Database Search Result Details

First Name Andrew
Last Name Florence
Decision Date 5/8/2023
Docket Number 2023-0340-DOT
ALJ BTC
Respondent Division of Highways
Employment Type State
Job Title Transportation Worker IV Equipment Operator
Topics Termination
Primary Issues Whether Respondent had good cause to terminate Grievant’s employment, whether the termination was discriminatory, and whether mitigation was warranted.
Outcome Denied
Statutes WEST VIRGINIA CODE ST. R. § 156-1-3 (2018); WEST VIRGINA CODE §6C-2-2(d).
Related Cases Oakes v. W. Va. Dep't of Finance and Admin., 164 W. Va. 384, 264 S.E.2d 151 (1980); Guine v. Civil Serv. Comm'n, 149 W. Va. 461, 141 S.E.2d 364 (1965); See also W. VA. CODE ST. R. § 143-1- 12.02 and 12.03 (2012). Baker v. Bd. of Trs./W. Va. Univ. at Parkersburg, Docket No. 97-BOT-359 (Apr. 30, 1998) (citing Harrison v. W. Va. Bd. of Drs./Bluefield State Coll., Docket No. 93-BOD-400 (Apr. 11, 1995) .” Phillips v. Summers County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 93-45-105 (Mar. 31, 1994); Cooper v. Raleigh County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 2014-0028-RalED (Apr. 30, 2014), aff’d, Kanawha Cnty. Cir. Ct. Docket No. 14-AA- 54 (Jan. 16, 2015). Overbee v. Dep't of Health and Human Resources/Welch Emergency Hosp., Docket No. 96-HHR-183 (Oct. 3, 1996); Olsen v. Kanawha County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 02-20-380 (May 30, 2003), aff’d, Kanawha Cnty. Cir. Ct. Docket No. 03-AA-94 (Jan. 30, 2004), appeal refused, W.Va. Sup. Ct. App. Docket No. 041105 (Sept. 30, 2004). Martin v. W. Va. Fire Comm'n, Docket No. 89-SFC-145 (Aug. 8, 1989).” Conner v. Barbour County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 94-01-394 (Jan. 31, 1995), aff’d, Kanawha Cnty. Cir. Ct. Docket No. 95-AA- 66 (May 1, 1996), appeal refused, W.Va. Sup. Ct. App. (Nov. 19, 1996).
Keywords Discrimination
Intermediate Court of Appeals
Circuit Court
Supreme Court
Synopsis Grievant was employed by Respondent as a Transportation Worker IV Equipment Operator. Respondent terminated Grievant’s employment for causing a vehicular crash on the interstate by blocking both lanes of traffic while attempting to make an illegal U turn. Respondent proved it was justified in terminating Grievant’s employment. Grievant failed to prove the termination of his employment was discriminatory. Grievant failed to prove mitigation of the penalty is warranted.

Back to Results Search Again