Grievants,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN RESOURCE/
BUREAU FOR CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT
and DIVISION OF PERSONNEL,
Respondents.
Nature of Work
Under general supervision, performs work at the full-performance level by providing
development of program, as well as associated policy and procedures based on standards
and regulation, administrative oversight of and complex technical assistance with a
program or a particular major component of a statewide program, or major technical area
specific to or characteristic of the Department of Health and Human Resources. Assures
compliance with federal, state, and local regulations governing the program or technical
area. Uses independent judgement to determine appropriate action taken to achieve
desired results. Has responsibility for providing consultation on highly complex individual
problem situations. Develops and delivers training programs related to assigned program
or component. Monitors and evaluates the operation of the assigned program or program
component. Exercises considerable latitude in determining approaches to problem solving.
Work may be performed independently and/or in conjunction with other program or
technical area staff. Performs related work as required.
Distinguishing Characteristics
The Health and Human Resources Specialist is distinguished from the Health and Human
Resources Associate by the responsibility for development and management of a
statewide program or operational area or a significant segment of a major statewide
program or operational area. This class is distinguished from the Health and Human
Resources Specialist, Senior, by the fact that although the Specialist may oversee clerical
or support staff in relation to the completion of his/her own work, this class does not
function in a regularly assigned lead or supervisory capacity over professional classes as
a significant segment of their total assignment nor does he/she have responsibility related
to entire programmatic or operational systems.
Examples of Work
Analyzes laws and regulations governing program or technical area and applies them
appropriately to resolve problems and assure compliance.
Interprets laws and regulations governing program or technical area for participants and
staff.
Monitors changes in laws and regulations and advises participants and other staff.Confers with inter- and intra-agency personnel to transact business or discuss information.
Collaborates on determining need for changes in procedures, guidelines, and formats;
devises resolutions and changes, and monitors success.
Drafts program manuals, clarifying the wording and describing new procedures, etc.,
accurately.
Represents the program in the area of assignment with the agency and outside entities.
Has contact with federal, state, local program representatives and participants, or technical
area personnel.
Completes related reports; may compile special and/or statistical reports, analyzing data
and interpreting results.
May oversee the work of support staff or other specialists in relation to the completion of
specific assignments.
Knowledge, Skills and Abilities
Knowledge of the rules, regulations, policies, and procedures of the Department of Health
and Human Resources.
Knowledge of the federal and state regulations, laws and statutes governing program or
technical area.
Knowledge of the objective of the program or technical area, its procedures, policies, and
guidelines, and its relationship to the rest of the Department and other user entities.
Ability to analyze situations, problems and information and develop appropriate responses
and resolutions.
Ability to communicate well, both orally and in writing.
Ability to represent area of assignment and to provide consultation on program or
Department concerns.
Ability to synthesize information and provide interpretation.
Minimum Qualifications
Training:
Graduation from an accredited four-year college or university.
Substitution:
Additional experience as described below may be substituted for the required training on
a year-for-year basis.
Experience:
Two years full-time, equivalent part-time paid or volunteer experience in a technical or
program area that is related to the area of employment.
Substitution:
Post-graduate education in a field related to the technical or program area may be
substituted for the required experience on the basis of fifteen semester hours for one year
of experience.
OR
Master's Degree in social work from an accredited social work program in a four-year
college or university.
Note: Appointment above the entry rate may be made at 5% for each 6 months of
successfully completed work as an intern in a practicum placement with Department of
Health and Human Resources for the Master of Social Work degree.
Nature of Work
Under general supervision, performs work at the advanced level by providing
administrative coordination of and complex technical assistance in a component of a major
statewide program, a statewide program in its entirety, or a major technical area specific
to or characteristic of the Department of Health and Human Resources. Acts as liaison to
facilitate problem resolution and assure compliance with federal, state, and local
regulations, laws, policies, and procedures governing the program or technical area. Has
primary responsibility for developing standards for major systems and for monitoring and/or
evaluation of major complex systems or multi program operations. May consult on highly
complex individual situations that potentially have significant impact on systems or involve
sensitive legal issues. Has responsibility for development and issuance of comprehensive
training programs to insure basic competency and continued development of skills,
knowledge and abilities relevant to the systems for which she/he are assigned
responsibility. Uses independent judgement in determining action taken in both the
administrative and operational aspects of the area of assignment. Exercises considerable
latitude in varying methods and procedures to achieve desired results. May supervise or
act as lead worker for other professional staff. Performs related work as required.
Distinguishing Characteristics
The Health and Human Resources Specialist, Senior, is distinguished from the Health and
Human Resources Specialist by the broader scope of administrative oversight and
responsibility for planning and operational aspects of a system of program or technical
areas. This level may function in a regularly assigned lead or supervisory capacity over
professional, paraprofessional and clerical classes and, if not, must have responsibility for
the conceptualization and development of major complex program and/or operational
systems.
