Rickie Caudill, CSC Docket No. 2021-504

BackgroundRickie Caudill, Jr. appeals the determination of the Division of Agency Services (Agency Services) that he did not meet the experience requirements for the promotional examination for Supervising Engineer (PM2027B), Vineland.

The subject examination had a closing date of January 21, 2020. The education requirements were a Bachelor’s degree in Civil, Mechanical, Chemical or Electrical Engineering. Further, possession of a valid license as a Professional Engineer issued by the State Board of Professional Engineer’s and Land Surveyors could substitute for the Bachelor’s degree. The experience requirements were four years of related experience in civil, mechanical, chemical or electrical engineering, one year of which shall have been in a supervisory capacity. The appellant was the only applicant and the examination was cancelled due to a lack of qualified candidates.

On the appellant’s application, he indicated that he had a Bachelor’s degree in Civil and Electrical Engineering. He also indicated that he possessed a Professional Engineer license. Additionally, he indicated that he was a Senior Engineer from September 2014 to January 21, 2020 closing date and a Designer II for Paulus, Sokolowski, and Sartor from November 2011 to September 2014. Personnel records indicate that he was provisionally serving in the subject title from October 2019 to the January 21, 2020 closing date, a Senior Engineer from June 2018 to October 2019, and an Assistant Engineer from September 2014 to June 2018. Agency Services credited the appellant with having met the education requirement and having met the general experience requirement, but determined that he lacked one year or supervisory experience.

Appellant's argumentOn appeal, the appellant describes his duties in these various positions in more detail. He states that as a Senior Engineer, beginning in January 2019, he began supervising as his supervisor took a leave of absence. Additionally, the appellant presents that he started provisionally serving in the subject title in October 2019 and explains how he has been performing supervisory duties in this title. The appellant also submits letter from the City Engineer, who has been his supervisor since September 2014 who confirms that the appellant began performing supervisory duties as a Senior Engineer.

CONCLUSION

RuleN.J.A.C. 4A:4-2.6(a) provides that applicants shall meet all requirements specified in the promotional 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 with open-competitive requirements may not use experience gained as a result of out-of-title work to satisfy the requirements for admittance to the examination or for credit in the examination process.

AnalysisUnder N.J.A.C. 4A:4-2.1(g), the Commission can accept clarifying information in eligibility appeals. For example, information submitted on appeal pertaining to duties in a given position that expands or enlarges information previously submitted is considered clarifying and is accepted. However, any documentation indicating work in a setting that was not previously listed on an application or resume cannot be considered after the closing date. Thus, the Commission can only consider information provided on appeal regarding the positions listed on the appellant’s original application. See In the Matter of Diana Begley (MSB, decided November 17, 2004).

Initially, it is noted that Agency Services correctly determined that the appellant was ineligible for the subject examination as he did not list any supervisory experience on his application, and if he had, supervisory duties as a Senior Engineer would be considered out-of-title work. However, on appeal, the appellant clarifies that he began performing supervisory duties as a Senior Engineer starting in January 2019 as his supervisor was on a leave of absence. Further, the City Engineer confirms that the appellant performed supervisory duties for a sufficient time due to business necessity. Moreover, the appellant continues to serve provisionally in the subject title and the eligible list is incomplete as the examination was cancelled due to a lack of qualified candidates. 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 supervisory 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, the cancellation of the examination be rescinded, and Rickie Caudill, Jr.’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.