Database Search Result Details
|
First Name
|
Tammy
|
|
Last Name
|
Salisbury
|
|
Decision Date
|
5/28/2019
|
|
Docket Number
|
2019-0633-CONS
|
|
ALJ
|
JSF
|
|
Respondent
|
Department of Health and Human Resources/Bureau for Children and Families
|
|
Employment Type
|
STATE
|
|
Job Title
|
Secretary
|
|
Topics
|
Termination; Dismissal
|
|
Primary Issues
|
Whether Respondent had good cause to terminate Grievant.
|
|
Outcome
|
Denied
|
|
Statutes
|
W. Va. Code § 9-2-6; W. Va. Code St. R. § 143-1-12.2.a. (2012)
|
|
Related Cases
|
Graley v. Parkways Econ. Dev. & Tourism Auth., Docket No. 91-PEDTA-225 (Dec. 23, 1991); Thacker v. West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources, Docket No. 2017-1422-DHHR (September 7, 2018); Jones v. W. Va. Dep’t of Health & Human Res., Docket No. 96-HHR-371 (Oct. 30, 1996); Phillips v. Summers County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 93-45-105 (Mar. 31, 1994); Cooper v. Raleigh County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 2014-0028-RalED (Apr. 30, 2014), aff’d, Kanawha Cnty. Cir. Ct. Docket No. 14-AA-54 (Jan. 16, 2015); Roberts v. Concord University, Docket No. 2016-1284-CONS (Apr. 25, 2016)
|
|
Keywords
|
Termination; Gross Misconduct; Forging Signatures; Failing to Cooperate; Investigation; Mitigation; Arbitrary and Capricious
|
|
Intermediate Court of Appeals
|
|
|
Circuit Court
|
|
|
Supreme Court
|
|
|
Synopsis
|
Grievant was employed by Respondent as a Secretary I. Respondent suspended Grievant without pay after she signed a coworker’s name to a document without permission. Respondent terminated Grievant for failure to cooperate in the subsequent internal investigation and for forging three coworker’s signatures to documents. While Grievant concedes to signing some documents, she contends her behavior was not intentional, was not misconduct, and that Respondent denied her due process in failing to hold a predetermination meeting. While Respondent did not prove failure to cooperate or criminal forgery, Respondent proved Grievant engaged in misconduct through signing coworker’s names to documents without permission. Grievant failed to prove that mitigation of her punishment is warranted. Accordingly, the grievance is denied.
|
Back to Results
Search Again