Isabelle Procaccino, CSC Docket No. 2020-1946

BackgroundIsabelle Procaccino appeals the determination of the Division of Agency Services (Agency Services) which found that she did not meet the experience requirements for the open-competitive examination for Administrative Secretary (M0791A), Jersey City.

The subject examination announcement was open to residents of Jersey City who met the specific requirements as of the September 4, 2019 closing date. The requirement for Administrative Secretary included five years of experience in the capacity of a secretary to an executive or administrative official in a public or private organization. Successful completion of a two-year program in secretarial science at an accredited college or university could be substituted for two years of this experience. One candidate appears on the eligible list, which was certified once, but no appointments have yet been made.

On her application, the appellant indicated that she possessed 75 college credits, and she listed one position, Supervising Legal Stenographer. She included a resume with three additional positions, Secretary, and two positions as Legal Secretary. None of her experience was accepted and she was found to be lacking five years of applicable experience.

On appeal, the appellant rewords the duties provided on her application, stating that she worked as the personal assistant for the Director of Law for eight years. She states that she handled all the financial for the department, prepared the budget, supervised support staff, provided support to 34 employees, prepared the municipal agenda, resolutions and ordinances, attended meetings, took calls for human resources, IT, payroll and the budget office, tracked employee time, and participated in staff evaluations.

CONCLUSION

RuleN.J.A.C. 4A:4-2.3(b) provides that applicants shall meet all requirements specified in the open competitive examination announcement by the closing date.

AnalysisFor 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). An incumbent Administrative Secretary assists an administrative official of a department or autonomous government agency at a level no lower than department head, by performing varied, complex administrative secretarial, advanced clerical and program support functions of a general or specialized nature; relieves the administrative official of technical, as well as general administrative details; may supervise clerical operations and staff. Those duties include maintaining a calendar, schedule of appointments, and travel arrangements for the executive; preparing administrative correspondence, memoranda, and statements on behalf of an administrative official, as authorized; preparing meeting agendas, attending meetings and recording minutes; greeting and directing visitors and screening and routing incoming calls; ordering supplies and office equipment; assisting in formulating policies and procedures for the office and other clerical operations. The Administrative Secretary is one of the highest functioning clerical positions in local government. Positions in this class perform highly specialized and responsible secretarial and administrative clerical work requiring experience and familiarity with departmental functions and procedures.

In this case, the appellant’s duties as a Supervising Legal Stenographer do not appear to primarily be in the capacity of a secretary to an executive or administrative official. Rather, the description of her duties suggests that she supervised providing clerical support to an office or unit, had financial and budgeting duties, and performed legal stenographic functions. The primary focus was not secretarial duties for an executive. Also, her remaining positions are inapplicable. As a Secretary, she prepared indictments for the Grand Jury. As a Legal Secretary, she states that for one position she performed “all aspects” of various topics such as will and “environmental.” For the second position she prepared legal pleadings for litigation, kept a diary of the daily activities of attorneys, “RICO cases,” “worked for” a law firm partner, and did “all aspects” of various topics.

An independent review of all material presented indicates that the decision of the 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.

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