Jose Cardona, CSC Docket No. 2022-231

Appellant's argumentJose Cardona, Jr., requests reconsideration of In the Matter of Jose Cardona, Jr., et al. (CSC, decided June 30, 2021) where the Civil Service Commission (Commission) denied his appeal of the determination of the Division of Agency Services (Agency Services) that he did not meet the experience requirements for the open competitive examination for Field Representative Housing, Housing Assistance Program (S0046C), Statewide.

BackgroundThe subject examination’s closing date was February 22, 2021. The education requirement was a Bachelor’s degree. The experience requirements were one year of experience in a housing assistance program or other housing related program which includes client intake review requiring participant eligibility determinations and/or field duties requiring facility eligibility determinations. Applicants who did not possess the required education could substitute additional experience as indicated on a year-for-year basis, with 30 semester hour credits being equal to one year of experience. A total of 101 candidates applied and 25 were admitted. The test was administered on June 30, 2021, and 20 candidates were determined eligible. A number of certifications were issued for various locations throughout the State and none of the certifications’ dispositions have been recorded. The list expires on August 4, 2024.

On his application, Cardona indicated that he had 60 college credits. He also indicated that he works for the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) and was a

Customer Service In-Bound 2 Representative from October 2020 to the February 22, 2021 closing date, a Storekeeper 2 from June 2019 to October 2020, a Principal Library Assistant from October 2011 to June 2019, a Youth Mentor for Family Transition Support Services from September 2001 to January 2018, a Family Support Specialist for Advance Opportunity from April 2015 to September 2018, a Principal Industrial Assistant for Talking Book and Braille from July 2001 to October 2011, a Shipping and Receiving Specialist for Airtex, Inc., from February 1999 to July 2001, a Purchasing Clerk for Certified Steel Company from September 1997 to January 1999, an Assistant Warehouse Manager for Market Source from March 1995 to September 1997, and a Front End Manager/Bookkeeper for Pathmark from August 1995 to September 1996.1 Agency Services credited Cardona with two years of experience based on his 60 college credits and five months of experience based on his service as a Customer Service In-Bound 2 Representative for a total of two years and five months of experience, but determined that he lacked two years and seven months of experience. In Cardona, supra, the Commission agreed with Agency Services’ determination that Cardona only possessed two years and five months of the required experience.

Appellant's argumentIn his request for reconsideration, Cardona states that he has over 20 years of experience analyzing applications for the disabled and low-income individuals. Additionally, he presents that he inspected their dwellings and ensured that their homes/facilities complied with program rules and regulations. Cardona indicates that he has been working for DCA since October 2020. He states that he works closely with management to learn the different functions of DCA’s Division of Housing and Community Resources, Application Service Unit. Although he acknowledges that he has worked less than one year with DCA, he represents that he provided housing and other community services while employed at Family Transition Support Services and Advance Opportunities. He describes his experience as a Youth Case Manager and Family Support Specialist, where for over 20 years, he conducted application intakes of youths and their families, provided them with information and connected them with other resources. He states that he visited client’s homes/facilities and assessed their living conditions and determined if they were eligible for the program. He indicates that his primary responsibilities in both these roles were to make sure clients’ homes were up to standards in accordance with State regulation to ensure that clients were not living in hazardous or unhealthy housing. Cardona argues that his prior experience prepared him for a position in the subject title where he assists low-income individuals with receiving affordable, safe, and clean housing. He submits his resume and attaches the job specification for the subject title where he

Background1 Personnel records do not indicate that the appellant is currently employed by DCA as a Customer

Service In-Bound 2 Representative as indicated on his application, and, therefore, it is presumed that this employment is through a third-party. Further, personnel records indicate that he was a Storekeeper 2 from June 2019 to the February 22, 2021 closing date. The records also indicate that he was a Principal Industrial Assistant from June 2003 to June 2019 and a Senior Industrial Assistant from July 2001 to June 2003. Further, personnel records indicate that the appellant was removed from his Storekeeper 2 position after the closing date on May 10, 2021.

asserts that he has experience in over 80 percent of the examples of work and knowledge and abilities described in the specification.

CONCLUSION

RuleN.J.A.C. 4A:2-1.6(b) provides that a request for reconsideration must show the following:

1. The new evidence or additional information not presented at the original proceeding, which would change the outcome and the reasons that such evidence was not presented at the original proceeding; or

Analysis2. That a clear material error has occurred.

RuleN.J.A.C. 4A:2-1.4(c) provides that the appellant has the burden of proof.

AnalysisIn this matter, Cardona failed to meet the standard for reconsideration as he has not presented new evidence or additional information that was unavailable at the time of the original proceeding. Further, he has not demonstrated that a clear material error has occurred. Specifically, per the prior decision, he lacked two years and seven months of experience in a housing assistance program or other housing related program. While Cardona states in his request that his primary responsibilities as a Youth Case Manager for Family Transition Support Services and as a Family Support Specialist for Advance Opportunity were to ensure that clients’ homes were up to standards according to State regulation so that his clients were not living in hazardous or unhealthy housing, as indicated in the prior decision, a review of his application, resume and appeal does not indicate that these were housing programs where his primary responsibility was to determine eligibility for a housing program. Instead, he worked with youths, families, and disabled individuals regarding a whole range of issues. Therefore, Agency Services correctly determined that he lacked two years and seven months of experience. In order for experience to be considered applicable, 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). Accordingly, his request for reconsideration is denied.

ORDER

Therefore, it is ordered that reconsideration be denied.

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