Sandra Currais Administrative Analyst (M0324C), CSC Docket No. 2022-1637

BackgroundSandra Currais appeals the determination of the Division of Agency Services (Agency Services), which found that she did not meet the experience requirement for the open competitive examination for Administrative Analyst (M0324C), Newark.

The subject examination was open to candidates with a Bachelor’s degree who had one year of experience in analyzing, evaluating, and providing advice to management on such matters as work methods and procedures, communications, budgeting, organizational structure, manpower utilization, distribution of work assignments, delegation of authority, policy development, records management, or similar areas as of the September 21, 2021 closing date. Applicants who did not possess the required education could substitute additional work experience as indicated on a year-for-year basis, with 30 semester hour credits being equal to one year of experience. Additionally, a Master’s degree in Business Administration, Public Administration, Industrial Management, Industrial Engineering, Industrial Psychology, Political Science or Government could have been substituted for the above experience. It is noted that 19 applicants filed for the subject examination, but they were all found ineligible. Consequently, the examination was cancelled on January 12, 2022, due to a lack of qualified applicants.

On her application and resume, the appellant indicated that she served as an Administrative Analyst with Newark from November 2020 to September 2021,1 a

1 Agency records indicate that the appellant was appointed provisionally pending open competitive examination procedures as an Administrative Analyst with the City of Newark effective November 16, 2020.

Coordinator with JN Management Corporation from September 2018 to May 2020, an Office Manager/Sales Assistant with Takasago International Group from August 2015 to August 2018, a Temp Operations Assistant with Adecco Agency from January 2015 to May 2015, an Administrative Assistant with M&M Development LLC from February 2014 to October 2014, a Keyboarding Clerk 1 with the Newark School District from October 2005 to September 2012, and a Clinical Service Representative/Head Cashier II with the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey. Specifically, as an Administrative Analyst, the appellant set forth that she would “investigate, analyze, develop, and prepare projects as requested” and was “mainly in charge of fair and open construction contracts” which included advertising projects, conducting bid opening, and overseeing contract execution.

AnalysisUpon its review, Agency Services found that the appellant met the educational requirement as she possessed a Bachelor’s degree. However, the experience listed on the appellant’s application and resume was not found applicable. In that regard, Agency Services determined that the primary focus of the duties listed by the appellant as an Administrative Analyst was not in analyzing, evaluating and providing advice to management in the level and scope needed. The remaining job positions also did not indicate any experience in analyzing, evaluating, and providing advice to management. Therefore, it was determined that the appellant lacked the one year of required experience.

On appeal, the appellant submits additional information regarding her job duties as an Office Manager/Sales Assistant with Takasago International Group, indicating that on a daily basis she would be “analyzing, evaluating and providing advice to Managers on what assignments were a priority to complete by the end of the day.” She was also in charge of the “System Manual” which “describe[s] to management the methods and procedures.” Moreover, the appellant indicates that she had to “communicate to Japan the system setbacks and would be creating policy development in order to enter different studies and fragrances. Ultimately [she] was responsible for record management and the operations of this One-T system.” Furthermore, the appellant managed sales assistants and accounts. Lastly, the appellant presents that she is serving in the Administrative Analyst title. Thus, she maintains that this position has provided her with the required one year of experience as listed on the examination announcement.

CONCLUSION

RuleN.J.A.C. 4A:4-2.3(b)2 provides that applicants shall meet all requirements specified in the open competitive examination announcement by the closing date.

N.J.A.C. 4A:4-6.3(b) provides that the appellant has the burden of proof in examination appeals.

AnalysisAt the outset, Agency Services correctly deemed the appellant ineligible for the subject examination since she did not indicate on her application or resume that she met the one year of experience in analyzing, evaluating, and providing advice to management on such matters as work methods and procedures, communications, budgeting, organizational structure, manpower utilization, distribution of work assignments, delegation of authority, policy development, records management, or similar areas. It is noted that in order for experience to be acceptable, it must mirror the experience required in the examination announcement. In addition, it must have as its primary focus full-time responsibilities in the areas required in the announcement. See In the Matter of Bashkim Vlashi (MSB, decided June 9, 2004).

Agency Services did not credit the appellant for her provisional experience as an Administrative Analyst because the primary focus of the duties she listed were not the duties of the title. Rather, the primary focus of the appellant’s duties appear to be administrative support with regard to contract proceedings. It is noted that, for eligibility purposes, it is not sufficient to be provisional in the title. The candidate must also be performing the duties of the title. In that regard, the definition of the Job Specification for Administrative Analyst states that an incumbent “[u]nder direction, performs the work involved in analyzing and evaluating administrative procedures, practices, and organizational structure to provide information and recommendations to management on ways to improve administrative functions and managerial control of operational activities; does related work as required.” Nonetheless, even if this experience was deemed applicable, the appellant lacked one year of service prior to the closing date as she was appointed in November 2020 and the examination closing date was September 2021.

Moreover, the appellant’s experience as an Office Manager/Sales Assistant does not rise to the level and scope of the primary focus of responsibilities in the required areas of the subject title. Her duties focused on daily assignments, record management, supervising staff, and overseeing accounts. It is noted applicants for Administrative Analyst titles must have primary experience being involved in the overall operational analysis of a specialized area in the organization with the direct responsibility for the recommendation, planning, or implementation of improvements for the agency as a result of such analysis. See In the Matter of Maria Jacobi (MSB, decided June 8, 2005).

Therefore, an independent review of all material presented indicates that the decision of Agency Services that the appellant did not meet the announced requirements for eligibility by the closing date is amply supported by the record. The appellant provides no basis to disturb this decision. Thus, the appellant has failed to support her burden of proof in this matter.

Finally, since it appears that the appellant is not performing the work of an Administrative Analyst, it is appropriate to refer the matter of the classification of her provisional position to Agency Services for review, and the appointing authority shall affect the proper classification of the position within 30 days of Agency Services’ classification determination.

ORDER

Therefore, it is ordered that this appeal be denied, and the matter of the appellant’s position classification be referred to Agency Services for review.

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