Examples of Work
Interprets federal and state laws, regulations, and guidelines for staff which provides
services; guides others in developing and utilizing plans and recommends methods of
improvement.
Effects or recommends operational changes to facilitate efficient and effective
accomplishment of goals or delivery of service.
Informs director of technical area, program, or service deficiencies and recommends
improvements.
Consults with other program or technical area staff, supervisors, or managers concerning
projects and priorities.
Develops rules, policies, and legislation regarding specific work projects.
Reads, reviews, and responds to correspondence or distributes to appropriate staff.
Develops research, information, or training programs.
Evaluates program or technical area effectiveness.
Writes, edits, or contributes to policy and procedure manuals.
Has contact with federal, state, local program representatives and officials, Department
of Health and Human Resources management and staff, and legislature.
Plans and develops budget requests and short-and-long-range work plans.
May lead or supervise professional and support staff.
Knowledge, Skills and Abilities
Knowledge of the rules, regulations, policies, and procedures of the Department of Health
and Human Resources.
Knowledge of the federal and state regulations, laws and statutes governing program or
technical area.
Knowledge of the objective of the program or technical area its procedures, policies, and
guidelines, and its relation ship to the rest of the Department and other user entities.
Ability to plan and coordinate work, plan and project budgeting needs, and organize work
and projects.
Ability to analyze situations, problems and information and develop appropriate responses
and resolutions.
Ability to communicate well, both orally and in writing.
Ability to assign, direct, and review the work of others.
Minimum Qualifications
Training:
Graduation from an accredited four-year college or university.
Substitution:
Additional experience as described below may be substituted for the required training on
a year-for-year basis.
Experience:
Four years full-time, equivalent part-time paid or volunteer experience in a technical or
program area that is related to the area of employment.
Substitution:
Post-graduate education in a field related to the technical or program area may be
substituted for the required experience on the basis of fifteen semester hours for one year
of experience.
Lowell D. Basford, Personnel's Assistant Director of the Classification and
Compensation Section, testified that in order to be classified as an HHR Specialist Senior,
an employee must either function as a lead worker, or have responsibility for
conceptualization and development of major complex program and/or operational
systems. Grievants argued they function as lead workers when they chair committees,
and they are responsible for the conceptualization and development of OSCAR, because
they design OSCAR's screens, and as Mr. Lewis aptly stated, come up with the ideas to
make the system work.
Mr. Basford testified that Grievants do not meet Personnel's written definition of
lead worker. He explained that a lead worker is a position which has regular and recurring
responsibility for the assignment and review of the work of co-workers, while also
performing identical kinds of work. He testified it was intended to be a quasi-supervisorytype position within a work unit. He stated a lead worker trains co-workers, and approves
leave; but would not discipline, recommend hiring or firing, or hear grievances. He stated
that when Grievants are in charge of committees, the members of the committee are
generally persons who are outside their work unit, not their co-workers, and they are
operating in a committee environment. He concluded that this did not fit the definition of
lead worker.
While Grievants are certainly in charge of the committees to which they are
assigned, they are not lead workers, as defined by Personnel. Grievants may disagree
with Personnel's definition, but that does not mean the definition is wrong. Personnel is
responsible for defining the terms used in its classification system.
Mr. Basford explained that a host of people are involved in the conceptualization
and development of OSCAR, including Grievants. He noted that programmers have a
significant role in the process, and the committees over which Grievants are in charge
have a significant role. Grievants do not have responsibility for the conceptualization and
development of a major complex program and/or operational system; rather, they are one
part of a group which works together on assigned tasks to make OSCAR work. He
concluded that Grievants' role in the process does not meet Personnel's definition of
responsibility for conceptualization and development. He noted Grievants themselves do
not each have responsibility for OSCAR; that role lies with their supervisor, who is
responsible for the unit, and ultimately further up the chain of command. He further noted
that positions are not classified by classifying the unit, but even the unit does not have
total responsibility.
Grievants' duties in determining what screens will be affected by a change to
OSCAR are complex. They must be very familiar with how the system works and how
screens interact. They design the look of the screens. In this respect, as they have
stated, Grievants conceptualize. While they each have responsibility to perform thecomplex tasks assigned to them, and to make sure their projects are carried to fruition, and
there is no doubt that they take this responsibility very seriously, and make these projects
their own, Grievants do not individually have responsibility for conceptualizing and
developing an entire program or operational system. They each represent one person,
albeit a key person, in a large group responsible for making OSCAR work. See Yevuta v.
Dep't of Health and Human Resources, Docket No. 99-HHR-474 (May 17, 2000).
