Database Search Result Details
|
First Name
|
Cassy
|
|
Last Name
|
Menas
|
|
Decision Date
|
9/7/2018
|
|
Docket Number
|
2018-1092-MrnED
|
|
ALJ
|
RLR
|
|
Respondent
|
Marion County Board of Education
|
|
Employment Type
|
PROF
|
|
Job Title
|
Substitute Teacher
|
|
Topics
|
Substitute Teaching Jobs
|
|
Primary Issues
|
Whether Respondent’s actions were unreasonable, or arbitrary and capricious.
|
|
Outcome
|
Denied
|
|
Statutes
|
W. Va. Code § 18A-4-15; W. Va. Code § 6C-2-2(o)
|
|
Related Cases
|
Davenport v. Gatson, 451 S.E.2d 57, 192 W. Va. 117 (1994); Cook v. Webster County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 02-51-426 (May 14, 2003); Graley v. W. Va. Parkways Economic Dev. & Tourism Auth., Docket No. 91-PEDTA-225 (Dec. 23, 1991); Frank’s Shoe Store v. W. Va. Human Rights Comm’n, 179 W. Va. 53, 365 S.E.2d 251 (1986); Anderson v. Raleigh County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 01-41-378 (Jan. 28, 2002); 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); Browns-Stobbe/Riggs v. Dep’t of Health & Human Res., Docket No. 06-HHR-313 (Nov. 30, 2006); Stewart v. Div. of Corr., Docket No. 04-CORR-430 (May 31, 2005); Jarrell v. Raleigh County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 95-41-479 (July 8, 1996); Clark v. Putnam County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 97-40-313 (April 30, 1998)
|
|
Keywords
|
Substitute Teaching Jobs; Lost Wages; Policy; Discrimination; Arbitrary and Capricious; Retaliation
|
|
Intermediate Court of Appeals
|
|
|
Circuit Court
|
|
|
Supreme Court
|
|
|
Synopsis
|
Grievant is employed by Respondent as a substitute teacher. Grievant makes a claim regarding alleged lost opportunities to substitute teach. Grievant claims that this was the result of reprisal and discrimination. Record did not support a finding that Grievant was the victim of either reprisal or discrimination. A building principal has broad discretion in selecting substitute teachers to fill the positions of absent teachers. Without proof that this discretion has been exercised in an arbitrary and capricious manner, or on the basis of some recognized impermissible reason, a substitute teacher’s claim for lost wages for not being selected to work as a substitute on any particular day is without merit. Further, Grievant seeks numerous forms of relief which, as a matter of law, are not available through the grievance process. Accordingly, this grievance is denied.
|
Back to Results
Search Again