Aravind Krishna, CSC Docket No. 2022-669

BackgroundAravind Krishna appeals the decision of the Division of Agency Services (Agency Services) which found that he did not meet the experience requirements for the open competitive examination Veterans Services Officer (C0143C), Passaic County.

The subject examination announcement was issued with a closing date of May 21, 2021, and was open to candidates who two years of experience in the gathering of information from clients and providing guidance, assistance or explanations of benefits and services. The appellant was found to be below the minimum requirements in experience. Ten candidates appear on the eligible list, which has been certified once, but no appointments have yet been made.

The appellant listed two positions on his application and resume: Business Analyst with the New York Department of Environmental Conservation from December 2017 to June 2020; and Financial Management with the U.S. Army from October 2013 to December 2015. None of this experience was accepted and the appellant was found to be lacking two years of required experience.

Appellant's argumentOn appeal, the appellant argues that as a Financial Management Technician he provided social and financial services to veterans, including disabled veterans, ensuring that soldiers were getting paid appropriately, helping them fill out paperwork, and checking paperwork for accuracy. As a Business Analyst, the appellant states that he issues contracts to service disabled veteran-owned businesses and minority-owned businesses, and helps the businesses with paperwork to bid for State contract.

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.

AnalysisA review of the appellant’s application indicates that his duties as a Business Analyst with the State of New York included “1) Used business analysis techniques to elicit requirements as foundation for the solution to the organizations business needs. 2) Used business analysis techniques for identifying solutions aimed at improving the efficiency and effectiveness of the system. 3) Described in a comprehensive written document what the system process, or product service must do to satisfy the established business requirement; this includes creating, updating, and maintaining documentation through the system development life cycle. 4) Validated requirements throughout the product/system development life cycle (SDLC) including all changes to the processes that would enable an organization to achieve its goals. 5) Verified requirements throughout the product/system development life cycle (SDLC) to ensure they perform to the required specifications and can achieve the design capabilities; this includes developing test plans/scenarios, logical designs, testing the scenarios, reviewing test results, identifying constraints and risks, and communicating with stakeholders. 6) Involved in help desk duties including troubleshooting, resolving user issues, and providing customer service. 7) Managed project through status meetings, weekly reports, identifying risks, and tracking issues. 8) Assisted contractors and grantees in developing best practices to achieve the goals being set under a resulting contract/grant. Communicated with contractors/grantees throughout the contract process to ensure contract is in compliance with the MWBE and SDVOB goals.” This is clearly not the same as the required experience, which involves working with individuals, not with businesses.

As a Financial Management Technician in the United States Army, the appellant listed his duties as, “Responsible for the efficient and effective financial management for the Army's most important asset—the Soldiers. I was responsible for budgeting, disbursing, and accounting for government funds and treasury checks, maintaining and preparing files and financial reports, reviewing contracts and invoices, and making sure all financial matters are met so the Army keeps running.” The appellant has filed other applications for examinations, including one for Payroll Clerk, and one for Technician Management Information Systems. On those applications, the appellant listed his duties for this position as, “Performed budgeting, disbursing, and accounting for government funds • Processed payment for travel and commercial vendor services; paid support of soldiers and foreign national employees and internal control operations. • Received and posted documents to accounting budget systems. • Processed treasury checks for payment and paid for invoices. • Maintained files and prepared financial reports/travel vouchers. • Reviewed contracts, invoices and received reports. • Performed accounting principles and procedures. • Maintained financial reports and budgets; analyzed financial data. • Computed pay and deductions. • Assisted on all human resource support matters. • Oversaw all strength management and strength distribution actions. • Responsible for the readiness, health and welfare of all soldiers. • Provided postal and personnel accountability support. • Maintained emergency notification data.” Again, the primary focus of this position is not gathering of information from clients and providing guidance, assistance or explanations of benefits and services. Rather, it is in accounting and finance. The appellant lacks two years of required experience.

A thorough review of the record indicates that 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.