Database Search Result Details
|
First Name
|
Heather
|
|
Last Name
|
Cox
|
|
Decision Date
|
6/26/2019
|
|
Docket Number
|
2017-2285-DOT
|
|
ALJ
|
JSF
|
|
Respondent
|
Division of Highways
|
|
Employment Type
|
STATE
|
|
Job Title
|
Storekeeper II
|
|
Topics
|
Selection
|
|
Primary Issues
|
Whether Grievant proved that the selection process was arbitrary or capricious.
|
|
Outcome
|
Denied
|
|
Statutes
|
|
|
Related Cases
|
Unrue v. W. Va. Div. of Highways, Docket No. 95-DOH-287 (Jan. 22, 1996); Pullen v. Dep't of Transp., Docket No. 06-DOH-121 (Aug. 2, 2006); See Ball v. Dep't of Transp., Docket No. 04-DOH-423 (May 9, 2005); Freeland v. Dep’t of Health and Human Res., Docket No. 2008-0225-DHHR (Dec. 23, 2008); Lewis v. W. Va. Dep't of Admin., Docket No. 96-DOA-027 (June 7, 1996); Blake v. W. Va. Dep't of Transp./Div. of Highways, Docket No. 97-DOH-416 (May 1, 1998); Mihaliak v. Div. of Rehab. Serv., Docket No. 98-RS-126 (Aug. 3, 1998)
|
|
Keywords
|
Selection; Qualifications; Experience; Arbitrary and Capricious
|
|
Intermediate Court of Appeals
|
|
|
Circuit Court
|
|
|
Supreme Court
|
|
|
Synopsis
|
Grievant is employed by Respondent as a Storekeeper 2. Respondent posted a vacancy for Supervisor I. Respondent chose an external applicant over Grievant. Grievant disputes her non-selection. Grievant did not prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the selection process was legally flawed, that she was the most qualified candidate, or that the selection of another applicant was arbitrary and capricious. Accordingly, this grievance is DENIED.
|
Back to Results
Search Again