| First Name | Leslie |
| Last Name | Riddle |
| Decision Date | 9/14/2017 |
| Docket Number | 2017-1358-DHHR |
| ALJ | CHL |
| Respondent | Department of Health and Human Resources/Bureau for Children and Families |
| Employment Type | STATE |
| Job Title | Economic Services Worker |
| Topics | Suspension |
| Primary Issues | Whether Respondent proved by a preponderance of the evidence that Grievant violated certain policies which justified her suspension. |
| Outcome | Denied |
| Statutes | W. Va. Code St. R. § 156-1-3 (2008) |
| Related Cases | Ramey v. W. Va. Dep't of Health, Docket No. H-88-005 (Dec. 6, 1988); Petry v. Kanawha County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 96-20-380 (Mar. 18, 1997); Leichliter v. W. Va. Dep't of Health & Human Res., Docket No. 92-HHR-486 (May 17, 1993), aff’d, Pleasants Co. Cir. Ct., Civil Action No. 93-APC-1 (Dec. 2, 1994); State ex rel. Eads v. Duncil, 196 W. Va. 604, 474 S.E.2d 534 (1996); 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); Adkins v. W. Va. Dep't of Educ., 210 W. Va. 105, 556 S.E.2d 72 (2001); Blake v. Kanawha County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 01-20-470 (Oct. 29, 2001); Overbee v. Dep't of Health & Human Res./Welch Emergency Hosp., Docket No. 96-HHR-183 (Oct. 3, 1996); Conner v. Barbour County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 95-01-031 (Sept. 29, 1995); Pingley v. Div. of Corr., Docket No. 95-CORR-252 (July 23, 1996); McVay v. Wood County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 95-54-041 (May 18, 1995); Daugherty v. Dep’t of Health & Human Res./William R. Sharpe, Jr. Hosp., Docket No. 2016-0821-CONS (May 17, 2016); Martin v. W. Va. [State] Fire Comm’n, Docket No. 89-SFC-145 (Aug. 8, 1989); Meadows v. Logan County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 00-23-202 (Jan. 31, 2001) |
| Keywords | Suspension; DHHR Policy Memorandum 2108; Misconduct; Conflict of Interest; Employee Confidentiality Statement; Arbitrary and Capricious; Unauthorized; Services; Discipline; Mitigation |
| Intermediate Court of Appeals | |
| Circuit Court | |
| Supreme Court | |
| Synopsis | Grievant was employed by Respondent as an Economic Service Worker. Respondent charged Grievant with violating the DHHR Policy Memorandum 2108 “Employee Conduct” and the Employee Confidentiality Statement by taking certain actions to work in a friend’s case. Respondent suspended Grievant for ten days without pay. Respondent proved by a preponderance of the evidence that Grievant violated DHHR Policy Memorandum 2108 “Employee Conduct” and the Employee Confidentiality Statement. As such, Respondent proved that Grievant’s suspension was justified. Grievant failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that mitigation of the discipline imposed was warranted. Therefore, the grievance is DENIED. |