Database Search Result Details
|
First Name
|
Randall
|
|
Last Name
|
Hazlewood
|
|
Decision Date
|
3/28/2019
|
|
Docket Number
|
2018-0864-CONS
|
|
ALJ
|
LRB
|
|
Respondent
|
General Services Division
|
|
Employment Type
|
STATE
|
|
Job Title
|
Facility Equipment Maintenance Technician
|
|
Topics
|
Discretionary Pay Increase
|
|
Primary Issues
|
Whether Grievant established he was entitled to a discretionary merit increase.
|
|
Outcome
|
Granted/Denied
|
|
Statutes
|
|
|
Related Cases
|
Hazlewood v. West Virginia General Services Division, Docket No. 2017-2495-CONS (Jan. 9, 2019); Wiley v. West Virginia Division of Natural Resources, Docket No. 97-DNR-397 (Mar. 26, 1998); Maxey v. West Virginia Department of Health & Human Services, Docket Nos. 92-HHR-088/224/362 (Aug. 16, 1993)
|
|
Keywords
|
Discretionary Increase; Pay Plan Policy; Arbitrary and Capricious
|
|
Intermediate Court of Appeals
|
|
|
Circuit Court
|
|
|
Supreme Court
|
|
|
Synopsis
|
Grievant was denied a discretionary merit increase. This is a consolidated grievance wherein the original two grievances are treated as one. In a consolidated grievance, it is possible that one claim may be dismissed while other claims remain, in the instant grievance, additional facts and/or clarification were collected before any final determination was reached on the pending issue(s). Grievant protest Respondent’s determination not to provide him a discretionary salary increase. Challenging how the score of his 2016 EPA3 is being used is different from challenging the score on the EPA. Grievant did not timely challenge the validity of the 2016 EPA. Grievant did successfully challenge the validity of his 2017 EPA. Grievant failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that Respondent’s decision not to recommend him for a discretionary merit increase violated any law, rule, policy or procedure, or that it was otherwise arbitrary and capricious. This Grievance is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART.
|
Back to Results
Search Again