Database Search Result Details
|
First Name
|
Jennifer
|
|
Last Name
|
Young, et al.
|
|
Decision Date
|
8/29/2019
|
|
Docket Number
|
2019-0840-CONS
|
|
ALJ
|
CHL
|
|
Respondent
|
Greenbrier County Board of Education
|
|
Employment Type
|
PROF
|
|
Job Title
|
Aide/ECCAT
|
|
Topics
|
Seniority; Early Childhood Classroom Assistant Teacher (ECCAT)
|
|
Primary Issues
|
Whether Grievants proved by a preponderance of the evidence that the random selection drawing was invalid and/or unnecessary and whether their overall Aide seniority should be used for ECCAT employment decisions.
|
|
Outcome
|
Denied
|
|
Statutes
|
W. Va. Code § 18A-4-8b(d)(2)(C); W. Va. Code St. R. § 156-1-3 (2018); W. Va. Code § 18A-4-8b(d)(2)(C); W. VA. Code § 18A-4-8g
|
|
Related Cases
|
Leichliter v. Dep't of Health & Human Res., Docket No. 92-HHR-486 (May 17, 1993), aff’d, Pleasants Cnty. Cir. Ct. Civil Action No. 93-APC-1 (Dec. 2, 1994); Carpenter, et al., v. Webster County Board of Education, Docket No. 2018-1027-CONS (Mar. 27, 2019); Mayle v. Barbour County Bd. of Educ., No. 17-0204 (W. Va. Supreme Court) (January 8, 2018); 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)
|
|
Keywords
|
Early Childhood Classroom Assistant Teachers; ECCAT; Seniority; Aide; Tie-breaker; Random; Rank; Multiclassified; Mistake; Error; Drawing; Identical; Certification; Classification; Category; Calculating; Decisions
|
|
Intermediate Court of Appeals
|
|
|
Circuit Court
|
Grievants Vandall, Thomas, Scruggs, Russell, Huffman, Boswell, Webb, Young and Osborne appealed to Circuit Court of Kanawha County 10/15/19; Civil Action Nos. 19-AA-132; 19-AA-133; 19-AA-134; 19-AA-135; 19-AA-136; 19-AA-137; 19-AA-138; 19-AA-140; 19-AA-141; Circuit Court Consolidated these under Mandy Vandall et al; Civil Action No. 19-AA-132; Judge Kaufman; Final Order 2/10/2020; Reversed
|
|
Supreme Court
|
|
|
Synopsis
|
Grievants are employed by Respondent as Aides holding ECCAT certification, multiclassified as Aide/ECCATs. In the past, Respondent ranked these employees for seniority purposes based upon their overall Aide seniority for employment decisions. In late 2018 or early 2019, the Associate Superintendent was advised that Respondent needed to conduct random selection drawings to establish ECCAT seniority rankings for Grievants and other ECCAT employees who shared identical ECCAT seniority dates. Grievants were thereafter required to participate in the random selection process to determine their ECCAT seniority ranking. Eight of the Grievants shared the ECCAT seniority date of August 4, 2014. One of the Grievants shared the ECCAT seniority date of August 21, 2017, with a non-party employee. Grievants argue that their overall Aide seniority should control for employment decisions and that the random selection drawings held in January 2019 were invalid and unnecessary. Grievants failed to prove their claims by a preponderance of the evidence. Therefore, this grievance is DENIED.
|
Back to Results
Search Again