Database Search Result Details

First Name Wilbur
Last Name Hines
Decision Date 12/7/2018
Docket Number 2019-0074-KanED
ALJ CHL
Respondent Kanawha County Board of Education
Employment Type SERV
Job Title Bus Operator
Topics Termination; Insubordination; Willful Neglect of Duty
Primary Issues Whether Respondent proved by a preponderance of the evidence that Grievant engaged in misconduct justifying his dismissal from employment pursuant to W. Va. Code § 18A-2-8.
Outcome Denied
Statutes W. Va. Code St. R. § 156-1-3 (2018); W. Va. Code § 18A-2-8; W. Va. Code § 18A-2-8(a); W. Va. Code § 18A-2-8(b)
Related Cases Leichliter v. Dep't of Health & Human Res., Docket No. 92-HHR-486 (May 17, 1993), aff’d, Pleasants Cnty. Cir. Ct. Civil Action No. 93-APC-1 (Dec. 2, 1994); Parham v. Raleigh County Bd. of Educ., 192 W. Va. 540, 453 S.E.2d 374 (1994); Beverlin v. Bd. of Educ., 158 W. Va. 1067, 216 S.E.2d 554 (1975); Bell v. Kanawha County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 91-20-005 (Apr. 16, 1991), aff’d, Kanawha Cnty. Cir. Ct. Civil Action No. 91-AA-110 (June 4, 1992); Allen v. Monroe County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 90-31-021 (July 11, 1990), aff’d, Kanawha Cnty. Cir. Ct. Civil Action No. 90-AA-134 (Oct. 13, 1992); Duruttya v. Mingo County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 29-88-104 (Feb. 28, 1990), aff’d, Kanawha Cnty. Cir. Ct. Civil Action No. 90-AA-72, aff’d, Duruttya v. Bd. of Educ., 181 W. Va. 203, 382 S.E.2d 203 (1989); State ex rel. Eads v. Duncil, 196 W. Va. 604, 474 S.E.2d 534 (1996); Bedford County Memorial Hosp. v. Health and Human Serv., 769 F.2d 1017 (4th Cir. 1985); Yokum v. W. Va. Schools for the Deaf and the Blind, Docket No. 96-DOE-081 (Oct. 16, 1996); Trimboli v. Dep’t of Health and Human Res., Docket No. 93-HHR-322 (June 27, 1997), aff’d Mercer Cnty. Cir. Ct. Docket No. 97-CV-374-K (Oct. 16, 1998); Adkins v. W. Va. Dep't of Educ., 210 W. Va. 105, 556 S.E.2d 72 (2001) (per curiam); Blake v. Kanawha County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 01-20-470 (Oct. 29, 2001), aff’d Kanawha Cnty. Cir. Ct. Docket No. 01-AA-161 (July 2, 2002), appeal refused, W.Va. Sup. Ct. App. Docket No. 022387 (Apr. 10, 2003); Bierer v. Jefferson County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 01-19-595 (May 17, 2002); Waggoner v. Cabell County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 2008-1570-CabED (Oct. 31, 2008); Maxey v. McDowell County Bd. of Educ., 212 W. Va. 668, 575 S.E.2d 278 (2002); Mason County Bd. of Educ. v. State Superintendent of Sch., 165 W. Va. 732, 274 S.E.2d 435 (1980); Butts v. Higher Educ. Interim Governing Bd./Shepherd Coll., 212 W. Va. 209, 212, 569 S.E.2d 456, 459 (2002) (per curiam); Reynolds v. Kanawha-Charleston Health Dep’t, Docket No. 90-H-128 (Aug. 8, 1990); Adkins v. Cabell County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 89-06-656 (May 23, 1990); Tolliver v. Monroe County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 01-31-493 (Dec. 26, 2001); Williams v. Cabell County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 95-06-325 (Oct. 31, 1996); Jones v. Mingo County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 95-29-151 (Aug. 24, 1995); Hoover v. Lewis County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 93-21-427 (Feb. 24, 1994); Bd. of Educ. v. Chaddock, 183 W. Va. 638, 398 S.E.2d 120, 122 (1990); Sinsel v. Harrison County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 96-17-219 (Dec. 31, 1996); Geho v. Marshall County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 2008-1395-MarED (Oct. 30, 2008)
Keywords Termination; Suspension; Misconduct; Unsatisfactory Performance; Insubordination; Willful Neglect of Duty; Correctable Conduct; Arbitrary and Capricious; Contact; Confrontation; Inappropriate; Camera; Abrasion; Mark; Discipline
Intermediate Court of Appeals
Circuit Court
Supreme Court
Synopsis Grievant was employed by Respondent as a bus operator. During a morning bus run, a ten-year-old student called Grievant “stupid,” and in response, Grievant deliberately stopped the bus, confronted the student, screamed at him, and called the student “stupid,” all of which was captured on the bus security camera. During this confrontation, Grievant also stuck his finger in the student’s face to punctuate his comments. As a result, Grievant unintentionally made contact with the student’s face and left a red mark on his cheek. Respondent terminated Grievant’s employment as a result of his conduct toward the student. Grievant denied making contact with the student’s face and leaving the mark. Grievant did not deny his other conduct during the incident. Respondent proved by a preponderance of the evidence that Grievant engaged in conduct constituting insubordination and willful neglect of duty thereby justifying his termination. Accordingly, the grievance is DENIED.

Back to Results Search Again