Source: https://wvyounglawyers.com/practice-handbook/education/
Timestamp: 2019-04-24 07:04:00+00:00

Document:
employee grievances; (2) disciplinary proceedings; and (3) proceedings to adjust the work force.
in counseling the school employee.
established, it seems, than they are modified by another wave of change.
area, they may also be based upon outdated statutory or policy provisions.
a number of Education and State Employees Grievance Board decisions.
and they do not always describe in useful detail the facts upon which they are based.
grievances, disciplinary cases, and proceedings to adjust the work force.
provided by the Education Employees Grievance Act, W.Va. Code§§ 18-29-1, et seq.
instruction, job performance or the health and safety of students or employees ….
The terms “discrimination,” “harassment,” and “favoritism” are separately defined in the statute.
W.Va. Code§§ 18-29-2(a), (m), (n), (o).
sought. The informal conference is not open to the public.
there are no further proceedings.
issuances of the written Level One decision.
If the employee is satisfied with the written Level One response, the grievance ends at that level.
However, if the immediate supervisor at Level One either fails to timely issue a written decision or issues a decision with which the employee is dissatisfied, the employee may pursue the matter at Level Two by filing a written appeal within five days.
superintendent of schools or by a Grievance Board administrative law judge in accordance with W.
If the grievant is satisfied with the superintendent’s decision, the grievance ends at Level Two.
proceed directly to Level Four.
filed, that the board chooses to waive its right to be involved in the processing of the grievance.
held as late as 30 days after the request is received.
hearing is public or private is within the discretion of the administrative law judge.
has the burden of proving his or her grievance by a preponderance of the evidence.
Four decision is characterized by the statute as “final” and enforceable in circuit court.
body of prior Level Four decisions rendered in similar cases.
court of the county in which the grievance originated.
circuit court, in due course, enters an order by which the Education and State Employees Grievance Board is directed to transmit the entire administrative record to the clerk of the circuit court. Upon separate motion by a party, the court may also stay the Level Four decision.
The decision of the circuit court may be appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeals.
administrative procedure and should be kept in mind in developing a grievance strategy.
often have the effect of allowing more time for certain actions than might otherwise appear.
may be sought only by motion and are granted only for good cause shown. Note, too, that the time limits at all levels of the grievance procedure must be extended whenever a grievant is not working due to circumstances that, under W. Va. Code § 18A-4-10, justify an employee’s use of personal leave. W.Va. Code§ 18-29-3(a).
written claim seeking relief by default. This halts all proceedings at Levels One through Three.
sought by way of default is contrary to law or clearly wrong.
designee at Level Two. W.Va. Code§ 18-29-3(c).
not be reinstated without the consent of the decision maker who consented to the withdrawal. W.Va.
process, in one proceeding, the identical grievances of similarly situated employees.
be requested. W.Va. Code§§ 18-29-30), (k).
suspension precedes the eventual termination of employment.
days unless extended by the board of education.
such appeals to Level Four priority over other grievances pending at Level Four.
the record of a suspension or termination hearing conducted by the county board of education.
contracts of employment may arguably be ended, for cause, under an alternative procedure.
mail, that they have not been rehired for the next year.
15 “days” after the board hearing.
entitled to more due process than the cited statutes expressly require. For example, as now written, W.Va. Code§§ 18A-2-7 and 18A-2-8 are silent as to the procedure to be followed by the superintendent of schools imposing a temporary suspension. Section 18A-2-8 also does not prescribe how a county board of education must act upon the recommendation for suspension or dismissal. Yet under the rules and reasoning of cases such as Cleveland Bd. of Educ. v. Loudermill, 470 U.S. 532 (1985), Bd. of Educ. of the County of Mercer v. Wirt, 192 W.Va. 568, 453 S.E.2d 402 (1994), and Waite v. Civil Service Commission of West Virginia, 161 W.Va. 154, 241 S.E.2d 164 (1978), an employee may be entitled to certain due process incident to a temporary suspension by the superintendent and to more than just after-the­ fact notice of a suspension or dismissal imposed by the board of education. See Allen v. Monroe County Bd. of Educ., Education and State Employees Grievance Board Docket No. 90-31-021 (July 11, 1990).