Mr. Basford agreed that the HHR Specialist was not a perfect fit for Grievants'
duties. He explained that Personnel's philosophy, as mandated by the State Personnel
Board, was to have as few classification specifications as possible. He stated Personnel
consults with the agency in classifying positions. Personnel considers whether it is
necessary to create a new classification specification, or whether an existing classification
specification can be used. He stated that one of the considerations is whether the agency
can recruit and retain personnel effectively using the existing classification specifications,
and in this case HHR determined it could recruit and retain employees in the HELP Desk
Unit utilizing the HHR Specialist classification specification. Mr. Basford stated there were
a pool of employees in lower pay grade, high stress positions willing to accept an HHR
Specialist position working at the HELP Desk; and indeed, he stated, HHR has not had a
problem recruiting for the positions.
Although Darlene Thomas, an Information Systems Manager III for BCSE, testified
that it was difficult to recruit the best people into these positions, she provided no data to
support this assertion, and stated that this was simply her own opinion. Likewise, James
Richards, who at one time supervised the HELP Desk Unit, testified that recruiting people
for these positions was a significant problem, because he had no way to lure HHR
employees from their hometowns throughout the state to Charleston, where these
positions are based. He also testified, however, that people doing this type of work are
not money driven, indicating that the problem was more that HHR employees living inother parts of the state did not want to live in Charleston, rather than that the salary was
too low. He provided no data to support his conclusive testimony. It is difficult to discern
from this testimony the extent of the recruiting problem for these positions, or its cause.
Obviously, no one at HHR had passed this perception on to Personnel. If there is indeed
a recruiting problem for these positions, HHR should take steps to evaluate the extent of
this problem, and provide data to Personnel so that this issue can be addressed.
Comparing the HHR Specialist and the HHR Specialist Senior classification
specifications, the undersigned concludes that Grievants' duties and level of responsibility
are encompassed within the HHR Specialist classification. The Nature of Work Section
of the HHR Specialist classification specification refers to exercising independent
judgement, monitoring and evaluating the operation of an assigned program or program
component, and exercising considerable latitude in problem solving, and clearly
contemplates that the employee will have a significant level of responsibility and be
required to evaluate a situation and use his mental abilities to come up with solutions to
problems. This is a good characterization of what Grievants do. The HHR Specialist and
HHR Specialist Senior are part of a class series. As such, there is not much to distinguish
the two classifications, and Personnel did not intend for there to be much distinction.
Grievants' duties are not supervisory in nature, nor do they have responsibility for a major
complex program or system. They cannot be classified as HHR Specialist Seniors.
The following Conclusions of Law support the decision reached.
1. In order to prevail in a misclassification claim, a grievant must prove by a
preponderance of the evidence that his duties for the relevant period more closely match
those of another cited classification specification than the classification to which he is
currently assigned. See generally, Hayes v. W. Va. Dep't of Natural Resources, Docket
No. NR-88-038 (Mar. 28, 1989). 2. The key to the analysis is to ascertain whether the grievant's current
classification constitutes the "best fit" for his required duties. Simmons v. W. Va. Dep't of
Health and Human Resources, Docket No. 90-H-433 (Mar. 28, 1991). The predominant
duties of the position in question are class-controlling. Broaddus v. W. Va. Div. of Human
Serv., Docket Nos. 89-DHS-606, 607, 609 (Aug. 31, 1990). Importantly, Personnel's
interpretation and explanation of the classification specifications at issue should be given
great weight unless clearly wrong. See, W. Va. Dep't of Health v. Blankenship, 189 W. Va.
342, 431 S.E.2d 681, 687 (1993).
3. In order to be classified as an HHR Specialist Senior, an employee must
either have supervisory or lead worker responsibilities, or have responsibility for a major
complex program and/or operational system.
4. Grievants are not supervisors, they do not lead other workers in their unit on
a regular, recurring basis, as is required to be a lead worker, and they do not each have
responsibility for making sure OSCAR is operational.
5. Personnel's determination that Grievants are HHR Specialists is not clearly
wrong.
6. The HHR Specialist Senior classification specification is not a better fit for
Grievants' duties than the HHR Specialist.
Accordingly, this grievance is DENIED.
Any party may appeal this Decision to the circuit court of the county in which the
grievance arose, or the Circuit Court of Kanawha County. Any such appeal must be filed
within thirty (30) days of receipt of this Decision. W. Va. Code § 29-6A-7 (1998). Neither
the West Virginia Education and State Employees Grievance Board nor any of its
Administrative Law Judges is a party to such appeal and should not be so named. Any
appealing party must advise this office of the intent to appeal and provide the civil action
number so that the record can be prepared and transmitted to the appropriate court.
BRENDA L. GOULD
Administrative Law Judge
Dated: December 29, 2000