Julia Mendez-Rivera, CSC Docket No. 2019-2153

BackgroundJulia Mendez-Rivera appeals the decision of the Division of Agency Services (Agency Services) which found that her position with the Department of Law and Public Safety is properly classified as Agency Services Representative 2. She seeks an Agency Services Representative 3 job classification in this proceeding.

The appellant received a regular appointment to the title Agency Services Representative 2 on December 8, 2018. A classification review was requested indicating that her title was not consistent with her duties and responsibilities. Agency Services conducted a thorough review of the appellant’s Position Classification Questionnaire (PCQ), and other documentation, and determined that her position was properly classified as Agency Services Representative 2. Her position is assigned to the Firearms Investigation Unit, Division of State Police, Department of Law and Public Safety, is supervised by a Head Clerk, and has no supervisory responsibility.

Appellant's argumentOn appeal, the appellant states that she has been employed by the New Jersey State Police for 16 years, and the quality of her work and her duties and responsibilities warrant a raise. She states that she is responsible for the Retired Police Officers Permit to Carry Handguns Program wherein she ensures that all applications are completed correctly, and all documents accompanying the applications are current and accurate. She researches firearms records and provisions of notarized affidavits, and also deals with the general public and other agencies. In support of her appeal, she submits a letter from the program supervisor who indicates that the appellant is the sole point of contact for initial applications requiring several key attributes. He states that she has fulfilled her role professionally, with little or no direction, her work product is reliable and accurate, and she has excelled in handling all initial permit applications.

CONCLUSION

RuleN.J.A.C. 4A:3-3.9(e) states that in classification appeals, the appellant shall provide copies of all materials submitted, the determination received from the lower level, statements as to which portions of the determination are being disputed, and the basis for appeal. Information and/or argument which was not presented at the prior level of appeal shall not be considered.

The definition section of the job specification for Agency Services Representative 2 states:

Under the limited supervision of a supervisory official in a State department, agency or institution, provides front-line and behind the scenes customer and other support services involving the review, processing and issuance of agency documents; provides information to customers regarding department/agency programs and services; may provide guidance and assistance to clerical staff; does other related work as required.

The definition section of the job specification for Agency Services Representative 3 states:

Under the general supervision of a supervisory official in a State department or agency or institution, provides front-line and behind the scenes customer and other support services involving the review, processing and issuance of agency documents; provides specialized information to customers regarding department/agency programs and services; handles the more complex and/or sensitive customer issues, requests and complaints; does other related work as required.

AnalysisThe major focus of positions classified as Agency Services Representatives is public contact. Incumbents spend a majority of their work time responding to questions and soliciting information, orally and in writing, from members of the general public, co-workers, and others for the purpose of processing agency documents. Other clerical support functions may be assigned from time to time, but should not be the primary emphasis of the position. In addition, the Agency Services Representative 2 requires familiarity with organizational procedures and rules and may involve a limited exercise of independent judgment. This incumbent is expected to have a basic understanding of the program in which they work and the services provided in order to answer questions and explain the clarify rules, policies and procedures without frequent supervisory oversight. Incumbents at this level should be able to effectively handle irate customers, or those who have trouble articulating their questions or problems. They may process multi-step transactions or transactions that require knowledge and a general understanding of operations across internal units. The Agency Services Representative 3 performs more complex or sensitive work. They are expected to have considerable experience and familiarity with organizational procedures and rules, and be able to provide specialized information of a varied nature. Also, incumbents at this level are expected to perform research and be able to explain laws and regulations, and technical information. They resolve complex, varied and sometimes difficult issues and exercise independent judgment where clear precedent does not exist.

Based upon a thorough review of the information presented in the record, the duties of the appellant’s position do not match, as a primary focus, the definition for Agency Services Representative 3. The appellant spends 20% of her time processing permits to carry handguns; 20% of her time copying and forwarding applications to former employers for verification and endorsement; 20% of her time researching and preparing notarized affidavit requests; 10% of her time training new employees, interns and temporary personnel in issuing permits, phone work, mail, and other work; 10% of her time in customer service; and 20% of her time (5% each) conducting criminal background checks, handling mail, maintaining files and letters, and maintaining daily attendance. It is noted that how well or efficiently an employee does her job, length of service, volume of work and qualifications have no effect on the classification of a position currently occupied, as positions, not employees are classified. See In the Matter of Debra DiCello (CSC, decided June 24, 2009). The record does not support that the appellant makes independent decisions, resolves more difficult issues, performs varied work, and performs more complex work, which would warrant the higher title.

Accordingly, a thorough review of the entire record fails to establish that the appellant has presented a sufficient basis to warrant an Agency Services Representative 3 classification of her position.

ORDER

Therefore, the position of Julia Mendez-Rivera is properly classified as Agency Services Representative 2.

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