
The Seventh Amendment preserves the right of trial by jury in suits at common law, yet when Congress creates new statutory public rights, it may assign their adjudication to an administrative agency with which a jury trial would be incompatible without violating the Seventh Amendment.32
No. After extensive investigation, Congress concluded in 1970 that work-related deaths and injuries had become a drastic national problem.33 Finding existing state statutory remedies and common-law actions for negligence and wrongful death inadequate, Congress enacted the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970.34 This created a new statutory duty to avoid unsafe working conditions.35 It empowered the Secretary of Labor to promulgate standards.36
The Act supplied two new remedies.37 These allowed the Federal Government to obtain abatement orders and to impose civil penalties through administrative proceedings before the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.38 Inspectors may conduct reasonable inspections.39 They issue citations proposing penalties ranging from nothing for de minimis violations to a maximum of ten thousand dollars for willful or repeated violations.40 Employers may contest citations before administrative law judges.41 Their decisions become final unless reviewed by the full Commission.42
In 1972, inspectors cited petitioner Irey for a willful violation of trench safety standards.43 In each case an employee's death had resulted. The Secretary proposed a penalty of $7,500, later reduced to $5,000.44 Petitioner Atlas was cited for a serious violation of roof-opening cover standards.45 Atlas received a $600 penalty.46 Both petitioners contested the citations.47 They received administrative hearings and obtained Commission affirmances of the violations and penalties.48
Petitioners sought judicial review in the Third and Fifth Circuits.49 They challenged the constitutionality of the enforcement scheme.50 The courts of appeals affirmed the Commission orders.51 The Supreme Court granted certiorari limited to the Seventh Amendment question.52 The rule applies directly because the Act created new public rights unknown to the common law.53 It committed their enforcement to an administrative forum supplying speedy and expert resolutions of the issues involved.54 This procedure is sustained by precedents permitting administrative adjudication of public rights without jury trials.55
The Seventh Amendment does not prohibit Congress from creating new public rights under the Occupational Safety and Health Act and assigning their adjudication to an administrative agency without a jury trial.56