v. Docket No. 95-HHR-537
WEST VIRGINIA DIVISION OF HEALTH & HUMAN RESOURCES and
WEST VIRGINIA DIVISION OF PERSONNEL
D E C I S I O N
Grievant M. Jean Faulkner filed a grievance in August 1995,
against her employer, Respondent Division of Health and Human
Resources (HHR), alleging she was misclassified as a Social
Service Worker III (SSW3) and that she should be reclassified as
a Social Worker III (SW3). Following adverse decisions at the
lower grievance levels, she appealed to level four. The parties
agreed that a level four decision could be based on the record
below, and the case became mature for decision on December 28,
1995, upon receipt of the transcript and exhibits of the level
three hearing.1
____________________
1Of record are the pleadings, adverse lower level decisions
and the transcript and exhibits of the October 30, 1995, level
three hearing. Background
There is no dispute about the underlying facts which gave
rise to the grievance. Grievant works in HHR's Office of Social
Services as an adoption worker. Her duties involve working in
her office or in the field with children who must be placed for
adoption, including those whose parents' parental rights have
been terminated and who may suffer emotional or physical prob
lems. Grievant also works with prospective adoptive parents as
well as existing biological parents and with various profession
al and support persons necessarily involved in the adoption
process. In order to match adoptive children with prospective
parents in the pre-adoption phase, Grievant performs various
assessments, in conjunction with other appropriate professionals
when necessary; prepares and presents reports of her findings;
and ultimately makes placement recommendations to various groups
and committees.
Grievant also assists in the post-adoption stage, offering
parenting training to the adoptive parents and/or follow-up
counseling to the adopted children. Grievant does not perform
intensive counseling with adoptive/adopted children or otherwise
offer services to them in a state institution; rather, she
effects the placement of these children in other types of
residential care when needed. By regulation, Grievant's case
load is restricted to fifteen children. The West Virginia Division of Personnel's (DOP or Person
nel) classification specifications at issue are reproduced as
follows: SOCIAL SERVICE WORKER III
Nature of Work
Under general supervision, performs advanced level professional
social service work in providing services to the public in one
or multiple program areas. Work requires the use of a personal
automobile for local travel. Employee is subject to on-call
status during non-business hours. May be required to deal with
situations which are potentially dangerous to client and worker.
Performs related work as required.
Distinguishing Characteristics
All three levels of Social Service Worker provide professional
social services to the public. The Social Service Worker III
provides these services in one or more of the following areas:
foster care, emergency shelter care, youth services, community
juvenile delinquency, single adolescent parent, adoption,
Hartley program, Medley program, Medical Waiver Project, licens
ing specialist or other services at this level. This class may
also be used for positions in certain geographic areas perform
ing professional social work in a variety of program areas such
as day care, generic social services, foster care and protective
services, and differs from the generic Social Service Worker II
in that the positions involve a significant, but not predomi
nant, amount of protective services work.
Examples of Work
Maintains a caseload for programs and services at this
level.
Prepares social assessment of client circumstances.
Interacts with a variety of professional practitioners in
the areas of social work, mental health, developmental disabili
ties, education, juvenile delinquency, and counseling and
guidance to assess client's needs and provide appropriate
services.
Develops client service plan designed to accomplish
habilitation and rehabilitation of the client and to provide
social services to assist client in attaining social, education
al and vocational goals.
Cooperates with the court system for foster care, adoption,
juvenile delinquency and Medley program services by preparing
social assessments and recommending actions to accomplish goals.
Locates and evaluates providers for foster care, adoption,
emergency shelter care and Medley home services; counsels and
rains providers in effectively providing required services;
conducts periodic evaluations of facilities and services.
Counsels clients/families in achieving goals of client service plan.
Counsels youth to correct delinquent and socially unaccept
able behavior; prepares probation plans for juvenile offenders;
monitors progress of probationers under the court supervision.
Speaks before educational and community organizations and groups
regarding services available and to develop community resources.
Writes reports on case findings and summaries of client
social and financial circumstances.
Knowledge, Skills and Abilities
Knowledge of theories and practices in social work.
Knowledge of federal and state laws, regulations and
programs in social services.
Knowledge of emotional states and their behavioral indica
tors.
Ability to assess social, educational and economic circum
stances of clients to determine need for social services.
