Database Search Result Details
|
First Name
|
Dana
|
|
Last Name
|
Evans
|
|
Decision Date
|
10/25/2023
|
|
Docket Number
|
2022-0031-LogED
|
|
ALJ
|
BTC
|
|
Respondent
|
Logan County Board of Education
|
|
Employment Type
|
PROF
|
|
Job Title
|
Itinerant counselor
|
|
Topics
|
Compensation; Discrimination
|
|
Primary Issues
|
Whether Grievant is entitled to the same supplemental pay as a "classroom teacher." Whether ESSERF II funds were supplements or stipends.
|
|
Outcome
|
Denied
|
|
Statutes
|
W. VA. CODE ST. R. § 156-1-3 (2018); W. VA. CODE § 18A-1-1(c)(1); W. VA. CODE § 18A-4-5a(a); W. VA. CODE § 6C-2-2(d)
|
|
Related Cases
|
Leichliter v. Dep't of Health & Human Res., Docket No. 92-HHR-486 (May 17, 1993), aff’d, Pleasants Cnty. Cir. Ct. Civil Action No. 93-APC-1 (Dec. 2, 1994); Beine v. Bd. of Educ., 181 W. Va. 669, 383 S.E.2d 851 (1989); Lockett v. Fayette Cty. Bd. of Educ., 214 W. Va. 554, 561, 591 S.E.2d 112, 119 (2003)
|
|
Keywords
|
Pay equity; Back pay
|
|
Intermediate Court of Appeals
|
|
|
Circuit Court
|
|
|
Supreme Court
|
|
|
Synopsis
|
Grievant is employed by Respondent as an itinerant school counselor. Grievant protest’s Respondent’s refusal to pay her alleged supplemental pay that was paid to regular classroom teachers. The pay at issue was a stipend rather than a county salary supplement and, therefore, the uniformity of pay requirement was not applicable. Grievant was not similarly situated to the regular classroom teachers who received the stipend so the refusal to pay the stipend was not discriminatory. Therefore, Grievant failed to prove she was entitled to payment of the stipend. Accordingly, the grievance is denied.
|
Back to Results
Search Again