Andrew Milos, CSC Docket No. 2020-2387
NJ Civil Service Commission decision of January 20, 2021, CSC Docket No. 2020-2387: position classification, denied. Andrew Milos, represented by Marcia Mitolo, Esq., appeals the decision of the Division of Agency Services that his position with Morris County is correctly classified as Senior Techni
Commission decisions · Meeting of January 20, 2021
Andrew Milos, represented by Marcia Mitolo, Esq., appeals the decision of the Division of Agency Services that his position with Morris County is correctly classified as Senior Technician, Management Information Systems. Appellant seeks a Systems Analyst job classification.
- Matter
- Position classification
- Decided
- January 20, 2021, item B-5
- Outcome
- Denied
- Chair at the time
- Deirdre L. Webster Cobb, Chairperson
- Official decision
- Published by CSC in its monthly archive bundle (B-005 01-20-21 CD.pdf)
Action recorded in the minutes: The Civil Service Commission directed that this appeal be denied.
Rules this decision applies
The decision
BackgroundAndrew Milos, represented by Marcia Mitolo, Esq., appeals the decision of the Division of Agency Services (Agency Services) that his position with Morris County is correctly classified as Senior Technician, Management Information Systems (STMIS). He seeks a Systems Analyst classification in these proceedings.
The appellant received a regular appointment in to the non-competitive title Systems Analyst on June 25, 2012, within the Sheriff’s Office in Morris County. In July 2018 he filed for a promotional examination for Senior Systems Analyst (PC2111W), Morris County. He was found to be ineligible and filed an appeal to the Civil Service Commission (Commission). The Commission found that the duties presented on his application did not match those required by the higher title in the title series, and ordered a classification review of the appellant’s position. Agency Services performed a classification review and found that the position is supervised by a Chief Warrant Officer, and does not have supervisory responsibility. It also reviewed all documentation submitted and conducted a telephone interview. In its determination, Agency Services found that the appellant’s duties and responsibilities are commensurate with the title STMIS.
Appellant's argumentOn appeal, the appellant argues that the STMIS has no analytical responsibilities, while the Systems Analyst responsibilities specifically include analytical studies. He states that his duties are not limited to analytical work, but include review, planning, development, and implementation of information systems, but that at least half of his duties are analytical in nature. For example, for 20% of the time he analyzes Personal Emergency Alert Systems presented by vendors and prepares cost studies; for 5% of the time he prepares and presents data and studies on malfunctioning IP cameras and network video recorders, with recommendations for corrections, and studies and analyzes the current Closed Circuit Television System (CCTV) System for upgrades and expansions; for 20% of the time he maintains a database, analyzes data, provides charts and graphs regarding door access, and analyzes future alterations to access groups; for 5% of the time he meets with the systems support unit to present statistical information, and uses data to make recommendations for procedural changes and upgrades to systems; and for 10% of the time, provides reports on the record management system, and analyzes and details difficulties in the system and makes recommendations in procedural changes. He argues that the analytical functions of his job were ignored in making the classification determination.
CONCLUSION
RuleN.J.A.C. 4A:3-3.9(e) states that in classification appeals, the appellant shall provide copies of all materials submitted, the determination received from the lower level, statements as to which portions of the determination are being disputed, and the basis for appeal. Information and/or argument which was not presented at the prior level of appeal shall not be considered.
The definition section of the specification for the title Senior Technician, Management Information Systems states:
Under direction of a supervisory official in a State or local department, institution, or agency, assists in the planning, development, and implementation of information systems; reviews related programs and systems; acts as liaison with internal components utilizing the systems, and/or with other government jurisdictions; or in a client/server environment, provides hardware/software support to end users; installs hardware and software on servers or workstations; does other related work
The definition section of the specification for the requested title Systems Analyst states:
Under direction, plans, conducts, and develops analytic studies of existing operations and programs to determine feasibility of conversion to a data processing system; does other related duties as required.
AnalysisIt is long-standing policy that upon review of a request for position classification, when it is found that the majority of an incumbent’s duties and responsibilities are related to the examples of work found in a particular job specification, that title is deemed the appropriate title for the position. In finding that the appellant’s position was appropriately classified by the STMIS title, Agency Services noted that the appellant’s primary duties and responsibilities involved recording data on the systems that he monitors. He accomplishes this by reviewing systems for a new problems, glitches, or connection issues. After troubleshooting issues, either by himself or with a vendor, he records the issues and compiles spreadsheets based on the malfunction, and provides that information to his supervisor. He also monitors the CCTV and logs performance, liaises with the Office of Information Technology to discuss hardware and software updates, maintains databases for the Velocity access control system and liaises with the vendor, provides reports from the Office Record Management System, and performs other technical duties in support of the Sheriff’s Department. Further, he searches and tests new systems and fixes that will resolve problems completely. When a new system is proposed, he reviews and trials the product while interacting with the vendor, records information during the trial phase and reports to his supervisor on whether it is feasible or not.
