| First Name | Timothy |
| Last Name | Ickes |
| Decision Date | 1/22/2026 |
| Docket Number | 2024-0560-DHF |
| ALJ | BTC |
| Respondent | Department of Health Facilities/Mildred Mitchell-Bateman Hospital |
| Employment Type | STATE |
| Job Title | Physical Therapist |
| Topics | Position, Paygrade, Classification and Compensation |
| Primary Issues | Whether Grievant can prove by a preponderance of the evidence that his prior classification under the Division of Personnel’s classification system was improper? |
| Outcome | DENIED |
| Statutes | W. VA. CODE § 30-20-1, W. VA. CODE § 30-20-3(12), W. VA. CODE ST. R. § 16-1-2.17, W. Va. Code St. R. § 16-1-2.5, W. Va. Code § 30-20-3(12), W. Va. Code St. R. § 16-1-2.17, W. Va. Code § 30-20-3(5), W. VA. CODE § 6C-2-5(a), W. Va. Code § 6C-2-5(b), W. VA. CODE §51-11-4(b)(4) W. Va. Code § 29A-5-4(b). |
| 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). Miller v. Workforce West Virginia and Div. of Pers., Docket No. 2008-0235-DOC (Dec. 23, 2008), aff’d, Kanawha Cnty. Cir. Ct., Docket No. 09-AA-15 (May 17, 2010). See Dep't of Natural Res., Docket No. NR-88-038 (Mar. 28, 1989); Oiler v. Dep't of Health & Human Res., Docket No. 00-HHR-361 (Apr. 5, 2001). Captain v. W. Va. Div. of Health, Docket No. 90-H-471 (Apr. 4, 1991). Dollison v. W. Va. Dep't of Empl. Security, Docket No. 89-ES-101 (Nov. 3, 1989).” Clark v. Ins. Comm’n & Div. of Pers., Docket No. 2016-1442-DOR (Dec. 13, 2016), aff’d, Kanawha Cnty. Cir. Ct., Docket No. 17-AA-4 (June 5, 2017). |
| Keywords | Classification, oversight, merits, "nature of work," aide, direct supervision, "pay-plan-policy" |
| Intermediate Court of Appeals | |
| Circuit Court | |
| Supreme Court | |
| Synopsis | Grievant is employed by Respondent as a Physical Therapist at Mildred Mitchell-Bateman Hospital. Grievant is currently classified under the Office of Shared Administration’s classification system but challenges his prior classification under the Division of Personnel’s classification system. Grievant failed to prove that the position he occupied was improperly classified. Accordingly, the grievance is denied. |