You are on page 1of 11
FILED SEP 26 2017 HEARINGS DIVISON BEFORE THE NEVADA STATE PERSONNEL COMMISSION HEARING OFFICER JOHNNY BLAVARN, Patio Ep FLW ) 7 J DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS Se 26 7 Respondent Employer NevibA ow. oe im unweit? GRIEVANCES APPEA DECISION AND ORIFBREON CITY, NEVA, ‘This matter eame on forthe completion of an administrative hearing before the undersigned Hearing Officer forthe Nevada Department of Administration, Hearings Divisionoon August 1,217. ‘The hearing wns held pursuant 10 Pettioner-Employee Johnny Bilavarn's appeal of is dismissal from State Service in October of 2016. 1, PROCEDURAL AND FACTUAL OVERVIEW, Pettioner-Employee Johnny Bilavam was employed as a Correctional Ofier with the Department of Corrections some nine years and three months before he was discharged on October 21,2016. On February 13/14, 2016, Officer Bilavarn was scheduled to work atthe High Desert State Prison, Unit 2, A-B Foor, graveyard shif from 9:00 pm. to 5:00 a.m. Between 4:00 ‘am, and 4:30 am, shortly before his shift was completed, Sergeant Mark Tansey, Administrative Sergeant on that dite, notified Officer Bilavarn, by phone, that he would be mandated to work ‘overtime in Unit 2.C-D forthe following eight hour shit beginning at 5:00 am, 1NAC284.242 requires t lest four (4) hours advance notice for mandatory overtime unless “an unpredictable emergency prevents prior approval and communication.” ‘When notified that he was being called upon to work eight hours of mandatory overtime, he advised Sergeant Tansey that he hed prior commitments and was only able to work for three overtime hours. ‘The testimony about this conversation was conflicting, but it appears as though Sergeant “Tansey said he would see whet he could do, bth left before eight hours, he would be abandoning bis post. There were no further communications between Sergeant Tansey and Officer Bilavarn, & See 28 ‘Three hoursino the overtime shift, at approximately 8:00 am, OfficerBilevarn efthispost without notifying his chain of command. Officer Bilavarn admitted that he exited the facility through the “sally por.” The Departnent of Corrections noted that exiting through the sally port was extremely ‘unusual and inferred that Officer Bilavarn was leaving through tat ext in order to avoid detection. Officer Bilavam testified otherwise - he was leaving through the sally port because of some foot issues and because it was more convenient. ‘he evidence was that after Officer Bilavarn sbandoned his post without notifying his ‘immediet supervisor, or he chain of command, and he caused th institution to fall below minimum staffing levels. Unit2, C-D was required to cease all operations and was on lock down fora least five hours; the evidence elso was that a search was conducted for Officer Bilavarm as there was a concer he could have been in danger and still on the premises. Officer Bilavarn'sdefense to these charges and allegations was that the order that he remain at High Desert State Prison and work an additional eight hour shift was, in itself unlawful in that ‘twas contrary to NAC 284.242. Much testimony was developed with respect to whether or not the ‘mandatory overtime siurtion that occurred on February 14, 2016, was, in fact an unpredictable ‘emergency situation, Of particular significance was the testimony of Investigator Nicholas Roble ofthe Office of Inspector General who performed an investigation ofthe allegations against Officer Bilavarn, Investigator Roble did a comprehensive evaluation ofthe employee schedule at High Desert State Prison, atthe relevant ime frame, and concluded thatthe stfTing was insufficient due to know factors and that there was no unpredictable emergency accounting for less thn four (4) hhours notification for mandatory overtime to Officer Bilavarn. Investigator Roble questioned Associate Warden Nash and Associate Warden Stroud 2s to ‘hy mandatory overtime was not scheduled in advance. Officer Stroud indicated thet the concept ‘as disused inthe pas, but never adapted. Investigator Roble was referred to Warden Nevin for 1 definitive answer as to why mandatory overtime was not scheduled in advance, According to Investigator Roble’s report, the definitive answer provided by the Warden was “because I don't fucking want to.” Wardea Nevin did not testify atthe underlying hearing. Lasty, of import was the testimony and documentation that two other comestions officers 2 1 | Gtendley and Peterson) were asked to complete the mandatory overtime shifton the date in question 2 | and they refused. Only after they refused was Officer Bilavarm advised he would have to work the 3 | mandatory overtime shift in question, ana es eee een cee ae ere ree eee 1G 0 ce, nny nn ES 2, 206. ; be hes 600) ot colon cabin Ot ; Slt ot eno ciel Se | DATO 4 ONO a pee ae tac eee 2 SEoanty ofthe instaion, a Ree cece fi pa) poets 1S ee a one F er Parca aware ee sense 18 ‘AR339.07.15 NEGLECT OF DUTY » ‘TT. Leaving an signed post wile on duty without authorization ofa 0 penton CLASS " a ‘The esence ofthe charges are that he was nsuboraate fr lng to follow alwfl order 22 | towork mandatory overtime and that he acted in neglect of duty for leaving an assigned post without 23 | authorization ofa supervisor. 24)2. LEGALAUTHORITY 3 Officer Bilavara's appeal tothe undersigned Administrative Hearing Officer ofthe Nevada 26 | State Department of Administration was timely filed and the determinetion of the merits of the 27 J appeal is properly within the jurisdiction ofthe Department. 8 ‘Chapter 284 ofthe Nevada Revised Statues addresses the State Personnel System, NFS 3 1 | 284.385 authorizes the dismissal, demotion, and suspension of a permaner 2 | Employee and states as follows: 3 1, An appointing euthority may: classified State ‘ (©) Dismis o demote any pmanent clessifed Employee when the lig author coders alt good othe publesevis wil s ‘SBerved thereby. m ‘ ©) Excptas tere provided inNRS 284.148, sped witty, for dbctph es, a permanent Emplajes fora period nett : fry papows permanent Empljee oa pio oat 8] 2 Aisne, involuntary demotion o suspeasion dos not become effestive Se agi demon ot apes dor ot besos ci 9 Spot spon fh ca tr. Te wie mayo veel personaly Yo he Employ of raed to 10 Mast knowm ores y epstered or crfed mal retry esl requested Ifthe noice ts maled he eftcive dt of he damods u {Rvolunary demotion or saponin shall be detned tobe ie dae of - vey ov be eer irene toe sendc, 3 dear alg 5. NoBimployeen theclesid serviemaybe dismissed ferreigious orca B Tao 14] 1Rs-284343 authorizes the Personnel Commision to adopt reuaion system for the 15 | eisiplie of State Employes sang: 16] 1. The Commision shall adopt by regulon a sytem for adn scp env spades ployee, et en ” self acto es sve mis led 8 imeshres hve fled to cones the Employer's tices. 19] 2 The system adopled purses to aubsecion must provide that a ste E ll sei ae yan epplaing stbny e he ceresentive of he appoing x thor any epting propoted display econ sa| 88244 290edablshesastatconploe' sgt to shenngfie State employe csares 1 | itt disitiny aon ken by an pointing aor. 3] Pasumtio NRS 25490), th hewing ofr iso detriaeheresonblenes ofthe 3 | Sisiliny aon. Furr, pusunto NRS 24386) he owing ofceristo dein ite

You might also like