The following FY2025-2026 State Personnel Board Decisions regarding employee grievances have been summarized for informational use only.
Tricia Jacobsen v Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services (SCATA)
The Appellant filed a grievance after she was denied funeral leave after the Appellant’s domestic partner passed away. The State Personnel Board designated Amanda Palmer as the Hearing Officer, and a hearing was held in accordance with the Nebraska Classified System Personnel Rules.
The Hearing Officer found that the agency did not abuse its discretion granted under Article 8.10 of the SCATA contract by not expanding the definition of “immediate family” to include Appellant’s domestic partner. The agency acted consistently with past practice by not expanding the definition in order to avoid subjective evaluations of relationships. The Hearing Officer recommended that the State Personnel Board deny the appeal.
The State Personnel Board upheld the Hearing Officer's decision and denied the appeal.
Julie Bubak #1 v Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services (NAPE/AFSCME)
On the week of March 10 through March 17, 2024, the Appellant was on-call. She was called back to duty four times during that week. The Appellant was only paid for her actual time worked and not the call-back entitlement outlined in Article 7.8 of the NAPE Labor Contract. The State Personnel Board designated Melanie Whittamore-Mantzios as Hearing Officer, and a hearing was held in accordance with the 2023-2025 NAPE/AFSCME Labor Contract.
The Hearing Officer recommended that the State Personnel Board grant the appeal. However, the State Personnel Board rejected the recommended Conclusions of Law and found that this case did not present any material different facts or legal interpretations that would warrant the State Personnel Board to disregard the District Court cases that rejected an award of call back time in similar circumstances.
The State Personnel Board denied the appeal.
Brianna Walker #1 v Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services (NAPE/AFSCME)
On the week of April 8 through April 15, 2024, the Appellant was on-call. She was called back to duty seven times during that week. The Appellant was only paid for her actual time worked and not the call-back entitlement outlined in Article 7.8 of the NAPE Labor Contract. The State Personnel Board designated Melanie Whittamore-Mantzios as Hearing Officer, and a hearing was held in accordance with the 2023-2025 NAPE/AFSCME Labor Contract.
The Hearing Officer recommended that the State Personnel Board grant the appeal. However, the State Personnel Board rejected the recommended Conclusions of Law and found that this case did not present any material different facts or legal interpretations that would warrant the State Personnel Board to disregard the District Court cases that rejected an award of call back time in similar circumstances.