Brandy Woolson, CSC Docket No. 2020-1338

BackgroundBrandy Woolson appeals the decision of the Division of Agency Services (Agency Services) that she did not meet the experience requirements for the promotional examination for Secretarial Assistant 3 (Non-Stenographic), (PS9682I), Department of Corrections.

The subject promotional examination announcement was issued with a closing date of May 21, 2019 and was open to employees in the competitive division who were serving in the titles Principal Clerk Transcriber or Principal Clerk Typist and had an aggregate of one year of continuous permanent service as of the closing date 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 possessed three years of experience in secretarial and administrative clerical work. Successful completion of a clerical training program with a minimum of 700 classroom training hours or 30 semester hour credits in secretarial science from an accredited college or university could be substituted for one year of the required experience. The appellant was found to be below the minimum requirements in experience. One candidate appears on the eligible list, which has not yet been certified.

The appellant listed experience in the following positions on her application: Secretarial Assistant 3 (Non-Stenographic); Senior Audit Account Clerk; Clerk Typist; Installation Administrative Assistant with Avalon Carpet and Tile; Purchasing Agent with Avalon Carpet and Tile; Administrative Clerk with Avalon

Carpet and Tile. None of this experince was accepted, and she was found to be lacking three years of qualifying experience.

Appellant's argumentOn appeal, the appellant provides her application, and indicates that her experience is extensive.

CONCLUSION

RuleN.J.A.C. 4A:4-2.6(a)2 states that applicants for promotional examinations must meet all requirements by the announced closing date.

AnalysisThe appellant was denied admittance to the subject examination since she lacked at least three years of experience in secretarial and administrative clerical work. In order for experience to be acceptable, it must mirror the experience required in the examination announcement. In addition, 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 appellant lists the duties of her provisional position as: organizes assigned secretarial and administrative clerical work with effective work methods; manages office typing of correspondence, reports, and recommendations of a confidential nature; maintains confidential follow-up and other files; and assists with all inmate account duties where needed. A review of these duties indicates that she is not performing the work of a Secretarial Assistant 3 (Non-Stenographic). As such, Agency Services should perform a review of the appellant’s duties to determine the proper classification of her position. For eligibility purposes, it is not sufficient to be provisional in the title, but the candidate must also be performing the duties of the title. None of the remaining experience had secretarial duties as the primary focus. The appellant lacks three years of required experience. Should the classification review find that the appellant is performing in-title work as a Secretarial Assistant 3 (Non-Stenographic), another examination can be announced.

An independent review of all material presented indicates that the decision of Agency Services that the appellant did not meet the announced requirements for eligibility by the closing date is amply supported by the record. The appellant provides no basis to disturb this decision. Thus, the appellant has failed to support her burden of proof in this matter.

ORDER

Therefore, it is ordered that this appeal be denied, and the matter of the appellant’s position classification be referred to Agency Services for review.

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