Gregory Moore, CSC Docket No. 2019-2237

BackgroundGregory Moore appeals the determination of the Division of Agency Services (Agency Services), which found that he did not meet the experience requirement for the promotional examination for Manager Parks and Grounds (PC2141W), Passaic County.

The subject examination was open to applicants who possessed three years of management experience involving planning the care and maintenance of large tracts of ground, including the planting and care of shrubbery and flowers, the maintenance of public recreation facilities and the preparation and administration of budgets as of the July 23, 2018 closing date. The subject examination was cancelled after both applicants, including the appellant, were deemed ineligible.

On his application, the appellant indicated, in relevant part, that he served as a provisional Manager Parks and Grounds from April 2018 to the closing date of the subject examination (July 2018); as a General Supervisor, Parks from May 2017 to March 2018; and as a Maintenance Supervisor Grounds from June 2014 to April 2017. Agency Services credited the appellant with four months of applicable experience based upon his provisional service in the subject title. However, Agency Services determined that the appellant’s remaining experience was not applicable because it did not appear that the primary focus of his duties included preparation and administration of budgets, as required. As a result, he was deemed ineligible for the subject examination.

Appellant's argumentOn appeal, the appellant states that his duties in the titles of General Supervisor, Parks and as a Maintenance Supervisor Grounds included, in part, coordinating and overseeing work schedules and assignments for all park supervisors and workers, directing landscape work and nursery care on park grounds, ensuring that staff follow safety and procedural guidelines, routine equipment operation and maintenance, reporting all damage, and working with the Director of Parks & Recreation to determine resource requirements and obtain estimates in connection with the preparation of the annual budget.

Appointing authority's argumentThe appointing authority submits a letter of support in which it states that the appellant’s duties while serving in the titles of Maintenance Supervisor Grounds and General Supervisor, Parks included planning, caring and maintenance of large tracts of grounds, including the planting and care of shrubbery and flowers; the maintenance of public recreation facilities; and assisting in the preparation of budgets.

CONCLUSION

RuleN.J.A.C. 4A:4-2.6(a)2 provides that applicants shall meet all requirements specified in the promotional examination announcement by the closing date.

AnalysisAgency Services correctly deemed the appellant ineligible for the subject examination. On appeal, both the appellant and the appointing authority argue that his experience as a General Supervisor, Parks and as a Maintenance Supervisor Grounds constitute applicable experience for the subject examination. In order for experience to be considered applicable, it must have as its primary focus full-time responsibilities in the areas required in the announcement. See In the Matter of Bashkim Vlashi (MSB, decided June 9, 2004). The announcement for the subject examination required three years of management experience involving planning the care and maintenance of large tracts of ground, including the planting and care of shrubbery and flowers, the maintenance of public recreation facilities and the preparation and administration of budgets as of the closing date. A review of the record fails to demonstrate that the appellant’s experience as a General Supervisor, Parks or as a Maintenance Supervisor Grounds constituted applicable experience for the subject examination. In this regard, the record evidences that the primary focus of his duties did not include the preparation and administration of budgets. Rather, it appears that his superiors were primarily responsible the preparation and administration of the annual budget and that the appellant merely assisted with some aspects of the preparation of the annual budget. Thus, it was properly determined that his experience as a General Supervisor, Parks and as a Maintenance Supervisor Grounds did not constitute applicable experience for the subject examination. Moreover, even if his experience as a General Supervisor, Parks was applicable, it would only provide him with 11 months of additional experience. Thus, he would still need an additional one year and nine months to qualify for the test. Accordingly, the appellant has not met his burden of proof and there is no basis to disturb the decision of Agency Services.

ORDER

Therefore, it is ordered that this appeal be denied.

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