Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Personnel And Whistleblower topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Employee alleges retaliation after reporting staffing and safety concerns at Pine Valley
Summary
A long-term Pine Valley employee, Deborah, told the subcommittee she was suspended after reporting understaffing and resident-safety incidents and said she may consult an attorney; administrators said they followed policy and offered to discuss details in closed session.
An employee identified only as Deborah told the Pine Valley subcommittee Dec. 15 that she reported staffing and resident-safety concerns in September and was later suspended, raising questions about retaliation and the facility disciplinary process.
Deborah said she worked at the facility for 23 years and described an incident on Sept. 7, 2025, when she reported that a 16-year-old was left alone with a resident and that one certified nursing assistant was left to care for residents for an hour and a half. She said she raised the issue with state surveyors and county leadership, and that on Oct. 21, 2025, she was suspended pending an investigation into how she transferred a resident. "I was told I was to retire early by 10/27/2025 at noon," she said, adding that she recorded a meeting and was considering legal counsel. She referenced federal protections, naming the Fair Labor Standards Act, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and OSHA as avenues for protection against retaliation.
Facility leadership responded that regulations and the facility handbook guided their actions. An administrator told the committee she would be willing to discuss personnel details in a closed session and to provide additional explanation at a future meeting: "I'd be happy to kind of go into more detail about the situation and why it took a turn the way it did." Another member stressed that employees should use the facility's chain of command first and that department heads may request support from the county attorney on HR matters.
Several board members urged the committee to add the matter to a future agenda for fuller review. One member said long-serving employees should be protected and expressed concern that the disciplinary process in this case may have bypassed in-house handling, noting the matter "was handled such as it has this current issue" and recommending the topic be placed on next month's agenda.
The subcommittee did not take a formal vote on any personnel action during the meeting. Members asked staff to place a follow-up item on the next agenda and suggested the option of closed-session review for personnel or legal discussion.
