Database Search Result Details
|
First Name
|
Catherine
|
|
Last Name
|
Skaggs, et al.
|
|
Decision Date
|
8/12/2019
|
|
Docket Number
|
2018-0990-CONS
|
|
ALJ
|
LRB
|
|
Respondent
|
Ritchie County Board of Education
|
|
Employment Type
|
SERV
|
|
Job Title
|
Aide
|
|
Topics
|
Seniority
|
|
Primary Issues
|
Whether Grievants proved that ECCAT seniority should be determined by the time Grievants were employed as Aides.
|
|
Outcome
|
Denied
|
|
Statutes
|
W. Va. Code 18-5-18(c); W. Va. Code 18A-4-8(i)(8)-(11) & (36)-(38)
|
|
Related Cases
|
Mayle v. Barbour County Bd. of Educ., Case No. 17-0204 (W. Va. Supreme Court) (January 8, 2018); Carpenter, et al., v. Webster County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 2018-1027 (March 27, 2019); Conners v. Hardy County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 99-16-459 (Jan. 14, 2000); Toney v. Lincoln County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 2008-0533-LinED (Oct. 31, 2008); Miller v. Bd. of Educ. of Boone Cty., 190 W.Va. 153, 159, 437 S.E.2d 591, 597 (1993)
|
|
Keywords
|
Seniority; Early Childhood Classroom Assistant Teacher; Random Seniority Selection Process; Statutory Time Limit
|
|
Intermediate Court of Appeals
|
|
|
Circuit Court
|
Grievants Haugh, Keith and Lafferre appealed to Kanawha County Circuit Court 9/26/19: Civil Action No. 19-AA-114, Judge Kaufman; Final Order 1/31/2020; Reversed; Civil Action No. 19-AA-115, Judge Tabit; Still Pending; Civil Action No. 19-AA-116, Judge Bailey; Final Order 3/6/2020; Reversed
|
|
Supreme Court
|
|
|
Synopsis
|
Respondent determined that Grievants were tied for Early Childhood Classroom Assistant Teacher (ECCAT) seniority and required Grievants to participate in a random selection process to determine their ECCAT seniority ranking. Grievants argue that their ECCAT seniority should be calculated the same as their Aide seniority. Additionally, they aver that the process for determining the seniority ranking was untimely (after the statutory time limit for that procedure). It is established that ECCAT seniority is not the same as Aide seniority. See Mayle v. Barbour County Bd. of Educ., Case No. 17-0204 (January 8, 2018) ECCAT seniority accrual is independent of Aide seniority.
Grievants point out that Respondent failed to hold a random selection to set the seniority ranking for Grievants within thirty days of them all starting to work as ECCATs. Grievants seems to argue that Respondent is now stuck with computing the ECCAT seniority based upon Aide seniority because it did not hold the tie-breaker within the statutory time line. A school board cannot continue to calculate seniority in a manner inconsistent with the law simply because they failed to timely hold a tie-breaker. This Grievance Board has long recognized that boards of education should be encouraged to correct their errors as early as possible. Respondent’s failure to hold a timely tie-breaker is understandable in the circumstance(s). The issue of ECCAT seniority accrual was less clear until the West Virginia Supreme Court addressed the issue. This Grievance is DENIED.
|
Back to Results
Search Again