Rose McGill, CSC Docket No. 2019-1134

BackgroundRose McGill appeals the determination of the Division of Agency Services which found that she did not meet the experience requirements for the promotional examination for Administrative Analyst 2 (PS6918LN), Department of Banking and Insurance.

The subject examination announcement was issued with a closing date of February 21, 2018. The examination was open to employees in the competitive division who had an aggregate of one year of continuous permanent service as of the closing date and who were serving in the title Administrative Analyst 1, OR to employees in the competitive division who had an aggregate of one year of continuous permanent service as of the closing date in any competitive title and who met the open competitive requirements. These requirements included graduation from an accredited college or university with a Bachelor’s degree, and two years of experience involving the review, analysis, and evaluation of budget, organization, administrative practices, operational methods, management operations, or data processing applications, or any combination thereof, which shall have included responsibility for recommendation, planning, and/or implementation of improvements in a business or government agency. Possession of a Master’s degree in Public Administration, Business Administration, Economics, Finance, or Accounting could be substituted for one year of the work experience. Applicants who did not possess the required Bachelor’s degree could substitute additional experience on a year for year basis, with 30 credits being equal to one year of experience. The appellant was found to be below the minimum requirements in experience. As no candidates were admitted, the examination was canceled on September 28, 2018.

Appellant's argumentThe appellant indicated possession of a Bachelor’s degree, and she listed one position on her application, provisional Administrative Analyst 2 from October 2017 to the February 2018 closing date. She was credited with five months of experience in her provisional position and was found to be lacking one year, seven months of required experience.

On appeal, the appellant states that, from January 2014 to September 2017, while in the title Program Technician, she was working out-of-title as an Administrative Analyst 2. In support of the appeal, the appointing authority has indicated that the appellant performed review, analysis, and evaluation of administrative practices and operational methods. The appointing authority indicates that it is willing to appoint the appellant should her name appear on an eligible list.

CONCLUSION

RuleN.J.A.C. 4A:4-2.6(a) provides that applicants shall meet all requirements specified in the promotional examination announcement by the closing date. N.J.A.C. 4A:4-2.6(c) provides that except when permitted for good cause, applicants for promotional examinations may not use experience gained as a result of out-of- title work to satisfy eligibility requirements.

AnalysisInitially, the appellant was correctly deemed to be ineligible for the subject examination since she lacked the minimum requirements in experience as she did not provide more than five months of experience on her application. The online application process is automated and provides instructions to candidates on how to properly complete their applications. Also, the application states that, by clicking “yes,” the applicant certified that the employment history was complete and accurate. The On-Line Application System User’s Guide cautions applicants to carefully review the application to ensure that it is complete and accurate before submitting, and to complete the application in detail. It states that failure to complete the application properly may cause the applicant to be declared ineligible. The instructions under the experience portion of the application advise applicants to provide all employment information (not just current employment information), and if they have multiple positions, they need to make sure that they provide each one separately. The appellant should follow these instructions and properly complete any future applications for examinations.

Nonetheless, the appointing authority has indicated that the appellant performed out-of-title duties for at least an additional one year, seven months while in the title Program Technician. It is noted that the position underwent a position classification review and it was determined that her duties were properly classified as Administrative Analyst 2. With the acceptance of this out-of-title work, the appellant possesses the required two years of experience. The examination was cancelled, and based on the documentation submitted and under these circumstances, good cause exists to accept the appellant’s out-of-title work experience to satisfy the requirements for the Administrative Analyst 2 examination.

ORDER

Therefore, it is ordered that this appeal be granted, the examination cancellation be rescinded, and the appellant’s application be processed.

ClosingThis is the final administrative determination in this matter. Any further review should be pursued in a judicial forum.