Edward Kelly, CSC Docket No. 2020-912
NJ Civil Service Commission decision of November 19, 2019, CSC Docket No. 2020-912: examination eligibility, granted. Edward Kelly appeals the determination of the Division of Agency Services that he did not meet the experience requirements for the promotional examination for Assistant Maintenance S
Commission decisions · Meeting of November 19, 2019
Edward Kelly appeals the determination of the Division of Agency Services that he did not meet the experience requirements for the promotional examination for Assistant Maintenance Superintendent (PC0437A), Burlington County.
- Matter
- Examination eligibility
- Decided
- November 19, 2019, item B-13
- Outcome
- Granted
- Title
- ASSISTANT MAINTENANCE SUPERINTENDENT
- Employer
- Burlington County
- Examination
- PC0437A
- Chair at the time
- Deirdre L. Webster Cobb, Chairperson
- Official decision
- Published by CSC in its monthly archive bundle (B-013 11-19-19.pdf)
Action recorded in the minutes: The Civil Service Commission directed that this appeal be granted.
Rules this decision applies
The decision
BackgroundEdward Kelly appeals the determination of the Division of Agency Services (Agency Services) that he did not meet the experience requirements for the promotional examination for Assistant Maintenance Superintendent (PC0437A), Burlington County.
The experience requirements were four years of experience in work involving a variety of maintenance and repair tasks, three years of which shall have been in a supervisory capacity. The requirements needed to be met by the April 22, 2019 closing date. See N.J.A.C. 4A:4-2.6(a). The appellant was the only employee who applied for the subject examination and the examination was cancelled due to a lack of qualified candidates.
Personnel record indicate that the appellant was provisionally serving in the subject title from January 2019 to the April 22, 2019 closing date, a Maintenance Supervisor, Grounds from November 2015 to January 2019, a Maintenance Worker 2, Grounds from June 2008 to November 2015, a Maintenance Worker 1, Grounds/Maintenance Worker Repairer from March 2006 to June 2008, a Maintenance Repairer from April 2000 to March 2006, and a Building Maintenance Worker from January 1996 to April 2000. Agency Services credited the appellant with having met the general experience requirements and having four months of applicable supervisory experience based on his provisional service in the subject title, but determined that he lacked two years and eight months of the required supervisory experience.
The record demonstrates that the appellant performed applicable out-of-title supervisory duties as a Maintenance Supervisor, Grounds, as the appellant describes in detail how he performed the required supervisory duties in this title and the appointing authority confirms that he was performing the applicable supervisory duties including supervising both grounds and maintenance staff in this title since November 2015 due to business necessity. Moreover, the appellant continues to serve provisionally in the subject title. Accordingly, in this matter, the Civil Service Commission finds good cause under N.J.A.C. 4A:4-2.6(c) to accept the appellant’s out-of-title work experience for eligibility purposes only, and admit him to the examination.
This determination is limited to the instant matter and does not provide precedent in any other matter.
ORDER
Therefore, it is ordered that the appeal be granted, and the cancellation of the examination be rescinded and Edward Kelly’s application be processed for prospective employment opportunities only.
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.