be made again awaiting more specific calculations of the parties in a manner consistent with this decision. I do not find the use of the weekly rate of compensation of $468.62[ ] unreasonable given the considerable fluctuations in claimant’s earnings each week. Also, the amount of the penalties shall be only 25 percent of the amounts delayed or denied as there was no showing of any prior violations of law by Winnebago or Sentry Insurance. Evenson filed a rehearing application, which was denied. Winnebago and Sentry filed a notice of appeal to the Iowa Workers’ Compensation Commissioner on Sep tember 7, 2012, and Evenson filed a notice of cross-appeal. The commissioner issued an appeal decision on August ,2, 2013, affirming the arbitration decision on all issues. Evenso 519 (Iowa 2012) (<HOLDING>); Burton v. Hilltop Care Ctr., 813 N.W.2d 250,
holding that the arbitrator did not exceed his authority because it was necessary to interpret the contract to resolve the parties dispute holding that the commissioner was not vested with interpretive authority for section 85341 holding that the commissioner of the department of pensions and security had statutory authority to reassign state employees to the county level holding that the commissioner did not have the authority to interpret the phrase suitable work under section 85333 holding that the possibility of a mistaken understanding of the phrase preponderance of the evidence on the part of the jury is too remote to constitute plain error when counsel gave the jury an accurate explanation of the legal meaning of the phrase in his closing argument and that meaning is consistent with the common understanding of the words in the phrase