various people in the office and “I’ve had situations that I’m aware of, that I’ve addressed.” However, the only specific example given by Ms. Ellis was an instance of Grievant bullying a case aide. On direct examination, Ms. Pence testified that Grievant “brings a sense of hostility and tension to the office” and that she has witnessed Grievant inappropriately lash out at coworkers at least five times since she came to their office in December 2019. On cross examination, Grievant asked her former classmate, “Was I ever rude to you?” Ms. Pence replied, “Jenny, your baseline is rude.” Then, Grievant immediately exhibited the reactionary response described by Ms. Ellis and retorted, “This is discriminatory” and moved that Ms. Pence’s testimony be disregarded because she is dishonest. For these reasons, Grievant failed to prove harassment or hostile work environment.

Grievant asserts that Respondent has discriminated against her and shown favoritism to certain employees. She claims that she was treated differently than other employees who have committed similar offenses. Discrimination for purposes of the grievance process has a very specific definition. “‘Discrimination’ means any differences in the treatment of similarly situated employees, unless the differences are related to the actual job responsibilities of the employees or are agreed to in writing by the employees.’” W. VA. CODE § 6C-2-2(d) (2024). Without providing names or details, Laurea Ellis testified that other individuals have recently received five-day suspensions for less than Grievant’s offenses. Grievant attempted to discredit Ms. Pence due to a prior “breach of confidentiality.” However, the circumstances differ from Grievant’s breach. Nevertheless, Ms. Ellis confirmed that Ms. Pence was disciplined for her impropriety. Grievant provided no evidence to prove discrimination.