WHEELING – A group of current and former Ohio County 911 dispatchers have sued the county commission over pay issues related to “on-call” procedures and workplace safety issues.
The plaintiffs filed their complaint March 15 in Ohio Circuit Court against the Ohio County Commission.
April Barnes, Emily Drake, Scott Himrod, John Knight, Jerome Kulpa, Renee LeBaron, Nicole Marci, John Mallis, Jaclyn Marling, Paul Theodore McIntire Jr., Jessica Palmer, Denise Ricker, Mark Scherrer, SuzAnne Waugh, Angie White and George Yoho are the plaintiffs.
Toriseva
“Twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year, 911 dispatchers are ready and are the first line of communication for people in trouble,” attorney Teresa Toriseva told The West Virginia Record. “They keep our other first responders safe and informed.
“Any manipulation of their earned wage is unlawful and threatens public safety.”
According to the complaint, Ohio County dispatchers work 12-hour shifts. Their pay period consists of one 48-hour week and one 36-hour week. During a pay period, a dispatcher works four nights and are off three days one week. The other week, the dispatcher works three days and is off four nights. There usually are three or four dispatchers on duty each shift.
The complaint says at least one dispatcher always must be available “on-call” and be ready to be called into work at a moment’s notice to fulfill emergency dispatch needs. It says the “on-call” rotations consist of a dispatcher being on-call for one week from Thursday to Thursday. It also says dispatchers are required to be on call 24 hours a day and in close proximity for the entirety of their “one-week” on-call rotation.
“Each dispatcher is not free to use his or her time as he or she saw fit during the entirety of the ‘on-call’ week rotation,” the complaint states. “The defendant requires that the ‘on-call dispatcher’ report to work immediately if he or she is called in to work (and) is threatened with disciplinary measures if they do not report to work immediately after receiving the call.”
But, the complaint says the plaintiffs are not paid for their on-call time unless they are ordered to report to work.
The plaintiffs say the county has violated its own policies regarding this issue since 1993.
And in March 2022, the county commission eliminated three days of paid vacation and reduced the accrual rate of sick leave for the plaintiffs. That decision was reversed a few months later, but the plaintiffs say they were not fully compensated for their lost vacation or sick leave time.
In addition, plaintiff say they were required to use their personal sick leave during the COVID-19 pandemic for sickness and quarantining, regardless of the cause of the sickness, as well as for county-mandated quarantine periods.
Also, the complaint says the condition of the dispatcher workplace is unsafe because it has only one fire escape and is contaminated with black dust and soot coming from the HVAC system.
The plaintiffs accuse the county of violating the West Virginia Wage Payment and Collection Act for failing to pay “on-call” time, failing to properly accrue vacation and sick leave, failing to pay sick leave, failing to pay COVID wages and for unpaid accrued leave time at separation for those employees as well as for liquidated damaegs. They also seek injunctive relief regarding the violation of the West Virginia Fire Code with the single fire escape and the exposure to hazardous materials in the workplace.
LeBaron also seeks damages for the defendants’ alleged violation of disciplinary policy after being suspended three days for non-work conduct that occurred off work premises.
The plaintiffs seek compensatory damages, injunctive relief, statutory interest, liquidated damages, court costs, attorney fees and other relief.
They are being represented by Toriseva and Josh Miller of Toriseva Law in Wheeling. The firm previously has represented firefighters, police officers and other emergency personnel in other pay issues. The case has been assigned to Circuit Judge Ronald E. Wilson.
Ohio Circuit Court case number 24-C-51
