Database Search Result Details
|
First Name
|
Joey
|
|
Last Name
|
Cremeans, et al
|
|
Decision Date
|
8/11/2026
|
|
Docket Number
|
2025-0676-CONS
|
|
ALJ
|
KDB
|
|
Respondent
|
Wayne County Board of Education
|
|
Employment Type
|
Service
|
|
Job Title
|
Bus Operator
|
|
Topics
|
Selection; Back Pay
|
|
Primary Issues
|
Whether Grievant can prove by a preponderance of the evidence that he was entitled to the overnight bus run pursuant to his extracurricular contract for the 'Grow Your Own' bus run for Respondent?
Did Respondent properly characterize and award the extra duty night run based on the duty roster?
|
|
Outcome
|
DENIED
|
|
Statutes
|
"W. Va. Code § 18A-2-5
W. Va. Code § 18A-4-8b
W. VA. CODE § 18A-4-8b (f)(2)
W. Va. Code § 18A-4-16
W. VA. CODE ST. R. § 156-1-3 (2018)
|
|
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). White v. Monongalia County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 2008-0586-CONS (Dec. 16, 2008); Sprouse v. Lewis County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 2010-1638-LewED (May 27, 2011). Conners v. Hardy County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 99-16-459 (Jan. 14, 2000); Barrett v. Hancock County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 96-15-512 (Dec. 31, 1997).” Toney v. Lincoln County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 2008-0533-LinEd (Oct 31, 2008).
|
|
Keywords
|
bus run, student transport, contract, “Grow Your Own” (“GYO”) bus run, calendar/inclement weather, extracurricular run, driver’s daily rate, regular daily run, Memorandum of Agreement, “night run”, seniority, "extra duty"
|
|
Intermediate Court of Appeals
|
|
|
Circuit Court
|
|
|
Supreme Court
|
|
|
Synopsis
|
Grievant argues that he should have been awarded the “Grow Your Own” program overnight bus run to Morgantown pursuant to his extracurricular contract for the “Grow Your Own” bus run for Wayne High School. Respondent designated the trip as an extra duty night run and awarded the bus run according to the next senior driver on the roster established by the Memorandum of Agreement. Respondent correctly characterized and properly awarded the extra duty night run based on the duty roster. Grievant failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that he was entitled to the bus run. Therefore, the grievance is DENIED
|
Back to Results
Search Again