Database Search Result Details
|
First Name
|
Johnathan
|
|
Last Name
|
Baldwin, et al.
|
|
Decision Date
|
7/20/2017
|
|
Docket Number
|
2017-1190-CONS
|
|
ALJ
|
LRB
|
|
Respondent
|
Department of Education/Office of Institutional Education Programs
|
|
Employment Type
|
DOE
|
|
Job Title
|
Teacher/service personnel
|
|
Topics
|
Salary Reduction
|
|
Primary Issues
|
Whether Respondent’s action of reducing Grievants’ annual salaries, to be consistent with the Boone County salary supplements, for the 2016-2017 school year is unlawful and/or an abuse of authority.
|
|
Outcome
|
Denied
|
|
Statutes
|
W. Va. Code § 18-2E-5(m)(4); W. Va. Code ' 18A-4-17; W. Va. Code § 18A-4-5a; W. Va. Code § 21-5-9
|
|
Related Cases
|
Huss v. W. Va. Div. Rehab. 96-RS-483 (Jul 31,1997); Carpenter v. W. Va. Dep't of Educ., Docket No. 93-DOE-372 (Dec 30, 1993)
|
|
Keywords
|
Salary Reduction; Payment Schedule; Contract; Notification; Arbitrary and Capricious
|
|
Intermediate Court of Appeals
|
|
|
Circuit Court
|
|
|
Supreme Court
|
|
|
Synopsis
|
This grievance arose out of the West Virginia Department of Education, Respondent reducing Grievants’ rate of pay to be consistent with the reductions in pay their counterparts employed by the Boone County Board of Education experienced. The reduction occurred several months after the State of West Virginia moved from issuing salary checks twice a month (semi-monthly) to every two weeks (bi-weekly). These two events, coupled with the practice of paying salaries in arrears, has caused much confusion, discord and misunderstandings.
Grievants contend that Respondent has acted unlawfully and wish for their prior yearly salaries to be restored. Respondent contends that in accordance with what has been interpreted as applicable controlling statutes and regulations, it was determined that the salary rate for personnel employed by the WVDE needed to be the equivalent of the salary paid by the county board in the county where each agency facility is located, whether this was an increase or a decrease in pay. The instant matter was the first time a county board reduced salaries supplements. It is not established that Respondent acted in an illogical or irresponsible manner. The facts are regrettable, the circumstances are undesirable, and extremely problematic; nevertheless, it is not determined illegal and/or unlawful for Respondent to timely adjust Grievants yearly salary.
|
Back to Results
Search Again