Database Search Result Details
|
First Name
|
Lisa
|
|
Last Name
|
Kerr
|
|
Decision Date
|
6/3/2021
|
|
Docket Number
|
2019-1896-CONS
|
|
ALJ
|
WBM
|
|
Respondent
|
Department of Health and Human Resources/Bureau for Children and Families
|
|
Employment Type
|
STATE
|
|
Job Title
|
Adult Protective Service Worker
|
|
Topics
|
Suspension
|
|
Primary Issues
|
Whether Grievant proved by a preponderance of the evidence that the penalty of suspension was disproportionate to the offense proven.
|
|
Outcome
|
Denied
|
|
Statutes
|
W. Va. Code § 6C-2-2(o)
|
|
Related Cases
|
Lanehart v. Logan County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 97-23-088 (June 13, 1997); Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc., 510 U.S. 17, at 22, (1993); Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Servs., Inc., 523 U.S. 75 (1998); Fairmont Specialty Servs., v. W. Va. Human Rights Comm’n, 206 W. Va. 86, 522 S.E.2d 180 (1999); Vest v. Board of Education of County of Nicholas, 193 W. Va. 222, 455 S.E.2d 781 (1995); Freeman v. Fayette Cty. Bd. of Educ., 215 W. Va. 272, 277, 599 S.E.2d 695, 700 (2004)
|
|
Keywords
|
Suspension; Employee Conduct; Misconduct; Unprofessional Behavior; Mitigation
|
|
Intermediate Court of Appeals
|
|
|
Circuit Court
|
Grievant appealed to Kanawha County, Civil Action 21-AA-37 (Webster) Affirms; 3/4/2022
|
|
Supreme Court
|
Grievant appealed to WV Supreme Court on 4/1/2022, No. 22-0253
|
|
Synopsis
|
Grievant was suspended for ten days without pay for violating DHHR Policy Memorandum 2106 – Employee Conduct through unprofessional conduct including being confrontational with co-workers, disrespectful with her supervisors and outside contacts as well as disrupting a training program.
Grievant argues that her behavior was not in violation of the policy, that the discipline was actually based upon her sexual preference, that she was not sufficiently warned of the consequences of her behavior, and that the penalty of suspension was disproportionate to any misconduct she may have committed.
Respondent proved that Grievant violated the identified policy, had warned Grievant about her conduct on several occasions, and that there were legitimates reasons for the suspension unrelated to any discrimination or retaliation. The penalty was not clearly disproportionate to the misconduct which was proven.
|
Back to Results
Search Again