| First Name | Robyn |
| Last Name | Wolford |
| Decision Date | 3/1/2019 |
| Docket Number | 2018-0549-HamED |
| ALJ | JSF |
| Respondent | Hampshire County Board of Education |
| Employment Type | SERV |
| Job Title | Bus Operator |
| Topics | Dismissed; Untimely |
| Primary Issues | Whether this grievance is untimely. |
| Outcome | Untimely |
| Statutes | W. Va. Code § 6C-2-4; W. Va. Code § 6C-2-3(c)(1) |
| Related Cases | Sayre v. Mason County Health Dep't, Docket No. 95-MCHD-435 (Dec. 29, 1995), aff'd, Circuit Court of Mason County, No. 96-C-02 (June 17, 1996); Ball v. Kanawha County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 94-20-384 (Mar. 13, 1995); Lynch v. W. Va. Dep't of Transp., Docket No. 97-DOH-060 (July 16, 1997); Carnes v. Raleigh County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 01-41-351 (Nov. 13, 2001); Williamson v. W. Va. Dep’t of Tax and Revenue, Docket No. 98-T&R-275D (Sept. 30, 1998); Harvey v. W. Va. Bureau of Empl. Programs, Docket No. 96-BEP-484 (Mar. 6, 1998); Harris v. Lincoln County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 89-22-49 (Mar. 23, 1989); Buck v. Wood County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 96-54-325 (Feb. 28, 1997); Bailey v. McDowell Cnty. Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 07-33-399 (Nov. 24, 2008) |
| Keywords | Motion to Dismiss; Untimeliness; Time Lines |
| Intermediate Court of Appeals | |
| Circuit Court | Grievant appealed to Kanawha County Circuit Court 4/2/19, CA # 19-AA-35 (Salango); Reversed/Remanded by Final Order 10/11/2019 |
| Supreme Court | |
| Synopsis | Grievant was a bus operator for one of Respondent’s three extracurricular bus runs starting with the 2014-15, school year. Respondent reduced these to one run for the 2017-18, school year. Upon posting, Grievant applied for the run and was unequivocally notified on September 5, 2017, that the run was awarded to another applicant. Grievant did not file this grievance until October 10, 2017. Respondent moved to dismiss this grievance as untimely, arguing that Grievant filed it beyond the requisite fifteen working days after the grievable event. Grievant contends that Respondent informed her that the 2016-17, run was a “tutoring run” and the 2017-18, run was an “activity run”. Grievant contends she did not suspect there was grievable event until September 22, 2017, when she retrieved her 2014-15, extracurricular contract from Respondent and noticed “activity run” handwritten on it. Grievant contends she only knew there was a grievable event when Respondent confirmed on September 29, 2017, that her prior extracurricular runs and the 2017-18, extracurricular run were “activity runs”. The timeframe for filing a grievance is calculated from the date Grievant is “unequivocally notified of the decision being challenged”, not the date she knows she has a grievable event. Accordingly, the grievance is Dismissed. |