Database Search Result Details
|
First Name
|
WILLIAM
|
|
Last Name
|
WEBB
|
|
Decision Date
|
9/29/1989
|
|
Docket Number
|
89-26-56
|
|
ALJ
|
SA
|
|
Respondent
|
MASON COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION
|
|
Employment Type
|
PROF
|
|
Job Title
|
TEACHER
|
|
Topics
|
REPRISAL
|
|
Primary Issues
|
INSUBORDINATION; RETALIATION OF PREVIOUS GRIEVANCE
|
|
Outcome
|
GRANTED
|
|
Statutes
|
W.Va. Code 18-29-2(a), 18-29-2(p)
|
|
Related Cases
|
HAMLIN V. W.VA. DEPT. OF HEALTH, H-33-036 (5/15/89)
|
|
Keywords
|
EMPLOYEE, JURISDICTION, REPRISAL
|
|
Intermediate Court of Appeals
|
|
|
Circuit Court
|
|
|
Supreme Court
|
|
|
Synopsis
|
Grievant charges retaliation for his refusal to comply with R's dress code by R's billing him for out-of-state tuition for his daughter. R denies claim and argues that no jurisdiction because Grievant no longer employed by R. DECISION: Whether a grievant is employed at the time of filing a grievance is not the issue for determining jurisdiction. Here the grievable act occurred during Grievant's employment since this claim is a continuation of one filed earlier. The definition of 'reprisal' of 18-29-2(p) 'actually refers to two types of 'injury': the first is an injury to the employer caused by some action of the employee and the second is an injury to the employee caused by the employer for which the employee is attempted to get redress, e.g., through the grievance procedures.' The standards for a prima facie showing of retaliation of Frank's Shoe Store v. W.Va. Human Rights Comm'n, 365 S.E.2d 251-259 (W.Va. 1986), apply, with either 'injury' substituting for that decision's requiring a showing of 'protected activity.' Here prima facie showing was made and rebutted by a 'legitimate nondiscriminatory (i.e. nonretiring) reason,' that tuition be paid for out-of-state students. However, Grievant established such reason was pretextual. GRIEVANCE GRANTED.
|
Back to Results
Search Again