Ability to develop client service plan to habilitate and
rehabilitate client and assist client in attaining social,
educational and vocational goals.
Ability to evaluate social service providers according to
established guidelines.
Ability to work effectively with other professionals and
social service agencies in providing social services.
Ability to counsel people in favor of specific actions,
changes in attitude or insights.
Ability to maintain records, prepare reports and correspon
dence related to the work.
Ability to communicate with others, both orally and in
writing.
SOCIAL WORKER III
Nature of Work
Under general supervision, responsible for the planning, devel
opment and delivery of advanced social services such as group
therapy, family therapy, or other intense therapeutic techniques
to the client population. Caseload will be comprised primarily
of multi-program, extreme, troubled clients, protective service
clients, families in severe crisis, or extremely troubled
individuals in out-of-home placement. Exercises considerable
latitude for independent action on the formation of service
plans and the delivery of therapeutic interventions. Responsi
ble for related administrative and operational aspects of
caseload. May supervise other social work staff. Work requires
the use of personal automobile for local travel. Employee is
subject to being on-call during non-business hours. Performs
related work as required.
Distinguishing Characteristics
The Social Worker III is expected to exercise a large degree of
autonomy in providing case assessment, case management and
contact in advanced level social work services. Caseload at this level involves complex situations with general client
vulnerability.
Examples of Work
Interview the client and family; contacts health and
welfare professionals in order to assess the client's current
behavior level, ego strengths and deficits, situational
strengths and weaknesses, and mental status.
Prepares recommendations based on professional assessment
of client's functioning level and on case history data of a
social, emotional, medical, economic, and socio-cultural con
tent.
Assumes a major role in the preparation of ser
vice/treatment plans, either alone or in collaboration with an
interdisciplinary team of professionals from such areas as
nursing, medicine, psychology, psychiatry, chaplaincy.
Discusses the proposed plan with the client and/or family
detailing the recommendations and the reasons for them; identi
fies alternative interventions and methods in order to ensure
that there is mutual understanding about intervention goals and
the kinds of services to be rendered.
Provides, with significant autonomy, individual, group or
family counseling requiring intervention skills in situations
involving complex interpersonal, social, financial, legal and
health dimensions.
Monitor, assesses and reports client progress, and actively
participates in or instigates the modification of service plans.
Acts as a client advocate and ensures that continuing or
concurrent services are received.
Maintains liaison/linkage with, and assists in the develop
ment of community resources.
Through contacts with clients, community organizations, and
other social service agencies, identified deficiencies in
existing service programs, and proposes alterations to ensure
continuity of care.
Attends and participates in various meeting, conferences,
training sessions, and workshops in order to exchange informa
tion, discuss cases, problems, policies, and procedures.
Knowledge, Skills and Abilities
Knowledge of the techniques and principles of social work.
Knowledge of human growth and developing the dynamics of
behavior.
Knowledge of the historical development, principles,
techniques and practices of modern social work.
Knowledge of the social factors contributing to maladjust
ment and dependency.
Knowledge of federal and state programs and functions as
well as the laws and regulations relating to them.
Knowledge of community resources available for utilization
in various welfare programs.
Skill in diagnosing cases, applying social work principles,
formulating plans for client treatment and rehabilitation and securing active cooperation of the client.
Ability to establish satisfactory working relationships
with clients and their families, agency personnel, public
officials and private citizens. Discussion
In order for Grievant to prevail upon a claim of
misclassification, she must prove by a preponderance of the
evidence that her duties for the relevant period more closely
matched another cited Personnel classification specification
than that under which she is currently assigned. See generally,
Hayes v. W.Va. Dept. of Natural Resources, Docket No. NR-88-038
(Mar. 28, 1989). Personnel specifications are to be read in
"pyramid fashion," i.e., from top to bottom, with the different
sections to be considered as going from the more general/more
critical to the more specific/less critical, Captain v. W.Va.
Div. of Health, Docket No. 90-H-471 (Apr. 4, 1991); for these
purposes, the "Nature of the Work" section of a classification
specification is its most critical section. Atchinson v. W.Va.
Dept. of Health, Docket No. 90-H-444, (Apr. 22, 1991); See
generally, Dollison v. W.Va. Dept. of Employment Security,
Docket No. 89-ES-101 (Nov. 3, 1989).
