Jacqueline Tillman, CSC Docket No. 2019-2764

BackgroundJacqueline Tillman appeals the decision of the Division of Agency Services which found that she did not meet the experience requirements for the promotional examination for Human Services Specialist 1 (PC0199A), Gloucester County.

The subject promotional examination had a closing date of February 21, 2019 and was open to employees in the non-competitive division who had an aggregate of one year of continuous permanent service as of the closing date in the titles Human Services Aide, or Human Services Aide Bilingual in Spanish and English 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 announced requirements, These requirements included possession of 60 semester hour credits from an accredited college or university. Experience involving any combination of the following could be substituted for the educational requirement: 1) securing/verifying information and making determinations or recommendations relating to eligibility or qualifications of applicants for loans, insurance, credit, or entitlement to cash awards, financial benefits or adjustment and settlement of insurance claims; 2) investigations involving the collection of facts and information by observing conditions, examining records, interviewing individuals, and preparing investigative reports of findings; or 3) investigating, establishing, and/or enforcing support obligations in a welfare board or agency, court system, or related agency. The appellant was found to be below the minimum requirements in experience. Eight candidates appeared on the eligible list, which was certified once, but no appointments have yet been made. It is noted that there are eight provisional incumbents, and it is expected that the list will be incomplete or exhausted prior to its expiration.

On her application, the appellant indicated that she possessed six college credits, and therefore, based on the substitution clause, she was required to have one year, ten months of qualifying experience. She listed one position on her application, Human Services Aide, and provided a narrative regarding another position as a Teacher. She was credited with one year, six months of experience from September 2017 to the February 2019 closing date in her Human Services Aide position. Her experience as a Teacher was not accepted, and as such, she lacked four months of qualifying experience as of the closing date.

Appellant's argumentOn appeal, the appellant argues that she should be eligible as she has enough time as a Human Services Aide and Teacher to substitute for the required education.

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:1-1.2(c) provides that the Civil Service Commission may relax the rules for good cause in a particular situation, on notice to affected parties, in order to effectuate the purposes of Title 11A, New Jersey Statutes.

AnalysisIn the instant matter, the appellant received credit for her position as a Human Services Aide. The Division of Agency Services correctly determined that the appellant was not eligible for the subject examination as Teachers are not assigned the duties listed above. Qualifying experience has the announced experience requirement as the primary focus of the position. That is, the announced experience should be the main duty of the listed position. The appellant submits a narrative on appeal regarding a position as a Teacher. However, the duties of her Teacher position do not match any of the announced experience requirements. As she lacked four months of experience by the closing date, she was correctly found to be ineligible for this examination. Nevertheless, the appellant has accrued an additional four months in her provisional position, and continues to serve in her provisional position. The list is expected to be exhausted or incomplete as provisional incumbents equal the eligible list count. As such, good cause exists to relax the provisions of N.J.A.C. 4A:4- 2.6(a), and accept the appellant’s experience after the closing date and admit her to the examination.

On a final note, the appellant had been informed that 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 applications 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.

ORDER

Therefore, it is ordered that this appeal be granted, and the appellant’s application be processed for prospective appointment only.

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