Bernard Korbel, CSC Docket No. 2022-2780

BackgroundBernard Korbel appeals the decision of the Division of Agency Services (Agency Services) that he did not meet the experience requirements for the promotional examination for Crew Supervisor Building Maintenance Programs (PS6949J), Rowan University.

The subject promotional examination announcement was issued with a closing date of November 22, 2021 and was open to employees in the competitive division who had an aggregate of one year of continuous permanent service as of the closing date in any competitive title and met the announced requirement of three years of experience in work involving the inspection, repair and maintenance of household, office and buildings, including their equipment, appliances, machinery, and furnishings. The appellant was found to be below the minimum requirements in experience. One candidate appears on the eligible list, which has been certified once, but no appointments have yet been made.

The appellant listed experience in the following positions on his application: provisional Crew Supervisor Building Maintenance Programs, and Mechanical Equipment Specialist. His one year of experience in the first position was accepted, and he was found to be lacking two years of qualifying experience.

Appellant's argumentOn appeal, the appellant states that, from April 2015 to December 2020, as a Mechanical Equipment Specialist at Rowan University he was repairing, maintaining and inspecting all heating, ventilation, air conditioning and refrigeration equipment, machinery, appliances on campus. He also repaired and maintained steam and chilled water distribution piping and appliances that serve all of the buildings on campus. He states that, from 2003 to 2015, prior to working at Rowan University, he maintained, repaired, installed and inspected many residential/commercial heating, ventilation, air conditioning and refrigeration equipment, appliances with Messick Fuel Supply, Inc. He provides various certifications.

CONCLUSION

RuleN.J.A.C. 4A:4-2.6(a)2 states that applicants for promotional examinations must meet all requirements by the announced closing date.

AnalysisThe appellant was denied admittance to the subject examination since he lacked at least two years of experience in work involving the inspection, repair and maintenance of household, office and buildings, including their equipment, appliances, machinery, and furnishings. 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). Additionally, an experience requirement that lists a number of duties which define the primary experience, requires that the applicants demonstrate that they primarily performed all of those duties for the required length of time. Performance of only one or some of the duties listed is not indicative of comprehensive experience. See In the Matter of Jeffrey Davis (MSB, decided March 14, 2007).

In this case, the appellant was credited with experience in his provisional position. However, the one other position on his application, Mechanical Equipment Specialist, had the repair and maintenance of mechanical equipment and HVAC systems as the primary focus. The appellant provides another position in his appeal, but does not include the title of the position, hours worked per week, nor the months of service of the position. Nonetheless, this position appears to have repair of HVAC systems as the primary focus.

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 his burden of proof in this matter.

ORDER

Therefore, it is ordered that this appeal be denied.

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