Bermari Roig, CSC Docket No. 2022-2369
NJ Civil Service Commission decision of May 18, 2022, CSC Docket No. 2022-2369: examination eligibility, granted. Bermari Roig appeals the determination of the Division of Agency Services which found that she did not meet the minimum requirements in experience for the open-competitive examination fo
Commission decisions · Meeting of May 18, 2022
Bermari Roig appeals the determination of the Division of Agency Services which found that she did not meet the minimum requirements in experience for the open-competitive examination for Program Specialist 2 (C0652C), Bergen County.
- Matter
- Examination eligibility
- Decided
- May 18, 2022, item B-28
- Outcome
- Granted
- Title
- PROGRAM SPECIALIST 2
- Employer
- Bergen County
- Examination
- C0652C
- Chair at the time
- Deirdre L. Webster Cobb, Chairperson
- Official decision
- Published by CSC in its monthly archive bundle (B-028 5-18-22 EG.pdf)
Action recorded in the minutes: The Civil Service Commission directed that this appeal be granted.
Rules this decision applies
The decision
BackgroundBermari Roig appeals the determination of the Division of Agency Services (Agency Services) which found that she did not meet the minimum requirements in experience for the open-competitive examination for Program Specialist 2 (C0652C), Bergen County.
The subject examination had a closing date of November 22, 2021 and was open to candidates who, in pertinent part, possessed a Bachelor’s degree from an accredited college or university and two years of experience in planning, monitoring, coordinating, implementing, modifying and/or evaluating agency programs and services. Three candidates appear on the eligible list, which has been certified once, but no appointments have yet been made.
On her application, the appellant indicated that she possessed a Bachelor’s degree, which satisfies the educational requirement, and she listed eight positions on her application and resume: “Home Improvement Program,” or Client Service Representative, from September 2017 to November 2021; Constituent Service Director; Chief of Staff; Legislative Director; Office Manager/Legislative Aide; Legislative Aide; Paralegal; and Executive Director. Except for the first position, the appellant did not provide the number of hours worked per week, and as such, the remaining positions could not be quantified. Official records indicate that the appellant was hired as a provisional Client Service Representative on September 11, 2017, and the next day was promoted to provisional Program Development Specialist, Community Services. She served in that title until April 6, 2021, when she was promoted to provisional Program Specialist 2. Agency Services found that none of the appellant’s experience was acceptable and she was found to be lacking two years of required experience.
Appellant's argumentOn appeal, the appellant states that she should be eligible as she has applicable experience since 2017, and she provides duties that she has performed since that time.
CONCLUSION
RuleN.J.A.C. 4A:4-2.3(b) provides that applicants shall meet all requirements specified in the open competitive examination announcement by the closing date. N.J.A.C. 4A:4-2.1(g) indicates that the Civil Service Commission can accept clarifying information in eligibility appeals.
AnalysisA review of the appellant’s application reveals that Agency Service’s initial rejection of the appellant to the subject examination was correct. In this regard, the duties that the appellant listed on her application were:
Communicate with public regarding the program. Calculate qualification of applicants for both Home Improvement Program and
American Dream Program. On site review of HOME projects calculations. Maintain all database and files for the Home
Improvement Program. Responsible for both phone lines and both email address dedicated to the program.
This description does not specify how the primary focus of the position was planning, monitoring, coordinating, implementing, modifying and/or evaluating agency programs and services. Nonetheless, on appeal, the appellant clarifies that the position was involved in implementing and monitoring the program Home Improvement Program, and identifying program needs and making changes as needed. For any future positions in which she might be interested, the appellant is cautioned that she should complete her application and provide all requested information. Given this clarification, which establishes the applicability of her experience, it is appropriate to accept that experience, for eligibility purposes only, and admit the appellant to the examination.
ORDER
Therefore, it is ordered that this appeal be granted, 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.
About this page
Not an official copy. The decision of record is CSC's monthly archive. The text above was extracted from it and may differ in layout or, rarely, in a character.
Names appear as the Commission published them in its public minutes and decisions, initials where it used initials. This site does not offer a search by a person's name.
The labels are ours. The kind of matter and the outcome are our reading of the minutes; the ACTION text the Commission recorded is quoted verbatim above. A decision applies the rules to its own facts and is not a prediction for any other matter, and nothing here is legal advice.
To report an error on this page, use the contact form.