Yesenia Carpio, CSC Docket No. 2022-472

BackgroundYesenia Carpio appeals the determination of the Division of Agency Services (Agency Services) which found that she did not meet the experience requirements for the promotional examination for Management Assistant (PM2136B), Jersey City.

The subject examination announcement was issued with a closing date of February 21, 2020. The examination 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 title and who met the announced requirements. These requirements included graduation from an accredited college or university with a Bachelor’s degree, and one year of experience performing complex administrative support work which must have included the interpretation, verification and/or application of department/agency rules, regulations, policies and procedures. Applicants who did not meet the education requirement could substitute experience on a year-for-year basis, with 30 semester hour credits equal to one year of experience. It is noted that one candidate appeared on the eligible list, which has been certified once, but no appointments have yet been made.

Appellant's argumentThe appellant indicated on her application that she possessed a Bachelor’s degree and she listed one position, Clerk 3 from January 2009 to the closing date, February 2020. She also provided a resume with an additional position, Senior Clerk with James F. Murray School from December 2005 to January 2009 (no hours given). Agency records indicate that the appellant was a Clerk 2 with Jersey City from December 2004 to January 2009. As none of this experience matched the announced experience requirement, the appellant was found to be lacking one year of experience.

On appeal, the appellant states that she meets the experience requirements. The appellant explains that previous employees with similar experience requirements have been in the Management Assistant title.

CONCLUSION

RuleN.J.A.C. 4A:4-2.6(a) provides that applicants shall meet all requirements specified in the promotional examination announcement by the closing date.

AnalysisFirst, titles are categorized as professional, para-professional or non- professional. N.J.A.C. 4A:4-2.5(a)1 states that professional titles require at least a Bachelor’s or higher-level degree, with or without a clause to substitute experience. Thus, since the Management Assistant title requires completion of a Bachelor’s degree with a substitution clause, which permits additional experience in lieu of the college credits, as well as relevant experience, it is considered a professional title, and the announced experience requirement involves professional experience. The Management Assistant title requires a Bachelor’s degree, and is not a “super- clerical” or paraprofessional title. The focus of the duties of a Management Assistant is to assist in the coordination of management or administrative activities of an assigned unit or work area. The incumbents act as an assistant to Managers, not in a supportive or secretarial function, but rather, to relieve the Managers of detail-oriented and time-consuming professional tasks. As such, the related experience requirement is professional experience. Thus, experience in clerical titles are not acceptable.

As to the appellant’s Clerk 3 position, on her application, the appellant listed her duties as including those involving purchasing, and she also copied the Examples of Work from the job specification for the subject title. She then added a few other duties at the end, most of which are clerical. On her resume, the appellant provided a second set of duties that did not closely match the first set. The duties listed on the resume were clerical in nature, involving payroll, purchasing, ordering supplies and equipment, journal entries, personnel actions, assisting with field trip documents, and attendance. For her Senior Clerk duties on her resume, the appellant listed payroll, ordering supplies and equipment, and journal entries. It is noted that on her application, instead of listing her actual duties for her Clerk 3 position, the appellant listed the Examples of Work taken verbatim from the job specification for the subject title, and included the Definition of that title among her duties. Simply quoting the duties contained in the job specification on an application is not a sufficient basis on which to determine if a candidate’s specific duties would meet the requirements for an examination. Candidates must demonstrate that the duties they perform qualify them for admission to the examination. See In the Matter of Maxsine Allen and Vivian Stevenson (MSB, decided March 10, 2004). Duties that appear to mimic the required duties listed on the job specification rather than describe actual responsibilities while serving in a particular position, in the absence of any corroborating information, is not acceptable. Of the duties listed in her own words, the majority were clerical in nature, which is in title work for her title. The appellant was not performing professional-level duties involving complex administrative support work. None of the appellant’s experience is acceptable, and she lacks one year of qualifying experience.

The classification of positions of previous employees has no bearing on this determination. Eligibility is established based on information on the application. See In the Matter of Charles Klingberg (Merit System Board, decided March 28, 2001).

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.