Database Search Result Details
|
First Name
|
James
|
|
Last Name
|
Prince
|
|
Decision Date
|
3/2/2021
|
|
Docket Number
|
2020-0552-MAPS
|
|
ALJ
|
BTC
|
|
Respondent
|
Division of Corrections and Rehabilitation/Bureau of Prisons and Jails
|
|
Employment Type
|
STATE
|
|
Job Title
|
Building Maintenance Supervisor
|
|
Topics
|
Job Duties
|
|
Primary Issues
|
Whether Grievant proved he is entitled to the removal of the additional duties Respondent has assigned.
|
|
Outcome
|
Denied
|
|
Statutes
|
W. Va. Code St. R. § 143-1-4.3a
|
|
Related Cases
|
Crowder, et al. v. Div. of Corrections, Docket No. 2018-0417-CONS (Oct. 4, 2018), aff’d, Kanawha Cnty. Cir. Ct. Civil Action No. 18-AA-251 (Apr. 3, 2019); Rexrode, et al. v. Div. of Corrections, Docket No. 2018-0800-CONS ( Oct. 12, 2018); Korntop, et al. v. Div. of Corrections, Docket No. 01-CORR-390 (Oct. 17, 2001); Hager v. Health & Human Res., Docket No. 95-HHR-241 (Sept. 29, 1995); Reed v. W. Va. Div. of Corrections , Docket No. 97-CORR-127 (May 22, 1998); Clifford v. Div. of Corrections, Docket No. 02-CORR-124 (Aug. 29, 2002)
|
|
Keywords
|
Job Assignments; Additional Duties; Classification
|
|
Intermediate Court of Appeals
|
|
|
Circuit Court
|
|
|
Supreme Court
|
|
|
Synopsis
|
Grievant is employed by Respondent as a Building Maintenance Supervisor 1. Grievant protests Respondent’s mandatory assignment of additional duties not within Grievant’s classification. Grievant has failed to prove he is entitled to the removal of the additional duties Respondent has assigned. Respondent is permitted to assign some duties that are not within an employee’s classification. Grievant is not entitled to the removal of the duties as the duties are not his predominant duties and he is paid at a higher rate than the classification of the additional duties. Accordingly, the grievance is denied.
|
Back to Results
Search Again