Database Search Result Details
|
First Name
|
Jason
|
|
Last Name
|
Womack, et al.
|
|
Decision Date
|
3/24/2017
|
|
Docket Number
|
2016-1577-CONS
|
|
ALJ
|
CHL
|
|
Respondent
|
Division of Highways
|
|
Employment Type
|
STATE
|
|
Job Title
|
Transportation Worker 2
|
|
Topics
|
Selection for Training
|
|
Primary Issues
|
Whether Respondent followed its policy in selecting an employee to attend the Equipment Operators Training Academy, and whether Respondent’s decision was arbitrary and capricious.
|
|
Outcome
|
Granted
|
|
Statutes
|
W. Va. Code St. R. § 156-1-3 (2008)
|
|
Related Cases
|
Howell v. W. Va. Dep't of Health & Human Res., Docket No. 89-DHS-72 (Nov. 29, 1990); Holly v. Logan County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 96-23-174 (Apr. 30, 1997); Hanshaw v. McDowell County Bd. Of Educ., Docket No. 33-88-130 (Aug. 19, 1988); Leichliter v. W. Va. Dep't of Health & Human Res., Docket No. 92-HHR-486 (May 17, 1993); Mihaliak v. Div. of Rehab. Serv., Docket No. 98-RS-126 (Aug. 3, 1998); Thibault v. Div. of Rehab. Serv., Docket No. 93-RS-489 (July 29, 1994); Bedford County Memorial Hosp. v. Health & Human Serv., 769 F.2d 1017 (4th Cir. 1985); Yokum v. W. Va. Schools for the Deaf & the Blind, Docket No. 96-DOE-081 (Oct. 16, 1996)." Trimboli v. Dep't of Health & Human Res., Docket No. 93-HHR-322 (June 27, 1997)
|
|
Keywords
|
Selection; Training; Equipment Operators Training Academy; Tier System; Upgrade; Experience; Tenure; General Abilities; Work History; Leave Balances; Disciplinary; Arbitrary and Capricious
|
|
Intermediate Court of Appeals
|
|
|
Circuit Court
|
|
|
Supreme Court
|
|
|
Synopsis
|
Grievants signed up to be considered for selection to attend backhoe training at the Respondent’s Equipment Operators Training Academy. Through such trainings employees receive certifications that help them to advance through the tier system resulting in higher pay, and qualify them for temporary upgrades in pay when operating the equipment. Grievants were not selected for the training despite their years of experience and time with the agency. Respondent selected another employee who had less work experience and only one year of service with DOH. Grievants argue that Respondent failed to follow its policy for selecting employees for these trainings, and that its decision was arbitrary and capricious. Respondent denies Grievants’ claims, and asserts that it followed its policy and its selection decision was proper. Grievants proved by a preponderance of the evidence that Respondent failed to follow its policy for selecting employees for the training, and that its decision was arbitrary and capricious. Therefore, the grievance is GRANTED.
|
Back to Results
Search Again