b'Formonthlypayperiods,substitute$260forthe$60figure-___I aboveand$346.67forthe$80. Statevs.federallaw:Thefederalgarnishmentlaws pecificallyprovidesthatstatelawwhichgivesthedebtor-employee abetterbreak,astonumberofdebtsallowedort h elimitson howmuchpaycanbeattached,controls.Ri ghtnowtheriskis thatthenewfederaldollarlimitsmaymakesomestateprovis i ons nolongerapplicable. CivilRightsrestrictions:Thefederalgarnishmentstatute andmoststatelawsdopermitdischargeofanemployeefor multiplegarnishments.Asearlyas1971 ,however,afederaldistrictcourtinCaliforniaruledthatacompanypolicyoffiring employeesformultiplegarnishmentsviolatedtheCivilRightsAct whenappliedtoblacks(Johnsonv.Pike,332F.Supp.490).A federaldistrictcourtinMissouriwhichheldtothecontraryhas justbeenoverruledbytheEighthCircuitCourtofAppeals.The appellatecourtruledagainstacompanypolicyofdischargefor twogarnishmentswithinayear,eventhoughappliedevenhandedly towhiteandblackemployees.Apolicythathasad isparate effectonblackscannotstandunlesstheemployercanprovea 1 businessnecessity.\' ConsumerCreditProtectionAct:Generallyspeaking,an employerisfreetodischargeanemployeeforasecondgarnish- \'-;-r- ment.Butthereissomequestionaboutwhetheranemployercan countgarnishmentspriortoJuly1,1970,theeffectiveda~e.of thefederalgarnishmentstatute(CCPA).TheWage-HourAdministrator said\'no\'backin1970,buttheFifthCircuitCourtofAppealshas sinceruledthattheemployercanincludeearliergarnishmentsin hiscount." OSHA- ITPAYSTOAPPEAL Arecentstudyindicatesthatempl oyershaveabouta75%chanceof atleastpartialreliefif theyappealcitationsandproposedp e nalties forallegedviolationsofOSEIAstandardstotheOccup;ti~nals;fetyand HealthReviewCommission.I:ir;hthundredforty-twocaseshavebeenheard bytheReviewCommissionsinceOSHAwentintoeffectinApril,1971,and thegreatbulkofthesecaseshaveresultedinmodificationsofcitations and/orproposedpenalties. In328cases(39%),theproposedpenaltywasreduced,butnottozero, andtheviolationwasupheld.In85cases,or10%,thepenaltywasreducedtozerowiththeviolationuphel d.In223cases,or2G%,theReview CommissionreversedtheDepartmentofLaborentirelyforvariousreasons andfoundnoviolation. Themoralinthisstudyisthatbycontestingthepr oposedcitationand penaltyyouhaveaverygoodchanceofatleastgettingt hepr oposedpenal t\\ reducedandperhapshavingtheproposedcitati onvacatedentir ely.'