Database Search Result Details
|
First Name
|
Jeannise
|
|
Last Name
|
Greco
|
|
Decision Date
|
2/8/2019
|
|
Docket Number
|
2019-0373-MonCH
|
|
ALJ
|
JSF
|
|
Respondent
|
Monongalia County Health Department
|
|
Employment Type
|
STATE
|
|
Job Title
|
Nutritionist I
|
|
Topics
|
Termination; Dismissal
|
|
Primary Issues
|
Whether Respondent had good cause to terminate Grievant’s employment.
|
|
Outcome
|
Denied
|
|
Statutes
|
W. Va. Code St. R. § 143-1-14.8.c.1. (2016); W. Va. Code St. R. § 143-1-12.2.c. (2016); W. Va. Code St. R. § 143-1-14.8.c.1.D. (2016)
|
|
Related Cases
|
Freeman v. Fayette Cty. Bd. of Educ., 215 W. Va. 272, 277, 599 S.E.2d 695, 700 (2004); Mace, 377 S.E.2d 461 at 464; W. Va. Dep't of Nat. Res. v. Myers, 191 W. Va. 72, 76, 443 S.E.2d 229, 233 (1994); Conner v. Barbour Cty. Bd. of Educ., 200 W. Va. 405, 409, 489 S.E.2d 787 (1997); Frank's Shoe Store v. Human Rights Comm’n, 179 W. Va. 53, 365 S.E.2d 251 (1986)
|
|
Keywords
|
Termination; Family Medical Leave Act; Unpaid Leave; Due Process Rights; Retaliation; Arbitrary and Capricious
|
|
Intermediate Court of Appeals
|
|
|
Circuit Court
|
Grievant appealed to Harrison County CA No. 19-C-78-3, Matish (being transferred to Kanawha County)
|
|
Supreme Court
|
|
|
Synopsis
|
Grievant contends her dismissal from employment with Respondent is arbitrary and capricious, an abuse of discretion, and in retaliation for her filing multiple grievances against Respondent. She contends that in citing conduct which occurred more than a year prior, for which she had already been disciplined, and which was addressed in a previous grievance, Respondent revealed its retaliatory motive. Respondent contends that it dismissed Grievant on the day her six months of unpaid family medical leave expired based on her disciplinary history and her physician statement. This physician statement gave a return to work date that was beyond the six-month period of unpaid leave and stated that Grievant’s condition would permanently prevent her from performing her work duties. Respondent proved a proper basis to dismiss Grievant. Grievant did not prove her dismissal was arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion and did not prove that the dismissal was retaliation. Accordingly, the grievance is DENIED.
|
Back to Results
Search Again