Grievant,
v. Docket No. 99-HHR-415
WEST VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF
HEALTH AND HUMAN RESOURCES/
HOPEMONT HOSPITAL, and
DIVISION OF PERSONNEL,
Respondents.
Shirley Short (Grievant) initiated this grievance on August 30, 1999, alleging she
is misclassified. She seeks reclassification from Office Assistant I (OAI) to Office Assistant
II (OAII). The grievance was denied at level one on August 31, 1999, and at level two on
September 7, 1999. A level three hearing was held on September 21, 1999, followed by
a decision denying the grievance dated September 23, 1999. Grievant appealed to level
four on October 7, 1999. After two continuances granted for good cause shown, the
parties agreed on January 31, 2000, to submit this matter for a decision based upon the
lower level record, and this matter became mature for consideration on that date. Grievant
represented herself; the Department of Health and Human Resources was represented by
counsel, Dennise Smith; and the Division of Personnel (Personnel) was represented by
counsel, Stephanie Schulz.
The following findings of fact are made from a preponderance of the evidence of
record.
Examples of Work
Sorts and files documents numerically, alphabetically or according to other
predetermined classification criteria; pulls material from files upon request.
Types routine correspondence, forms, and labels.
Operates office equipment such as adding machines, electrical calculating or
copying machine or other machines requiring no special previous training.
Answers telephone; takes messages; routes calls; answers general information questions.
Receives, sorts and distributes incoming and outgoing mail and performs
messenger work.
Inventories, stocks and distributes office supplies.
Counts, collates, codes, sorts, staples and inserts forms in envelopes.
Posts information to log or ledger for record-keeping purposes.
Collects, receipts, counts and deposits money.
May record and maintain time/attendance records for unit or section.
May enter data into a video display terminal; may make inquiries into the system;
may run a mailing list.
May microfilm documents for record maintenance.
Nature of Work
Under general supervision, performs full performance level work in multiple-step
clerical tasks calling for interpretation and application of office procedures, rules and
regulations. Performs related work as required.
Distinguishing Characteristics
Performs tasks requiring interpretation and adaptation of office procedures as the
predominant portion of the job. Tasks may include posting information to logs or ledgers,
and checking for completeness, typing a variety of documents, and calculating benefits.
May use a standard set of commands, screens, or menus to enter, access and update or
manipulate data.
At this level, the predominant tasks require the understanding of the broader scope
of the work function, and requires an ability to apply job knowledge or a specific skill to a
variety of related tasks requiring multiple steps or decisions. Day-to-day tasks are routine,but initiative and established procedures are used to solve unusual problems. The steps
of each task allow the employee to operate with a latitude of independence. Work is
reviewed by the supervisor in process, randomly or upon completion. Contacts are usually
informational and intergovernmental.
Examples of Work
Posts information such as payroll, materials used or equipment rental to a log or
ledger; may be required to check for completeness; performs basic arithmetic calculations
(addition, subtraction, division or multiplication); corrects errors if the answer is readily
available or easily determined.
Maintains, processes, sorts and files documents numerically, alphabetically, or
according to other predetermined classification criteria; reviews files for data and collects
information or statistics such as materials used or attendance information.
Answers telephone, screens calls, takes messages and complaints; gives general
information to callers when possible, and specific information whenever possible.
Receives, sorts and distributes incoming and outgoing mail.
Operates office equipment such as adding machine, calculator, copying machine
or other machines requiring no special previous training.
Types a variety of documents from verbal instruction, written or voice recorded dictation.
Collects, receipts, counts and deposits money.
Calculates benefits, etc., using basic mathematics such as addition, subtraction,
multiplication, division and percentages.
Posts records of transactions, attendance, etc., and writes reports.
May compile records and reports for supervisor.
May operate a VDT using a set of standard commands, screens, menus and help
instructions to enter, access and update or manipulate data in the performance of a variety
of clerical duties; may run reports from the database.
As explained by Lowell Basford, Assistant Director of Personnel's Classification and
Compensation Unit, the critical difference between these two class specifications is that
the OAII must interpret and apply policies and procedures and explain them to others, and
is required to perform some independent analysis in performing certain tasks. The OAI,
by comparison, performs work at the direction of a superior, without being called upon to
interpret policies or procedures. Also, the OAI simply gives and receives basic
information. The undersigned finds that Grievant has failed to establish that the
OAII class specification is the best fit for the duties she performs. As noted by Mr. Basford,Grievant relays basic information when receiving phone calls and routes them to the
appropriate person, which is not truly screening, as Grievant stated in her level three
testimony. Also, Personnel focused upon the nature of Grievant's contacts, which are
largely informational and performed with little decision-making authority, as opposed to the
higher level of contacts and authority contemplated within the OAII specification. Although
Grievant does perform many tasks related to completing forms and compiling information,
most of this work requires her to take information from one document and transfer it to
another. There is little or no actual decision-making or problem-solving involved in the
majority of her work, which is performed according to procedures set by her supervisors
and the facility. Moreover, Grievant's testimony and her position description form do not
contain any tasks which would call for independent interpretation and application of
policies and procedures. Nearly all of Grievant's duties are performed at the direction of
her superiors in conformance with established hospital procedures. In addition, all of her
duties are accurately described in the examples of work portion of the OAI class
specification.
There is no question that Grievant is a capable and valued employee, as evidenced
by the written recommendations of her supervisors submitted at level four, requesting that
she be upgraded to the OAII classification. However, it is not the recommendations of
these individuals that is the focus of this analysis; rather, it is whether or not the
predominant duties Grievant performs fall within a class specification other than that to
which she has been assigned. In this case, the evidence overwhelmingly demonstrates
that Grievant is properly classified as an OAI. Consistent with the foregoing findings and discussion, the following conclusions of
law are appropriate.
Accordingly, this grievance is DENIED.
Any party or the West Virginia Division of Personnel may appeal this decision to the
Circuit Court of Kanawha County or to the circuit court of the county in which the grievance
occurred, and 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. However, the appealing party is required by W. Va. Code § 29A-
5-4(b) to serve a copy of the appeal petition upon the Grievance Board. The appealing
party must also provide the Board with the civil action number so that the record can be
prepared and properly transmitted to the appropriate circuit court.
Date: February 28, 2000 ___________________________________
DENISE M. SPATAFORE
Administrative Law Judge