Alexander Ofoma, CSC Docket No. 2019-502

BackgroundAlexander Ofoma 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 Quality Assurance Technician (PS6730H), Trenton Psychiatric Hospital.

The subject examination announcement was issued with a closing date of January 22, 2018. The examination was open to employees serving in the title of Practical Nurse who possessed an aggregate of one year of continuous permanent service in that title; and who possessed two years of administrative experience providing assistance in staffing, fiscal management, office administration or other support services in a business or government agency; and three years of experience in resident care work involving the review of clinical records, monitoring patient care and treatment measures, and the determination of treatment goals as of the January 22, 2018 closing date. The subject examination was cancelled on August 18, 2018, after all 11 applicants, including the appellant, were deemed ineligible.

Appellant's argumentThe appellant stated on his application that he served as a provisional Quality Assurance Technician from June 2017 to the closing date (January 2018); as a provisional Client Services Representative from February 2015 to June 2017; and as a Practical Nurse from February 2004 to February 2015. Agency Services credited the appellant with one year and eight months of applicable administrative experience based upon his service as a Quality Assurance Technician and three years of applicable resident care work. However, because the appellant did not possess an additional four months of applicable administrative experience, he was deemed ineligible for the subject examination.

On appeal to the Civil Service Commission (Commission), the appellant asserts, in relevant part, that he possesses more than three years of applicable administrative experience based upon his work as a provisional Client Services Representative and as a provisional Quality Assurance Technician.

BackgroundAgency records indicate that the appellant continues to serve provisionally in the subject title.

CONCLUSION

RuleN.J.A.C. 4A:4-2.6(a)2 provides that applicants must meet all requirements specified in a promotional examination announcement by the closing date. N.J.A.C. 4A:1-1.2(c) provides that a rule may be relaxed for good cause shown in a particular situation.

AnalysisInitially, it is noted that Agency Services correctly credited the appellant with one year and eight months of applicable administrative experience based upon his service as a Quality Assurance Technician and three years of applicable resident care work based upon the experience he listed in his application. Although the appellant asserts that his provisional experience as a Client Services Representative constitutes applicable administrative experience, a review of the record fails to demonstrate that the required administrative support work was the primary focus of his duties in this title. However, a review of the record shows that the appellant continues to serve provisionally in the title of Quality Assurance Technician, thereby providing him with the additional four months of applicable administrative experience for the subject examination. Additionally, the record indicates that the examination situation is not competitive since the subject examination was cancelled. In this regard, N.J.A.C. 4A:1-1.2(c) provides that the Commission may relax a rule for good cause in a particular situation. Under these circumstances, good cause exists to relax the provisions of N.J.A.C. 4A:4-2.6(a)2 and accept the appellant’s provisional experience after the closing date, for eligibility purposes only, and admit him to the subject examination.

ORDER

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

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