Database Search Result Details
|
First Name
|
Donna
|
|
Last Name
|
Estepp
|
|
Decision Date
|
2/16/2024
|
|
Docket Number
|
2023-0624-MinED
|
|
ALJ
|
LRB
|
|
Respondent
|
Mingo County Board of Education
|
|
Employment Type
|
SERV
|
|
Job Title
|
Aide
|
|
Topics
|
Termination
|
|
Primary Issues
|
Whether Respondent proved it was within its discretion to terminate Grievant's employment for violation of policy?
|
|
Outcome
|
Denied
|
|
Statutes
|
W. Va. Code § 18A-2-8
|
|
Related Cases
|
Painter v. Kanawha County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 2008-0724-KanED (June 18, 2008); Arnold v. Monongalia County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 02-30-195 (Jan. 13, 2003); Cooper v. Kanawha County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 02-20-097 (July 31, 2002); Buckley v. Kanawha County Board of Education, Docket No. 2015-0963-KanED (May 18, 2015); Tickett v. Cabell County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 97-06-233 (Mar. 12, 1998); Huffstutler
v. Cabell County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 97-06-150 (Oct. 31, 1997); Buckley v. Kanawha County Board of Education, Docket No. 2015-0963-KanED (May 18, 2015).
|
|
Keywords
|
Immorality; transit time, timesheet
|
|
Intermediate Court of Appeals
|
|
|
Circuit Court
|
|
|
Supreme Court
|
|
|
Synopsis
|
Mingo County Board of Education terminated Grievant's employment as an Aide, as a consequence of a pattern of misreporting her time on timesheets, which resulted in
overtime pay. Respondent alleges that Grievant's conduct violated Mingo County Board of Education policy numbers 4000 (Service Personnel, Code of Conduct), 6000 (Finances, Overtime), and 8000 (Operations, Anti-Fraud). Grievant protests and contends the facts do not warrant termination and/or Respondent is overreacting. Violation of applicable rules and regulation is established. Grievant is found to be in violation of applicable school codes, which undermines Respondent's willingness to retain Grievant in its employment. Respondent maintains that Grievant violated certain policies, specifically its Code of Conduct Policy, Overtime Policy, and Anti-Fraud Policy
by falsified time sheets that reflected 1⁄2 hour overtime each day for a period of several months; resulting in repeated overtime pay. It is not established that Respondent is beyond its discretion finding the established conduct (in the facts of this case) to be a
dischargeable offence. This Grievance is DENIED.
|
Back to Results
Search Again