Mark Taylor, CSC Docket No. 2021-566

BackgroundMark Taylor appeals the determination of the Division of Agency Services (Agency Services) that he did not meet the experience requirements for the promotional examination for Paralegal Technician (PS1613Y), Office of Administrative Law.

The education requirements were an Associate’s degree in Paralegal Studies, or any Associate’s degree and a Certificate of Proficiency in Paralegal Studies. A Juris Doctorate degree could be substituted for the above education. The experience requirements were two years of experience as a paralegal in a law firm, legal tribunal, or legal department in a public or private entity whose primary function is the research, enactment, enforcement, or litigation of legal matters as of the January 21, 2020 closing date. The appellant was the only employee who applied, and the examination was canceled due to a lack of qualified applicants.

On his application, the appellant indicated that he possessed a Bachelor’s degree and a certificate in Paralegal Studies. He also indicated that he was a Paralegal Technician Assistant from August 1995 to October 2019. Personnel records indicate that he was provisionally serving in the subject title from October 2019 to the January 21, 2020 closing date. Agency Services credited him for having met the education requirements but determined that he lacked two years of experience.

Appellant's argumentOn appeal, the appellant asserts that he has over 25 years of experience based on his current position with the appointing authority and clarifies how he performs the required duties.

CONCLUSION

RuleN.J.A.C. 4A:4-2.1(g) provides that the Civil Service Commission (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.

AnalysisIn this matter, initially Agency Services correctly determined that the appellant was not eligible for the subject examination as he did not clearly articulate how he performed the required duties. However, on appeal the appellant explained how he has been performing the required duties for the past 25 years. The Commission has reviewed the clarification and finds that the bulk of the appellant’s experience is applicable. Therefore, the Commission finds that the appellant has sufficiently clarified that he has been performing the required duties for more than the required time by the closing date. See In the Matter of Diana Begley (MSB, decided November 17, 2004).

ORDER

Therefore, it is ordered that the appeal be granted, the cancellation of the examination announcement be rescinded, and the appellant’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.