Database Search Result Details
|
First Name
|
David
|
|
Last Name
|
McDaniel
|
|
Decision Date
|
6/30/2017
|
|
Docket Number
|
2017-1404-CONS
|
|
ALJ
|
WBM
|
|
Respondent
|
Division of Highways
|
|
Employment Type
|
STATE
|
|
Job Title
|
Transportation Worker, Mechanic 2
|
|
Topics
|
Suspension
|
|
Primary Issues
|
Whether Respondent proved discipline was justified. Whether Respondent properly implemented a suspension after advising grievant it was contemplating a written reprimand.
|
|
Outcome
|
Granted/Denied
|
|
Statutes
|
W. Va. Code St. R. § 143.1.12.3a
|
|
Related Cases
|
Reichard v. Div. of Highways, Docket No. 2015-1188-DOT (Oct. 15, 2015); Cobb v. Div. of Highways, Docket No, 2012-0604-CONS (Nov. 16, 2012); Clagg and James v. Div. of Highways, Docket No. 2015-1631-CONS (Feb. 10, 2016); Rinehart v. Div. of Highways, Docket No. 2014-0984-DOT (March 25, 2015); Cobb v. Div. of Highways, Docket No. (Nov. 16, 2012); Loudermilk v. W. Va. Dep’t of Transp./Div. of Highways, Docket No. 2010-0558-DOT (Oct. 8, 2010); Powell v. Brown, 160 W. Va. 723; 238 S.E.2d 220 (1977); Layne v. Dep’t of Health & Human Res., Docket No. 2008-0172-DHHR (Jan. 8, 2009)
|
|
Keywords
|
Suspension; Written Reprimand; Misconduct; Notice; Arbitrary and Capricious
|
|
Intermediate Court of Appeals
|
|
|
Circuit Court
|
|
|
Supreme Court
|
|
|
Synopsis
|
Grievant believes Respondent was not justified in disciplining him for his conduct at two meetings with his supervisors. Respondent proved that some discipline was justified for Grievant’s misconduct at the meetings.
Grievant also argues that the District Engineer gave him a written reprimand and it was arbitrary and capricious for Respondent to subsequently give him a suspension for the same conduct. Grievant also claims that Respondent violated the Division of Personnel Administrative Rule by not giving him notice that a suspension was being considered prior to issuing the suspension. Grievant proved these defenses by a preponderance of the evidence.
|
Back to Results
Search Again