Robert McCauley, CSC Docket No. 2021-1452

BackgroundThe appeal of Robert McCauley, Senior Correctional Police Officer, Southern State Correctional Facility, Department of Corrections, removal, effective March 26, 2021, on charges, heard by Administrative Law Judge Kathleen M. Calemmo (ALJ), who rendered her initial decision on October 23, 2023. No exceptions were filed.

AnalysisHaving considered the record and the ALJ’s initial decision, and having made an independent evaluation of the record, the Civil Service Commission (Commission), at its meeting on November 22, 2023, adopted the ALJ’s Findings of Facts and Conclusions and her recommendation to uphold the removal.

The Commission makes the following comments. The Commission’s review of the penalty is de novo. In determining the propriety of the penalty, several factors must be considered, including the nature of the appellant’s offense, the concept of progressive discipline, and the employee’s prior record. George v. North Princeton Developmental Center, 96 N.J.A.R. 2d (CSV) 463. However, it is well established that where the underlying conduct is of an egregious nature, the imposition of a penalty up to and including removal is appropriate, regardless of an individual’s disciplinary history. See Henry v. Rahway State Prison, 81 N.J. 571 (1980). It is settled that the theory of progressive discipline is not a “fixed and immutable rule to be followed without question.” Rather, it is recognized that some disciplinary infractions are so serious that removal is appropriate notwithstanding a largely unblemished prior record. See Carter v. Bordentown, 191 N.eJ. 474 (2007).

Administrative Law JudgeIn her initial decision, the ALJ found the appellant’s infraction egregious, and, while noting that the appellant did have a prior disciplinary history, upheld his removal without regard to progressive discipline. The Commission agrees that the nature of the misconduct in this matter is sufficiently egregious to support the penalty of removal. Suffice it to say, the appellant’s testing positive for amphetamines and methamphetamines falls well short of what is expected of a law enforcement employee and the penalty imposed is neither disproportionate to the offense nor shocking to the conscious.

ORDER

The Civil Service Commission finds that the action of the appointing authority in removing the appellant was justified. The Commission therefore upholds that action and dismisses the appeals of Robert McCauley.

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