Database Search Result Details
First Name
|
Djuana
|
Last Name
|
Kennedy
|
Decision Date
|
4/9/2019
|
Docket Number
|
2018-1209-WetED
|
ALJ
|
JSF
|
Respondent
|
Wetzel County Board of Education
|
Employment Type
|
SERV
|
Job Title
|
Bus Operator
|
Topics
|
Summer Bus Run
|
Primary Issues
|
Whether Respondent’s assignment of the summer bus runs was arbitrary and capricious.
|
Outcome
|
Denied
|
Statutes
|
W. Va. Code §§ 18-5-39(f) and 18-5-39(g)
|
Related Cases
|
Lilly v. Fayette County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 96-10-481 (Sept. 15, 1997); Lilly v. Fayette County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 99-10-43[3] (Mar. 17, 2000); Williams v. Kanawha County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 0[1]-20-058 (May 10, 2001); Eisentrout v. Preston County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 2010-0022-PreED (April 16, 2010); Cowan, et al. v. Ritchie County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 2010-1537-CONS (Jan. 20, 2012)
|
Keywords
|
Summer Bus Run; Reduction in Force; Summer Seniority; Arbitrary and Capricious; Reemployment
|
Intermediate Court of Appeals
|
|
Circuit Court
|
Grievant appealed to Kanawha County 5/10/19, CA #19-AA-50, Kaufman; Final Order Affirmed 10/31/2019
|
Supreme Court
|
|
Synopsis
|
Respondent has employed Grievant as a summer bus run operator since 2014. Each year, Respondent reduces in force all summer bus driver positions, reposts the positions by run, and chooses from applicants based on summer seniority, which usually results in drivers retaining their runs from the previous summer. Grievant drove the New Martinsville/Paden City summer run in 2017. In 2018, Respondent eliminated the run driven by the most senior summer bus operator, Ms. Norris, and reduced in force the least senior summer bus driver, Mr. West, before assigning Grievant’s 2017, summer run to Ms. Norris. Respondent assigned to Grievant the summer Extended Year Run, resulting in her working 14 fewer days in the summer of 2018. Grievant contends that she was entitled to retain her 2017, summer run under W. Va. Code § 18-5-39(f). Respondent contends that W. Va. Code § 18-5-39(g) obligated it to provide Ms. Norris her choice of summer runs once it eliminated Ms. Norris’ 2017, summer bus run. The cited code sections mandate that reemployment in summer positions be based on summer seniority, but permit drivers who drove the previous summer to retain their summer employment over more senior summer drivers who did not drive the previous summer. While neither party’s interpretation of the code is accurate, Respondent’s interpretation led it to the proper outcome. Accordingly, the grievance is DENIED.
|
Back to Results
Search Again