Linda Belardo, CSC Docket No. 2021-117

BackgroundLinda Belardo appeals the determination of the Division of Agency Services (Agency Services) which found that she did not meet the minimum requirements in experience for the promotional examination for Chief of Administrative Services (PM1575A), Hamilton.

The subject examination had a closing date of November 21, 2019 and was open to employees in the competitive division who had an aggregate of one year of continuous permanent service as of the closing date in the title Assistant Chief of Administrative Services OR to employees in the competitive division who had an aggregate of one year of continuous permanent service as of the closing date in any competitive title and who met the announced experience requirements. These requirements included graduation from an accredited college or university with a Bachelor’s degree, and three years of experience in either: analyzing, evaluating, and providing advice to management on such matters as work methods and procedures, communications, management information systems, organizational structure, human resource utilization, distribution of work assignments, delegation of authority, policy development, budget preparation, records management, or similar areas with the objective of improving managerial effectiveness, OR managing, administering, or directing an organizational unit and its work program which entailed responsibility for planning, organizing, directing, staffing, coordinating, and budgeting for the activities of the unit. Applicants who did not possess the required education could substitute additional experience as indicated below on a year-for-year basis with thirty semester hour credits being equal to one year of experience.

Possession of a Master’s degree from an accredited college or university with a major course of study in business administration, public administration, industrial management, industrial engineering, management science, or in a program related to the organization, operation, administration, and control of private or public organizations could be substituted for one year of the above experience. The appellant was found to be below the minimum requirements in experience per the substitution clause for education. One candidate was admitted, the eligible list has been certified, and no appointments have yet been made.

Appellant's argumentThe appellant indicated on her application that she possessed 24 college credits. Thus, per the substitution clause, she was required to possess six years, three months of qualifying experience. She listed the following positions on her application: provisional Chief of Administrative Services from June 2013 to the November 2019 closing date, Supervising Account Clerk, Principal Account Clerk, Senior Account Clerk, Senior Clerk Typist, Clerk Typist, and Clerk. Official records indicate that the appellant received a provisional appointment to the subject title on January 2019, was a Supervising Account Clerk from June 2014 to January 2019, and was a provisional in the subject title before that, from June 2013 to June 2014. The appellant was credited with one year, eleven months of experience in her provisional positions. She was found to have four years, six months of out-of-title experience for the intervening position as a Supervising Account Clerk. The appointing authority was contacted and did not respond. As her remaining experience was inapplicable, the appellant was found to be lacking four years, four months of experience.

On appeal, the appellant argues that her experience as a Supervising Account Clerk, the title to which she was originally appointed on August 23, 2010, should be acceptable since this was a supervisory position over support staff and she had responsibility for administrative tasks. In support, the Director of Public Works maintains that the appellant has performed out-of-title work since June 2013, and the Human Resource Officer concurs.

CONCLUSION

RuleN.J.A.C. 4A:4-2.6(a) provides that applicants shall meet all requirements specified in the promotional examination announcement by the closing date. N.J.A.C. 4A:4-2.6(c) provides that except when permitted for good cause, applicants for promotional examinations may not use experience gained as a result of out-of-title work to satisfy eligibility requirements. N.J.A.C. 4A:1-1.2(c) states that the Commission may relax a rule for good cause in particular situations, on notice to affected parties, in order to effectuate the purposes of Title 11A, New Jersey Statutes.

AnalysisInitially, the appellant was correctly deemed to be ineligible for the subject examination since she lacked the minimum requirements in experience per the substitution clause for education. Nonetheless, the appointing authority has indicated that the appellant performed out-of-title duties while in the title Supervising Account Clerk from June 2014 to January 2019. With the acceptance of this out-of-title work, the appellant possesses at least the required four years, four months of additional experience required. As there was only one admitted applicant, and based on the documentation submitted and under these circumstances, good cause exists to accept the appellant’s out-of-title work experience to satisfy the requirements for the Chief of Administrative Services examination.

ORDER

Therefore, it is ordered that this appeal be granted, and the appellant’s application be processed.

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