Database Search Result Details

First Name Deborah
Last Name Guillot
Decision Date 9/20/2023
Docket Number 2022-0627-DHHR
ALJ JSF
Respondent Dept. of Health and Human Resources/Bureau for Children and Families
Employment Type STATE
Job Title Supervisor for Child Protective Services
Topics Disciplinary
Primary Issues Whether Respondent had good cause to terminate Grievant because her actions discredited Respondent and negatively affected public trust.
Outcome Denied
Statutes W. VA. CODE ST. R. § 156-1-3 (2018); W. VA. CODE ST. R. § 143-1-12.2.a. (2016)
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); Syl. Pt. 1, 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); Sloan v. Dep't of Health & Human Res., 215 W. Va. 657, 600 S.E.2d 554 (2004) (per curiam); Drown v. W. Va. Civil Serv. Comm'n, 180 W. Va. 143, 145, 375 S.E.2d 775, 777 (1988) (per curiam); 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); 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); .” 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)
Keywords Termination
Intermediate Court of Appeals
Circuit Court
Supreme Court
Synopsis Grievant was dismissed for violating DHHR’s Off-the-Job Conduct policy. It is undisputed that two underage employees sold alcohol to an underage operative at the inn co-owned by Grievant and her husband. Grievant then interfered with police questioning of her underage employees and was disorderly. Grievant contends she was an inactive secondary owner, that she was protecting minors, and that her dismissal was excessive. Grievant failed to prove these affirmative defenses. DHHR proved that Grievant’s actions discredited DHHR and negatively affected public trust, providing good cause for dismissal. Accordingly, this grievance is DENIED.

Back to Results Search Again