Xavier Morales, CSC Docket No. 2020-2030

BackgroundXavier Morales appeals the decision of the Division of Agency Services (Agency Services) which found that he did not meet the experience requirements for the promotional examination for Supervising Parking Enforcement Officer (PM1190A), Jersey City.

The subject examination had a closing date of August 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 and who were serving in the titles Parking Enforcement Officer or Parking Enforcement Officer/Parking Meter Collector, and who met the open competitive requirements, OR to all employees in the competitive division who had an aggregate of one year of continuous permanent service as of the closing date, and who met the open competitive requirements. These requirements included two years of experience in enforcing parking ordinances. The appellant submitted an application with no experience listed. Eight candidates appear on the eligible list, which has not yet been certified.

Appellant's argumentOn appeal, the appellant argued that he had wrote down all of his experience for the last three years, and he submitted a resume with that position, Parking Enforcement Officer.

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.

AnalysisN.J.A.C. 4A:4-2.1(f), states that any supplemental information received after the closing date cannot be considered.

The appellant was determined to be ineligible for the examination as he did not complete his application. Specifically, no experience had been submitted. The online application process is automated and provides instructions to candidates on how to properly complete their applications. When an applicant clicks on the payment tab to submit their online application and they have not provided any experience, they receive a warning message as highlighted below. If the applicant does want to provide experience, they must click ‘Yes’ to return to the experience section before submitting their application. If they do not have any experience to report, they click ‘No’ to complete and submit their application. The note on the appellant’s application indicates that “during the application creation process, employment information was not entered into the experience section.” If additional documents were provided by the closing date, this information is reviewed in determining eligibility.

Also, by clicking “yes,” the appellant certified that his employment history was complete and accurate. A copy of the application as it appears online is as follows:

Under N.J.A.C. 4A:4-2.1(g), the Commission can accept clarifying information in eligibility appeals. However, N.J.A.C. 4A:4-2.1(f) provides that an application may only be amended prior to the announced closing date. For example, information submitted on appeal pertaining to duties in a given position that expands or enlarges information previously submitted is considered clarifying and is accepted. However, any documentation indicating work in a setting that was not previously listed on an application or resume cannot be considered after the closing date. Thus, the Commission can only consider information provided on appeal regarding the positions listed on the appellant’s original application. See In the Matter of Diana Begley (MSB, decided November 17, 2004). The appellant submitted his resume with information that was not listed on his application. This is considered to be supplemental information, and cannot be accepted after the closing date.

The appellant did not provide any experience on his application and certified that his application was complete and accurate. Accordingly, there is no basis to accept the appellant’s supplemental information after the closing date.

A thorough review of all material presented indicates that the decision of Agency Services, that appellant did not meet the announced requirements for eligibility by the examination closing date, is amply supported by the record and appellant provides no basis to disturb that decision. Thus, appellant has failed to support his 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.