BRENDA YOKUM,      

      Grievant,

v.                                                      Docket No. 00-42-229

RANDOLPH COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION,

      Respondent.

DECISION

      Brenda Yokum (“Grievant”) initiated this grievance on March 9, 2000, seeking reclassification from Accountant II/Secretary III to Accountant III/Secretary III, with back pay and benefits to March 1, 2000. The grievance was denied at level one on March 20, 2000. A level two hearing was held on April 5, 2000, followed by a decision denying the grievance dated June 29, 2000. Level three consideration was waived, and Grievant appealed to level four on July 12, 2000. After a continuance granted for good cause shown, a level four hearing was held in the Grievance Board's office in Morgantown, West Virginia, on October 11, 2000. Grievant was represented by counsel, John E. Roush, and Respondent was represented by counsel, Basil R. Legg, Jr. This matter became mature for consideration upon receipt of the parties' fact/law proposals on November 22, 2000.
      The following findings of fact are made from a preponderance of the evidence of record.

Findings of Fact

      1.      Grievant has been employed by Respondent Randolph County Board of Education (“RCBOE”) since 1987. Prior to late 1999, Grievant was a school secretary.
      2.      Beginning on October 6, 1999, Grievant was transferred to RCBOE's centraloffice and was assigned to assist the Coordinator of Food Services, who administers the school lunch program. At that time, she was classified as an Accountant II/Secretary III.
      3.      Effective March 1, 2000, billing and payment for school lunches was assigned to Grievant, rather than being handled by each individual school, as it had been previously.
      4.      As of March 1, 2000, Grievant performs the following duties:
      
      
      
      5.      RCBOE's job description for Accountant II states that the position's job goal is to “assist and perform financial accounting responsibilities in their school, department or division.” Financial record keeping for the school lunch program is listed as one of the responsibilities for that position.
      6.      RCBOE's job description for Accountant III lists the job goal as “to assist with the accounting tasks and fiscal responsibilities for the school system as assigned by the Director of Finance/Treasurer.”

Discussion

      The burden of proof is upon the grievant to establish, by a preponderance of theevidence, that her duties more closely match those of another W. Va. Code § 18A-4-8 class title than that under which her position is categorized. Pierantozzi v. Brooke County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 96-05-061 (May 31, 1996); Porter v. Hancock County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 95-15-493 (May 24, 1994); Hatfield v. Mingo County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 91-29-077 (Apr. 15, 1991). "[S]imply being required to undertake some responsibilities normally associated with a higher classification, even regularly, does not render a grievant misclassified, per se." Midkiff v. Lincoln County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 95-22-262 (Mar. 19, 1996), citing Hamilton v. Mingo County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 91-29-077 (Apr. 15, 1991).
      W. Va. Code §18A-4-8 requires county boards of education to "review each service personnel employee's job classification annually and . . . reclassify all service employees as required by such job classifications." A board of education is obligated to classify school service personnel according to the duties performed by said employees. Taflan v. Hancock County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 15-86-099-2 (Jan. 12, 1987).
      “Accountant II” is defined by W. Va. Code § 18A-4-8 as “personnel employed to maintain accounting records and to be responsible for the accounting process associated with billing, budgets, purchasing and related operations.” The same statute defines Accountant III” as “personnel who are employed in the county board office to manage and supervise accounts payable and/or payroll procedures.” "County boards of education may expand upon the W.Va. Code §18A-4-8 classification definitions in a manner which is consistent with those definitions. Brewer v. Mercer County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 91-27-002 (March 30, 1992)." Pope and Stanley v. Mingo County Bd. of Educ., Docket No.91-29-068 (July 31, 1992). Although RCBOE's job descriptions differ slightly from the definitions set forth in W. Va. Code § 18A-4-8, the basic difference between the two positions remains the same. The Accountant II position contemplates an individual who performs accounting functions at the school, department, or division level, while an Accountant III is expected to handle accounts payable or payroll responsibilities for the entire school system. The evidence is uncontradicted that Grievant is largely responsible for administration of the school lunch program, through generation of bills and receipt of payments, along with monitoring food vendors' bills. She is performing accounting functions for a department or division, i.e. Food Services. Grievant does not perform payroll or accounts payable duties for the entire county, so she is clearly properly classified as an Accountant II.
      Consistent with the foregoing, the following conclusions of law are made.
Conclusions of Law

      1.      The burden of proof is upon the grievant to establish, by a preponderance of the evidence, that her duties more closely match those of another W. Va. Code § 18A-4-8 class title than that under which her position is categorized. Pierantozzi v. Brooke County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 96-05-061 (May 31, 1996); Porter v. Hancock County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 95-15-493 (May 24, 1994); Hatfield v. Mingo County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 91-29-077 (Apr. 15, 1991).
      2.      “Accountant II” is defined as “personnel employed to maintain accounting records and to be responsible for the accounting process associated with billing, budgets, purchasing and related operations.” W. Va. Code § 18A-4-8.      3.      “Accountant III” is defined as “personnel who are employed in the county board office to manage and supervise accounts payable and/or payroll procedures.”
      4.      "County boards of education may expand upon the W.Va. Code §18A-4-8 classification definitions in a manner which is consistent with those definitions. Brewer v. Mercer County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 91-27-002 (March 30, 1992)." Pope and Stanley v. Mingo County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 91-29-068 (July 31, 1992).
      5.      Grievant has failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that she is misclassified.
      Accordingly, this grievance is DENIED.

      Any party may appeal this Decision to the Circuit Court of Kanawha County or the Circuit Court of Randolph County, and such appeal must be filed within thirty (30) days of receipt of this Decision. W. Va. Code § 18-29-7. 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:      November 28, 2000                   _______________________________                                                 DENISE M. SPATAFORE
                                                Administrative Law Judge