Julie Pietropinto, CSC Docket No. 2022-626

BackgroundJulie Pietropinto appeals the determination of the Division of Agency Services (Agency Services) that she did not meet the experience requirements for the promotional examination for Administrative Secretary (PC4203C), Morris County.

The subject examination’s closing date was July 21, 2021. The experience requirements were five years of experience in the capacity of a secretary to an executive or administrative official in a public or private organization. Successful completion of a two-year program in secretarial science at an accredited university could have been substituted for two years of experience. The appellant was the only applicant and the examination was cancelled due to a lack of qualified candidates.

On the appellant’s application, she indicates that she was provisionally serving in the subject title from January 2021 to the July 21, 2021 closing date, a Clerk 4 from January 2016 to January 2021, a Clerk 2 from July 2011 to January 2016, a Clerk 1 from October 2007 to July 2011, and a Loan Processing Agent for Champion Mortgage from August 2003 to February 2007. Personnel records indicates that she was provisionally serving in the subject title from October 2020 to the July 21, 2021, closing date, an Administrative Clerk 4 from January 2018 to October 2020, a Clerk 4 from January 2016 to January 2018, a Clerk 2 from July 2011 to January 2016, and a Clerk 1 from October 2007 to July 2011. Agency Services credited the appellant with 10 months of experience based on her provisional service in the subject title, but determined that she lacked four years and two months of experience.

Appellant's argumentOn appeal, the appellant presents that in addition to performing the required duties while serving provisionally in the subject title, from January 2016 through September 2020, she directly reported to the Director of Finance and Chief Financial Officer, where she performed secretarial duties among other duties. Therefore, she asserts that she possesses more than five years of experience performing the required duties. The appellant also highlights her Associate’s degree in Business Administration.

CONCLUSION

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

N.J.A.C. 4A:4-2.6(c) provides that, except when permitted by the Chairperson or designee for good cause, applicants for promotional examinations with open competitive requirements may not use experience gained as a result of out-of-title work to satisfy the requirements for admittance to the examination or for credit in the examination process. Good cause may include, but not be limited to, the following:

1. Where the number of employees eligible for examination will result in an incomplete list, or where the number of applications does not exceed the number of provisional incumbents by more than one, the applicant may submit a detailed statement from his or her supervisor describing the out-of-title duties performed and the reason why it was necessary to perform such duties. A statement shall also be submitted from the appointing authority verifying the supervisor’s statement and indicating interest in making an appointment from the resultant eligible list.

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

AnalysisIn this matter, a review of the appellant’s application and appeal indicates that Agency Services correctly determined that the appellant was not eligible for the subject examination. Secretarial work involves working for an executive, including scheduling appointments, giving information to callers, reading and routing incoming mail, locating files, typing, filing, greeting visitors and conducting them to the executive or appropriate person, arranging travel schedules, placing outgoing calls, recording minutes of staff meetings, making copies of printed matter, and preparing outgoing mail. See In the Matter of Rosemarie Baylies (MSB, decided April 6, 2005). A review of the job specifications for clerical titles indicates that incumbents are not performing secretarial duties. Therefore, if the appellant was performing the required duties while serving in clerical titles, her duties would be out-of-title. In this regard, and per the rule above, this agency initially reached out to the appointing authority via email on November 9, 2021, and had followed-up with emails on January 4, 2022, January 27, 2022, March 3, 2022, March 8, 2022, and April 20, 20221 to confirm the appellant’s out-of-title work, but it did not receive the requested confirmation. Therefore, there is no good cause to accept the appellant’s clerical experience for the subject examination and her appeal is properly denied.

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.