Database Search Result Details
|
First Name
|
ROBERT
|
|
Last Name
|
TEREK
|
|
Decision Date
|
4/4/1988
|
|
Docket Number
|
35-87-276-3
|
|
ALJ
|
NK
|
|
Respondent
|
OHIO COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION
|
|
Employment Type
|
SERV
|
|
Job Title
|
BUS OPERATOR
|
|
Topics
|
EXTRA DUTY; ASSIGNMENT
|
|
Primary Issues
|
Driver Rotation
|
|
Outcome
|
GRANTED, IN PART; DENIED, IN PART
|
|
Statutes
|
18A-4-5b, 18A-4-8b(b)
|
|
Related Cases
|
238 S.E.2D 220 (WV 1977)
|
|
Keywords
|
DRIVER; EXTRA DUTY; PREFERENCE LIST; ROTATION; ARBITRARY
|
|
Intermediate Court of Appeals
|
|
|
Circuit Court
|
|
|
Supreme Court
|
|
|
Synopsis
|
The bus operators and transportation department have written and unwritten regulations and agreements governing the allocation among operators of extra-duty driving assignments for extra compensation. Grievant was mistakenly offered an extra-duty run during a week he was not eligible and the transportation director erroneously place him at the bottom of the priority list for refusing the run notwithstanding grievant's attendance at an AIDS seminar for in-service credit for the day of the scheduled run. At that time other drivers refused the run for similar reasons, but their names were not disturbed and attendance at seminars for in-service credit is a legitimate work schedule conflict/reason to refuse a run and not lose status on the drivers' priority list. Due to grievant's placement at the bottom of the list, another driver was awarded a nine and one-fourth hour extra-duty assignment, which grievant wanted. Gr instead selected an eight hour morning assignment. Grievance granted in part: Grievant has proven arbitrariness on school officials' part but has failed to prove entitlement to the relief of money damages in the amount he seeks and, absent express authority to do so, the Grievance Board cannot award damages.
|
Back to Results
Search Again