Database Search Result Details

First Name Cameron
Last Name Moffett
Decision Date 8/31/2018
Docket Number 2018-0160-MasED
ALJ JSF
Respondent Mason County Board of Education
Employment Type SERV
Job Title Director of Maintenance
Topics Salary
Primary Issues Whether the Grievant was uniformly compensated and whether Grievant proved that he was harmed by any discrimination and/or favoritism.
Outcome Denied
Statutes W. Va. Code §18A-4-5; W. Va. Code § 18A-4-8
Related Cases Fowler v. Mason Co. Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 94-26-037 (Oct. 6, 1994); Mersing, et al., v. Preston County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 89-39-513 (July 12, 1991); Deal v. Mason Co. Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 96-26-106 (Aug. 30, 1996); Allison v. Hancock County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 97-15-454 (Mar. 31, 1998); Stanley v. Hancock County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 95-15-217 (Sept. 29, 1995); Robb v. Hancock County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 9-15-356 (March 31, 1992); Frymier v. Higher Educ. Policy Comm'n, 655 S.E.2d 52, 221 W. Va. 306 (2007); Harris v. Dep't of Transp., Docket No. 2008-1594-DOT (Dec. 15, 2008); Farley, et al., v. Wayne County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 96-50-272 (Feb. 28, 1997); Mullins v. Kanawha County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 94-20-364 (Dec. 29, 1994); Long v. Kanawha County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 00-20-308 (Mar. 29, 2001); Cremeans v. Bd. of Trustees, Docket No. 96-BOT-099 (Dec. 30, 1996); Pomphrey v. Monroe County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 94-31-183 (July 1, 1994)
Keywords Salary; Uniformity in Compensation; Policy; Discrimination; Favoritism; Harm
Intermediate Court of Appeals
Circuit Court
Supreme Court
Synopsis Grievant is employed by Respondent as the Director of Maintenance. Grievant alleges that Respondent is exhibiting favoritism towards its Transportation Director and that it uses a more favorable compensation formula to determine that employee’s salary, thereby treating Grievant unfairly. Grievant alleges that Respondent’s compensation formula violates the uniformity provisions of W. Va. Code § 18A-4-5. Grievant has not proven that Respondent compensates its directors in a non-uniform manner or that he has suffered any harm as a result of Respondent’s conduct. Therefore, this grievance is denied.

Back to Results Search Again