The key to the analysis is to ascertain whether Grievant's
current classification constitutes the "best fit" for her
required duties. Simmons v. W.Va. Dept. of HHR/Division of
Personnel, 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 Services, Docket Nos.
89-DHS-606, 609 (Aug. 31, 1990). Finally, Personnel's interpretation and explanation of the classification specifications at
issue, if determined to be ambiguous, should be given great
weight unless clearly erroneous. See W.Va. Dept. of Health v.
Blankenship, 431 S.E.2d 681, 687 (W.Va. 1993).
Grievant has not met her burden of proof in this case.
Grievant does not offer a legal theory as to why she should be a
SW3 instead of a SSW3. Rather, she expresses the belief that
her twenty plus years in social work must count for something in
this situation. She also argues that her educational back
ground, experience and skills are those required of a social
worker. According to Grievant, HHR's social workers and social
service workers perform essentially the same duties as profes
sional social workers, and it is unreasonable to differentiate
between them simply because they have different work envi
ronments.
HHR maintains that the primary issue raised by Grievant was
settled in Grubb v. Dept. of Health and Human Resources, Docket
No. 95-HHR-069 (May 30, 1995), and that Grubb must be applied to
this case. HHR also draws on the testimony offered by DOP's
Assistant Director of Classification and Compensation, Lowell T.
Basford, in the Grubb case. Mr. Basford established that,
traditionally, Social Service Workers were hired by the Human
Resources segment of HHR while Social Workers were hired by
Health. He explained that the Social Service Worker class
series is three-tiered and identified by its programmatic
functions. SSW3's distinguishing characteristics include work in programs such as adoption services and related services, and
the work is performed either within an agency's office or out in
the field. On the other hand, the Social Worker class series is not programmatic in nature and is designed to apply to employees
located in state health facilities. These types of employees
provide therapeutic services to clients in state hospitals, and
work with a team of medical personnel to provide counseling
therapy in an institutional setting.
HHR is correct that the outcome in Grubb controls this case
as the underlying issue is identical. Clearly, Grievant per
forms adoption services within an HHR office or out in the
field, and does not perform therapy in a state institution.
Granted, the two class series and/or specifications in question,
social worker and social service worker, identify many similar
duties and responsibilities. However, it is not arbitrary or
capricious for DOP to group these workers into two classifica
tions, based on the types of services rendered, i.e., office or
field versus institutional. Grubb.
In addition to the foregoing, the following findings and
conclusions are appropriate.
Findings of Fact
1. Grievant is employed by HHR in its Office of Social
Services, and is classified as a SSW3.
2. Grievant's primary function as an adoption worker
includes facilitating the placement of eligible children in
adoptive homes and offering needed follow-up care.
3. Grievant is a licensed social worker with the State of West Virginia.
4. Grievant's work as an adoption worker is programmatic
rather than therapeutic in nature, and she performs her duties either within her own office or other agency facilities or out
in the field.
5. Grievant is not involved with the intensive therapy of
clients within one of West Virginia's hospitals or other insti
tutions.
Conclusions of Law
1. Grievant has failed to prove by a preponderance of the
evidence that she is improperly classified as a Social Service
Worker III, based upon a review of her duties and responsibili
ties.
2. Personnel's interpretations of the two classification
specifications at issue are not clearly wrong as applied to the
facts in this case. W.Va. Dept. of Health v. Blankenship, 431
S.E.2d 681 (W.Va. 1993).
3. It is not arbitrary or capricious or otherwise unlawful
for Personnel to group HHR's social service workers and social
workers into two different classifications, based upon the
nature, type and setting of the services rendered, i.e., the
performance of relevant, routine assessments and counseling or
related work in office or field versus the delivery of intensive
therapy in a state hospital or other state institution. Grubb
v. Dept. of Health and Human Resources, Docket No. 95-HHR-069
(May 30, 1995).
Accordingly, this grievance is DENIED. Any party or the West Virginia Division of Personnel may
appeal this decision 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. Neither the West Virginia Education and State Employ
ees Grievance Board nor any of its Administrative Law Judges is
a party to such appeal and should not be so named. Any appeal
ing party must advise this office of the appeal and provide the
civil action number so that the record can be prepared and
transmitted to the appropriate court.
____________________________
NEDRA KOVAL
Administrative Law Judge
Date: January 10, 1996