A Systems Analyst plans and develops complex analytic studies of existing operations and programs in determining the conversion to a data processing programs. The Systems Analyst conducts feasibility studies; develops and participates in studies to determine the effectiveness of programs, policies, methods, procedures, and forms and recommends improved courses of actions; prepares schedules outlining essential steps to be taken in the installation or conversion of systems; illustrates, explains and implements data processing procedures and programs; studies procedural difficulties and operating programs and provides solutions; appraises adequacy and efficiency of current data processing systems and assists in developing organizational structure and methods for performing new or expanded functions. The Systems Analyst and the STMIS titles are very similar, as they are both in the occupational group 12, “Information Processing Systems.” However, they do have differing primary responsibilities. The Systems Analyst is primarily responsible with applications design and analysis, while the STMIS performs more general data processing duties.
The STMIS job specification includes such duties as assisting in the design and development of management information systems to provide retrievable current information for decision-making, developing applicable procedures, conducting studies of programs and operations to determine their applicability in the existing or planned information systems, and preparing reports of findings and recommendations, assisting in the planning and implementation of information systems, assisting in the evaluation of the active systems to determine levels and quality of outputs, assisting in the development and maintenance of control devices to ensure that systems output meet established standards, answering inquiries and providing technical assistance, supporting the maintenance of mainframe connections, identifying and resolving network problems, troubleshooting application areas, analyzing and supervising the coding of data in documents, and monitoring and reviewing data inputs to detect errors within the system. To say that the STMIS does not perform analysis is to misunderstand these duties. The STMIS clearly performs analysis in the course of his or her responsibilities. The STMIS organizes and conducts research and operational studies needed for making recommendations for new or expanded use of information systems. The STMIS is responsible for analysis and problem solving that is above and beyond daily operations of the information system.
In the instant matter, it is not clear that the appellant plans and develops complex analytic studies of existing operations and programs, as required of a Systems Analyst. The PCQ indicated that the appellant researched the effectiveness and feasibility of the Personal Emergency Alert System, which required 5% of his time, not 20% as indicated on appeal. In filling out his application for Senior Systems Analyst (see Milos, supra.) the duties presented were more of a helpdesk nature. During the interview, the primary focus was presented as taking information from current IT products and applying it to new products for research and bidding purposes. He researches systems, identifies problems and checks compatibility with other systems. While these duties related to the responsibilities of a Systems Analyst, this falls squarely into the STMIS job definition of assisting in the planning, development, and implementation of information systems.
The appellant also constantly monitors the CCTV (25% of the time), logging its functionality, presenting data on malfunctioning units, recommending corrections, researching upgrades and expansions, and archiving and logging video data. The appellant maintains a vast database in the Velocity access control system (for 20% of the time), contacting the vendor to discuss malfunctions, correcting and upgrading the system, preparing and updating door access groups, and reporting on the system. For 5% of the time, the appellant oversees the functionality of the cellular phone system, maintains devices, and keeps logs. For 10% of the time, the appellant keeps and provides reports on the status of the Record Management System, and recommends changes. Each of these duties is not applications design and analysis, i.e., not complex analytic studies of existing operations and programs to determine the feasibility of conversion to a data processing system. Rather, they fall within the purview of general data processing duties performed by a STMIS, such as reviewing related programs and systems. For 25% of the time, the appellant works with the Office of Information Technology to ensure that the network system is operating efficiently, schedule upgrades of hardware and software, discuss updates to maintain the system, meet with vendors and supply a cost analysis. This is the work of an STMIS. It is not uncommon for an employee to perform some duties which are above or below the level of work which is ordinarily performed. Nonetheless, a holistic view of the duties presented indicates that the STMIS title is the best fit.
A thorough review of the information presented in the record establishes that this position is properly classified as STMIS, and the appellant has not presented a sufficient basis to establish that his position is improperly classified.
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.
About this page
Not an official copy. The decision of record is CSC's monthly archive. The text above was extracted from it and may differ in layout or, rarely, in a character.
Names appear as the Commission published them in its public minutes and decisions, initials where it used initials. This site does not offer a search by a person's name.
The labels are ours. The kind of matter and the outcome are our reading of the minutes; the ACTION text the Commission recorded is quoted verbatim above. A decision applies the rules to its own facts and is not a prediction for any other matter, and nothing here is legal advice.
To report an error on this page, use the contact form.