Database Search Result Details
|
First Name
|
Ruben
|
|
Last Name
|
Wright
|
|
Decision Date
|
1/10/2020
|
|
Docket Number
|
2019-0877-McdED
|
|
ALJ
|
BTC
|
|
Respondent
|
McDowell County Board of Education
|
|
Employment Type
|
PROF
|
|
Job Title
|
Substitute Teacher/Assistant Coach
|
|
Topics
|
Hostile Work Environment; Discrimination
|
|
Primary Issues
|
Whether Grievant proved he was the victim of either discrimination or hostile work environment.
|
|
Outcome
|
Denied
|
|
Statutes
|
W. Va. Code § 6C-2-2(d); W. Va. Code § 5-11-1
|
|
Related Cases
|
Beverly v. Div. of Highways, Docket No. 2014-0461-DOT (Aug. 19, 2014), aff’d, Kanawha Cnty. Cir. Ct. Docket No. 14-AA-95 (Mar. 31, 2015); Vance v. Reg’l Jail & Corr. Facility Auth., Docket No. 2011-1705-MAPS (Feb. 22, 2012), aff’d, Kanawha Cnty. Cir. Ct. Docket No. 12-AA-32 (Jul. 5, 2012); Hanlon v. Chambers, 195 W. Va. 99, 464 S.E.2d 741 (1995); Napier v. Stratton, 204 W. Va. 415, 513 S.E.2d 463, 467 (1998)
|
|
Keywords
|
Hostile Work Environment; Discrimination; Job Description; Coach Duties
|
|
Intermediate Court of Appeals
|
|
|
Circuit Court
|
|
|
Supreme Court
|
|
|
Synopsis
|
Grievant is employed by Respondent in an extra-curricular assignment as an Assistant Coach. Grievant alleges hostile work environment and discrimination by the head coach and the principal of the school. Respondent argued that Grievant failed to prove the underlying facts or that discrimination or a hostile work environment had occurred. While there has been a breakdown of the working relationship between Grievant and the head coach, the breakdown was caused by Grievant, who consistently worked to undermine the head coach’s authority and was repeatedly disrespectful and insubordinate, presumably because he believed he should have been selected as the head coach instead. While the head coach’s management of Grievant was ineffective and he was discourteous at times, the head coach did not discriminate against Grievant or create a hostile work environment. The principal did take appropriate action in response to the situation and Grievant failed to prove that she discriminated against him or created a hostile work environment. Accordingly, the grievance is denied.
|
Back to Results
Search Again