NJ Civil Service Navigator

KERRY HAZEL, CSC Docket No. 2019-2087

NJ Civil Service Commission decision of March 27, 2019, CSC Docket No. 2019-2087: examination scoring or administration, granted. Woodbine Developmental Center requests that the Civil Service Commission waive the written test requirement for Kerry Hazel for the promotional examination for Cottage Tr

Commission decisions · Meeting of March 27, 2019

Woodbine Developmental Center requests that the Civil Service Commission waive the written test requirement for Kerry Hazel for the promotional examination for Cottage Training Technician (PS4592K), Woodbine Developmental Center, Department of Human Services.

Matter
Examination scoring or administration
Decided
March 27, 2019, item B-15
Outcome
Granted
Title
COTTAGE TRAINING TECHNICIAN
Employer
Human Services
Examination
PS4592K
Chair at the time
Deirdre L. Webster Cobb, Chairperson
Official decision
Published by CSC in its monthly archive bundle (B-015 03-27-19.pdf)

Action recorded in the minutes: The Civil Service Commission directed that this request be granted.

Rules this decision applies

The decision

BackgroundWoodbine Developmental Center requests that the Civil Service Commission (Commission) waive the written test requirement for Kerry Hazel for the promotional examination for Cottage Training Technician (PS4592K), Woodbine Developmental Center, Department of Human Services (DHS).

As background, Mr. Hazel was previously granted an accommodation waiver for a written examination for the subject title as a result of his documented disability. See In the Matter of Kerry Hazel, Cottage Training Technician (PS8387K), Woodbine Developmental Center, Department of Human Services (CSC, decided December 18, 2013). In that matter, Mr. Hazel was placed on the PS8387K list with a score of 70. However, he was not appointed to the subject title as he was not reachable on that list.

AnalysisIn this matter, the subject examination was announced with specific requirements to be met as of the closing date of August 21, 2018. The record indicates that Mr. Hazel was determined eligible to take the subject examination. The record also indicates that there are 72 candidates admitted to the examination. The examination has not yet been scheduled. As it did in the prior matter, the appointing authority requests that the subject written test be waived for Mr. Hazel based on a documented disability. In support of its request, it provides documentation regarding Mr. Hazel’s disability. The appointing authority states that Mr. Hazel was admitted to a previous promotional examination for the subject title and, although he received Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accommodations, he did not receive a passing score. The appointing authority confirms that, historically, it exhausts the eligible lists for the subject title prior to the expiration date. The appointing authority also confirms that, based on Mr. Hazel’s current employment history, it would appoint him to the subject title when he is in a reachable position on the list.

Official records indicate that Mr. Hazel was appointed to the title of Human Services Assistant effective February 21, 2004, and continues to serve in that title.

CONCLUSION

N.J.S.A. 11A:7-13 and N.J.A.C. 4A:4-2.14(b) provide that the Commission may waive an examination for an otherwise qualified candidate or provisional with a physical, mental or emotional affliction, injury, dysfunction, impairment or disability which makes it physically or psychologically not practicable to undergo the testing procedure for a particular title, but does not prevent satisfactory performance of the title’s responsibilities under conditions of actual service.

In the instant situation, the appointing authority states that Mr. Hazel was previously granted an accommodation waiver for a subject written examination as a result of his documented disability. See Hazel, supra. In this matter, the appointing authority again request an accommodation waiver for the subject written examination, and it confirms that, historically, it exhausts the eligible lists for the subject title prior to the expiration date of the certifications. The appointing authority also confirms that, based on Mr. Hazel’s current employment history, it would appoint him to the subject title when he is in a reachable position on the list as his condition does not prevent his satisfactory performance of the title’s responsibilities. Therefore, although official records reveal that there are 72 candidates for the subject examination, it is conceivable that the resultant eligible list will be exhausted prior to its expiration date. Consequently, no eligibles would be harmed by the addition of Mr. Hazel’s name to the eligible list for the subject title. As such, good cause exists to utilize the provisions of N.J.S.A. 11A:7-13 and N.J.A.C. 4A:4-2.14(b) and grant the appointing authority’s request to waive the requirement of a written test for Mr. Hazel in this particular situation. Therefore, the examination for the title Cottage Training Technician should be waived for Mr. Hazel and, upon issuance of the list, his name be placed on the list with a score of 70.00.

ORDER

Therefore, it is ordered that this request be granted and, upon issuance, Mr. Hazel’s name be placed on the Cottage Training Technician (PS4592K) eligible list with a score of 70.00.

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

Decisions this one cites

  • In the Matter of Kerry Hazel, Cottage Training Technician (PS8387K), Woodbine Developmental Center, Department of Human Services (December 18, 2013)

About this page

Not an official copy. The decision of record is CSC's monthly archive. The text above was extracted from it and may differ in layout or, rarely, in a character.

Names appear as the Commission published them in its public minutes and decisions, initials where it used initials. This site does not offer a search by a person's name.

The labels are ours. The kind of matter and the outcome are our reading of the minutes; the ACTION text the Commission recorded is quoted verbatim above. A decision applies the rules to its own facts and is not a prediction for any other matter, and nothing here is legal advice.

To report an error on this page, use the contact form.