other procedural safeguards to a worker whose suspension or termination is sought.
challenge to any actual suspension or dismissal.
and defense of suspension, dismissal and nonrenewal cases.
conduct directly affects the duties the employee is to perform, or if, without contribution on the part of school officials, the conduct has become the subject of such notoriety as to significantly and reasonably impair the capability of the employee to discharge the duties of his or her job. Woo v. Bd. ofEduc., 202 W.Va. 409, 504 S.E.2d 644 (1998); Rogliano v. Fayette County Bd. of Educ., 176 W. Va. 700, 347 S.E.2d 220 (1986). Where, for example, the dismissal of a guidance counselor was predicated upon her plea of nolo contendere to the misdemeanor charge of shoplifting, the court ordered reinstatement because the evidence did not show the requisite nexus. Id. Accordingly, unless common sense or prior decisions of the court indicate that a particular kind of off-the-job activity meets the rational nexus test, it may be productive to explore in some detail this aspect of an employer’s case.
dismissal may be so harsh as to be unreasonable and arbitrary under the circumstances. Fox v.
circumstances it is not punishable by dismissal.
or misconduct is arguably correctable, the employer might be persuaded to forego action under W.Va.
Code§§ 18A-2-8 or 18A-2-8a in return for the employee’s promise to pursue a definite plan of improvement or treatment. However, even where a negotiated resolution is achieved, the county superintendent may be under a legal obligation to report the employee’s deficiency to the State Superintendent of Schools under W.Va. Code§ 18A-3-6, at least where a teacher’s conduct may warrant the revocation of his or her teaching certificate by the state.
under the reduction-in-force provisions ofW. Va. Code§§ 18A-4-7a and 18A-4-8b.
positions shall be lateral.) The names of professional employees whose seniority with the county board is insufficient to avoid dismissal must be placed upon a preferred recall list. Such ex-employees are to be recalled on the basis of seniority to any professional position opening within the area where they had previously been employed or within any lateral area for which they are certified, provided that no regular full-time professional employees, or professional employees returning from leaves of absence with greater seniority, are qualified, apply for and accept such positions.
that classification or in any other job classification where the employee was previously employed.
employees who apply for and accept the vacancy in question.
release a least-seniored employee, the dismissal must proceed in accordance with W.Va.
entitled, before the first Monday in April, to written notice of the superintendent’s intention to terminate the employee’s contract at the end of the school year; the affected service employee is entitled to such notice before April 1. The notice must extend to the employee an opportunity to be heard at a meeting of the board prior to the board’s action on the recommendation. Also before the first Monday in April, the county board of education must conduct a dismissal hearing for each professional employee who takes advantage of the opportunity to be heard; the hearing to each such service employee must be conducted before April 1. An employee’s contract may then be terminated under this procedure only by a majority vote of the full membership of the board before the first Monday in April (professional employees) and April 1 (service employees) of the then-current year. Disgruntled employees who are terminated under this procedure may thereafter initiate a grievance under the Education Employ es Grievance Act.
Monday in May, and at the hearing the reasons for the proposed transfer must be shown.
Monday in May, must furnish to the board of education a written list of teachers and other employees to be considered for transfer and subsequent assignment for the next ensuing school year.
assigned to a new position.
represents an employee subject to a reduction-in-force related dismissal or transfer.
belongs to such an association, consider drawing upon this valuable resource.
cases to ensure that the proposed transfer or dismissal has been processed in accordance with them.
insist that all statutory deadlines and procedures be met.
Information Act, W.Va. Code§§ 29B-1-1, et seq., may be appropriate.
work as vacancies develop. Be sure that the employee is aware of the full extent of the recall rights which he or she enjoys. Here again, questions of seniority, certification and classification may be quite significant in determining which employees must be recalled to an open position.
W.Va. Code § 18A-4-7a (professional personnel), and W.Va. Code§ 18A-4-8b (service personnel).
the past or described in this article will necessarily apply to an action taken in the future.

References: § 18
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.

 § 18