Database Search Result Details

First Name Edwin
Last Name Holley
Decision Date 8/10/2021
Docket Number 2021-0249-MU
ALJ JSF
Respondent Marshall University
Employment Type HE
Job Title Grounds Supervisor
Topics Suspension
Primary Issues Whether Respondent had good cause to suspend Grievant.
Outcome Denied
Statutes W. Va. Code § 6C-2-3(h); W. Va. Code § 6C-2-2(o); W. Va. Code § 6C-2-2(l)
Related Cases Butts v. Higher Educ. Interim Governing Bd., 212 W. Va. 209, 212, 569 S.E.2d 456, 459 (2002); McDaniel v. Div. of Highways, Docket No. 2017-1404-CONS (June 30, 2017); Hazelwood v. General Services Div., Docket No. 2017-2495-CONS (January 19, 2019); State ex rel. Eads v. Duncil, 196 W.Va. 604, 474 S.E.2d 534 (1996); Wiley v. Div. of Natural Res., Docket No. 96-DNR-515 (Mar. 26, 1988); Linger v. Dep’t of Health & Human Res., Docket No. 2010-1490-CONS (Dec. 5. 2012); Reynolds v. Kanawha-Charleston Health Dep’t, Docket No. 90-H-128 (Aug. 8, 1990); Cook v. Div. of Natural Res., Docket No. 2009-0875-DOC (Jan. 22, 2010); Conner v. Barbour County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 93-01-154 (Apr. 8, 1994); Poore v. W. Va. Dep’t of Health and Human Resources/Bureau for Children and Families, Docket No. 2010-0448-DHHR (Feb. 11, 2011); Conner v. Barbour County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 93-01-154 (Apr. 8, 1994); Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc., 510 U.S. 17, 22, (1993); Day v. Morgan Co. Health Dep’t, Docket No. 07-CHD-121 (Dec. 14, 2007)
Keywords Suspension; Policy; Retaliation; Discrimination; Harassment; Hostile Work Environment; Arbitrary and Capricious
Intermediate Court of Appeals
Circuit Court
Supreme Court
Synopsis Grievant is employed as a Supervisor of Moves by Respondent, Marshall University. Respondent suspended Grievant for ignoring orders to retrieve lumber, for yelling at his supervisor, and for leaving work without notice/authorization. Grievant contends he was never directed to personally transport lumber, did not yell, and gave notice of FMLA leave. Grievant claims Respondent denied him due process by failing to interview his witnesses. He asserts retaliation for his prior grievances, and harassment. Grievant contends that a coworker who took FMLA leave without permission was not disciplined. Respondent did not demonstrate that Grievant was required to get permission before using FMLA leave, that he failed to give notice, or that he yelled at his supervisor. Respondent proved that insubordination and prior discipline justified Grievant’s suspension. Grievant did not prove reprisal, harassment, discrimination, or lack of due process. Accordingly, this grievance is DENIED.

Back to Results Search Again