Database Search Result Details
|
First Name
|
Robert
|
|
Last Name
|
Tate, Jr.
|
|
Decision Date
|
4/28/2017
|
|
Docket Number
|
2017-0202-MAPS
|
|
ALJ
|
LRB
|
|
Respondent
|
Division of Corrections/Parkersburg Correctional Center
|
|
Employment Type
|
STATE
|
|
Job Title
|
Counselor 1
|
|
Topics
|
Selection
|
|
Primary Issues
|
Whether Respondent violated any applicable policy, procedure, rule or practice in denying Grievant an opportunity to interview for a posted position.
|
|
Outcome
|
Denied
|
|
Statutes
|
W. Va. Code § 29-6-10; W. Va. Code R. § 143-1-11
|
|
Related Cases
|
Toney v. W. Va. Dep't of Health & Human Res., Docket No. 93-HHR-460 (June 17, 1994); Moore v. Dep't of Health and Human Res./Div. of Personnel, Docket No. 94-HHR-126 (Aug. 26, 1994)
|
|
Keywords
|
Selection; Interview; Minimum Qualifications; Job Classification; Creditable Work Experience; Arbitrary and Capricious
|
|
Intermediate Court of Appeals
|
|
|
Circuit Court
|
|
|
Supreme Court
|
|
|
Synopsis
|
Grievant presented a timely application for a posted position along with several other applicants. Grievant was informed by Respondent, his employer, that he did not qualify for the position and would not be interviewed. Grievant challenges Respondent’s action. Respondent maintains that the information provided at the time of application did not demonstrate that Grievant had the necessary work experience required for the position.
Pursuant to the provisions of W. Va. Code § 29-6-1, et seq., the West Virginia Division of Personnel (DOP) is charged with establishing classification plans for state employees. DOP is also vested with authority to determine the minimum qualifications for each job classification. See W. Va. Division of Personnel Administrative Rule, 143 C.S.R. 1 (2012). State agencies which utilize such positions are obligated to select applicants who qualify under the terms established by DOP classification and specifications. The amount of work experience Grievant is rightfully entitled is debatable but given the totality of relevant factors and the circumstances, it is not established by a preponderance of the evidence that Respondent’s action was beyond its reasonable exercise of discretion. In accordance with the DOP’s interpretation and explanation of the work experience requirements pertaining to the classified position of Corrections Unit Manager, Respondent action was not arbitrary and capricious nor clearly erroneous, this grievance must be DENIED.
|
Back to Results
Search Again