Steeve Augustin, CSC Docket No. 2020-655

BackgroundSteeve Augustin appeals the determination of the Division of Agency Services (Agency Services) which found that he did not meet the experience requirements for the open-competitive examination for Administrative Secretary (M0165A), Hillside Township.

The subject examination announcement was open to residents of Hillside Township, Union County, and contiguous counties, who met the specific requirements as of the February 21, 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. Eighteen applicants took an examination, and the results are not yet available.

On his application, the appellant indicated that he possessed a Juris Doctorate degree, and he listed four positions: provisional Administrative Secretary, Managing Assistant Director with Kean University, Counsel to the City Council President with Newark, and Assistant County Counsel with Essex County. He was credited with one year, two months of experience as an Administrative Secretary and was found to be lacking three years, ten months of applicable experience.

Appellant's argumentOn appeal, the appellant provides duties for his current and prior positions. As an Assistant County Counsel with Essex County, on his application the appellant listed his duties as, “Acted as labor counsel, negotiated labor contracts, represented county in OAL, handled mental health hearings, solid waste hearings.” On appeal, the appellant provides new duties, stating that he drafted memos, prepared reports, responded to inquiries, scheduled appointments and meetings, prepared agenda items and maintained records and files. As a Counsel to the City Council President, the appellant initially indicated that he, “Draft[ed] and review resolutions, review budget, draft ordinances.” On appeal, he states that he performed the same duties as the new ones listed above for Assistant County Counsel while working for the Council President in the City of Newark, as well as assisting in budget preparation, staff meetings, council meetings, and working closely with all departments within the city. The appellant reiterates his duties for his provisional position, which include responding to a constituent and employee concerns and complaints, maintaining the mayor’s calendar and scheduling, answering phones and responding to requests, working on economic development initiatives, assisting the Business Administrator with projects, assisting the Mayor with seeking more effective and efficient ways to operate, and acting as direct contact between the Mayor and the Department Directors.

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.

AnalysisIn order for 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). The appellant was credited with one year two months of experience for Administrative Secretary. However, he described his duties in that position as:

Scheduling on behalf of admin., draft policy, review policies, special projects, negotiate with vendors, problem solve, draft memorandum, coordinate events, responds to inquiries, general office duties.

Based on this description, it is unclear if the appellant is performing duties of an Administrative Secretary. An incumbent in that title 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 do not appear to primarily be clerical in nature. Rather, the description of his duties suggests that he assists the Mayor in such things as the development of policies and procedures in the operation of the municipal government. In other words, the limited description of his duties that the appellant provided on his original application and in his appeal submissions suggests that he does not primarily perform the clerical duties associated with the Administrative Secretary classification. Given the variance between the described duties and his provisional title, Agency Services should perform a classification review of this position.

The appellant’s remaining positions are inapplicable, as these positions were in law and legal counseling, or as a Managing Assistant Director, drafting specifications for Requests for Proposals in the Purchasing Department.

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 his 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.