Database Search Result Details
|
First Name
|
Thomas
|
|
Last Name
|
Keller
|
|
Decision Date
|
2/8/2018
|
|
Docket Number
|
2018-0157-DHHR
|
|
ALJ
|
LGB
|
|
Respondent
|
Department of Health and Human Resources/Bureau for Children and Families
|
|
Employment Type
|
STATE
|
|
Job Title
|
CPS Worker
|
|
Topics
|
Suspension
|
|
Primary Issues
|
Whether Respondent proved the charges against Grievant, and demonstrated good cause for his 10-day suspension.
|
|
Outcome
|
Denied
|
|
Statutes
|
|
|
Related Cases
|
Young v. Div. of Natural Res., Docket No. 2009-0540-DOC (Nov. 13, 2009); Massey v. W. Va. Public Serv. Comm’n, Docket No. 99-PSC-313 (Dec. 13, 1999); Gill v. W. Va. Dep’t of Commerce, Docket No. COMM-88-031 (Dec. 23, 1988); Overbee v. Dep’t of Health & Human Res., Docket No. 96-HHR-183 (Oct. 3, 1986); Lanham v. W. Va. Dep’t of Transp., Docket No. 98-DOH-369 (Dec. 30, 1998); Riddle v. Bd. of Directors, So. W. Va. Community Coll., Docket No. 93-BOD-309 (May 31, 1994); Webb v. Mason County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 26-89-004 (May 1, 1989)
|
|
Keywords
|
Suspension; Unacceptable Conduct; Unprofessional Behavior; Credibility; Insubordination; Arbitrary and Capricious; Mitigation
|
|
Intermediate Court of Appeals
|
|
|
Circuit Court
|
|
|
Supreme Court
|
|
|
Synopsis
|
Respondent established by a preponderance of the evidence that Grievant misrepresented the extent of his investigation into the proper placement of two minor females in an official written report, acted unprofessionally during a meeting in the hospital room of a brother and sister who had been drugged and sexually assaulted, acted unprofessionally in telling hospital security officers that their assistance might be required to “kick the mother’s ass,” and acted unprofessionally by telling the children’s mother that she would be arrested if she approached the children, and that she had only 15 minutes in which to identify a family member for alternative placement of the children before he took them into his custody. These violations established a factual and legal basis for Grievant’s 10-day suspension. Grievant failed to establish that his 10-day suspension involved a penalty which constituted an abuse of the employer’s discretion or constituted an arbitrary and capricious exercise of the employer’s disciplinary authority.
|
Back to Results
Search Again