Issue: Compliance: Consolidation of Grievances for Hearing; Ruling Date April 9, 2001; Ruling #2001-033; Agency: Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University; Outcome: In Compliance (consolidation)

COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
Department of Employment Dispute Resolution

COMPLIANCE RULING OF DIRECTOR

In the matter of VPI & State University No. 2001-033
April 9, 2001

ISSUE:

Should the grievant’s February 1 and 5, 2001 grievances challenging Group I Written Notices be consolidated for hearing with her October 17, 2000 grievance alleging retaliation and an arbitrary or capricious performance evaluation?

RULING:

Yes. This Department holds that in the interests of consistency and efficiency, the three grievances shall be consolidated to proceed as separate claims before the same hearing officer. Proceeding in this manner should avoid unnecessary duplication of testimony, and should not prevent the hearing officer from addressing the grievances separately as needed for purposes of procedural issues or in determining the substantive merits of each grievance. This Department’s rulings on matters of compliance are final and nonappealable. See Va. Code § 2.1-116.03(5).

EXPLANATION:

On October 17, 2000, the grievant initiated a grievance alleging that management retaliated against her for having reported an alleged Fair Labor Standards Act violation and for having stated her desire to grieve her subsequent low performance evaluation, which, in her October 17, 2000 grievance, she also claimed was arbitrary or capricious. That grievance was qualified for hearing by this Department.

On January 30 and February 1, 2001, the grievant received two Group I Written Notices for separate instances of alleged unprofessional behavior in fulfilling her job duties. The grievant challenged each Written Notice through a separate grievance alleging retaliation for having filed her October 17, 2000 grievance. Thus, her second grievance was initiated on February 1, 2001 and the third on February 5, 2001.

This Department has long held that grievances may be consolidated by mutual agreement of the parties, or absent such an agreement (as in this case), by this Department whenever the grievances challenge the same action or series of actions or arise out of the same facts. Where alleged retaliation is grieved, and each grievance challenges a discrete action by management to support this characterization, as in this case it is appropriate to consolidate the grievances to be heard before one hearing officer.

Neil A.G. McPhie, Esquire
Director

June M. Foy
Employment Relations Consultant