Database Search Result Details
|
First Name
|
Paula
|
|
Last Name
|
Brinkley-Simpkins
|
|
Decision Date
|
11/6/2015
|
|
Docket Number
|
2015-0429-MerED
|
|
ALJ
|
CHL
|
|
Respondent
|
Mercer County Board of Education
|
|
Employment Type
|
SERV
|
|
Job Title
|
Cook III
|
|
Topics
|
Independent Contractor; Extracurricular; Extra-Duty
|
|
Primary Issues
|
Whether Respondent had to offer an assignment to Grievant.
|
|
Outcome
|
Denied
|
|
Statutes
|
W.Va. Code St. R. § 156-1-3 (2008); W. Va. Code § 18A-4-16; W. Va. Code § 18A-4-8b(f)
|
|
Related Cases
|
Wilt and McMillan v. Marshall County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 2014-1757-CONS (Aug. 20, 2015); Herald v. Bd. of Educ., 65 W. Va. 765, 65 S.E. 102 (1909); Jones v. Braxton County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 00-04-090 (July 28, 2000); Ganoe v. Hampshire County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 97-14-229 (July 30, 1997); Dempsey v. Fayette County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 98-10-357 (Dec. 8, 1998); Goins v. Mercer County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 02-27-317 (Jan. 15, 2003); Barnisky/Shafer v. Pocahontas County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 93-38-027 (Nov. 22, 1993); Kirk, et al., v. McDowell County Bd. of Educ. and W. Va. Dep’t of Educ., Docket No. 2010-0603-CONS (Dec. 1, 2011)
|
|
Keywords
|
Extra-Duty Assignments; Extracurricular; Independent Contractor; Contracts; Instructional Class
|
|
Intermediate Court of Appeals
|
|
|
Circuit Court
|
|
|
Supreme Court
|
|
|
Synopsis
|
Grievant is employed by Respondent as a cook. Grievant asserts that Respondent improperly hired an independent contractor to perform a training that had most recently been included in the regular duties of the Nutritional Director, but that Grievant had previously performed as an extracurricular duty. Respondent argues that Grievant was not entitled to the assignment, that it had previously been an extra-duty assignment, and that it was permitted by law to hire an independent contractor to teach the class as it was a one-time assignment. While Grievant proved that the assignment had been extracurricular when she last held it years ago, the evidence demonstrated that the position ceased being an extracurricular assignment when it became the regular responsibility of the Nutritional Director. Grievant failed to prove her claims by a preponderance of the evidence. Therefore, this grievance is DENIED.
|
Back to Results
Search Again