Database Search Result Details

First Name Christine
Last Name Denton
Decision Date 7/22/2019
Docket Number 2018-1174-DHHR
ALJ WBM
Respondent Department of Health and Human Resources/Welch Community Hospital
Employment Type STATE
Job Title Cook
Topics Salary
Primary Issues Whether Grievant proved that the decision to not seek a merit-based salary advancement for Grievant was arbitrary or capricious.
Outcome Denied
Statutes W. Va. Code § 6C 2 2 (d); W. Va. Code § 29-6-10
Related Cases Thewes and Thompson v. Dep’t of Health & Human Res./Pinecrest Hosp., Docket No. 02-HHR-366 (Sept. 18, 2003); Myers v. Div. of Highways, Docket No. 2008-1380-DOT (Mar. 12, 2009); Buckland v. Div. of Natural Res., Docket No. 2008-0095-DOC (Oct. 6, 2008): Boothe, et al., v. W. Va. Dep’t of Transp./Div. of Highways, Docket No. 2009-0800-CONS (Feb. 17, 2011); Lott v. Div. of Highways and Div. of Personnel, Docket No. 2011-1456-DOT (Sept. 9, 2014); Deem et al. v. Div. of Motor Vehicles, Docket No.2016-1041-CONS (Nov. 30, 2016): Largent v. W. Va. Div. of Health and Div. of Personnel, 192 W. Va. 239, 452 S.E.2d 42 (1994).
Keywords Pay; Salary; Discrimination; Equal Pay for Equal Work; Arbitrary and Capricious
Intermediate Court of Appeals
Circuit Court
Supreme Court
Synopsis Grievant is being paid a lower wage that other employees in her classification who were hired after her. She argues that paying these less experienced employees a higher wage is discriminatory as well as arbitrary and capricious. All the employees in Grievant’s classification are being paid in the appropriate Pay Grade for the cook classification. The West Virginia Supreme Court of appeals has held that an Agency is only required to pay employees in the same classification within the wage range established in the Pay Grade for that classification, which /respondent is doing in this instance.

Back to Results Search Again