Justin Pollock, CSC Docket No. 2022-871

BackgroundJustin Pollock appeals the determination of the Division of Agency Services (Agency Services) that he did not meet the experience requirements for the promotional examination for Mechanic (PM3221C), Monroe Township.

The subject examination’s closing date was May 21, 2021. The training requirement was successful completion of one year of training in automotive technology at an accredited community college or vocational school. The experience requirement was two years of experience in the maintenance and repair of various types of motor vehicles and/or construction equipment such as bulldozers, tractors, cranes, road graders, power shovels, or similar equipment. Applicants who did not possess the required formal training could have substituted one additional year of experience. A total of two employees applied for the subject examination and both were found ineligible. Therefore, the examination was cancelled due to a lack of qualified candidates.

On the appellant’s application, he did not indicate that he completed training in automotive technology from an accredited school. He did indicate that he was in Vehicle Maintenance from November 2019 to May 21, 2021 closing date. Personnel records indicate that he was provisionally serving in the subject title from August 2020 to the May 21, 2021 closing date, a Mechanic Helper from November 2018 to August 2020, and a Student Assistant from July 2016 to November 2018. Agency Services credited the appellant for having one year and seven months of experience, but determined, per the substitution clause for training, he lacked one year and five months of experience.

Appellant's argumentOn appeal, the appellant presents that he attended Gloucester County Institute of Technology for Automotive Technology and started working as an apprentice for the appointing authority in July 2016 to work over the summer and into his Senior year in high school. Thereafter, the appellant indicates that he continued working for the appointing authority on a part-time basis until he was hired by the appointing authority on a full-time basis in November 2018. Additionally, he describes in detail how he performs the required duties.

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:4-2.1(f) provides that an applicant may amend a previously submitted application only prior to the announced closing date. N.J.A.C. 4A:1-1.2(c) states that the Civil Service Commission (Commission) may relax a rule for good cause in order to effectuate the purposes of Title 11A, New Jersey Statutes.

AnalysisInitially, Agency Services correctly determined that the appellant was not eligible as he did not present his entire work history on his application as he only indicated experience from November 2019 to the May 21, 2021 closing date. However, the appellant describes on appeal on how he has performed the required duties on a full-time basis since November 20181, personnel records indicate that the appellant continues to provisionally serve in the subject title and he has gained the required experience after the closing date. Although N.J.A.C. 4A:4-2.1(f) proscribes the amendment of an application after the closing date set in the announcement, the circumstances present in this matter provide good cause to permit the appellant to amend his application. Specifically, the examination was cancelled due to a lack of qualified candidates. Further, the Commission notes that the dual purpose of the Civil Service system is to ensure efficient public service for State and local governments and to provide appointment and advancement opportunities to Civil Service employees based on their merit and abilities. These interests are best served when more, rather than fewer, individuals are presented with employment opportunities. See Communications Workers of America v. New Jersey Department of Personnel, 154 N.J. 121 (1998). Therefore, the Commission finds good cause under N.J.A.C. 4A:1-1.2(c) to relax the provisions of N.J.A.C. 4A:4-2.6(a) and N.J.A.C. 4A:4- 2.1(f) and accept the appellant’s amended application and experience gained after the closing date, for eligibility purposes only, and admit him to the subject examination.

The Commission cautions the appellant that, in the future, he should ensure that any applications are fully and completely filled out as his failure to do so will be cause for rejection from the selection process. This determination is limited to the instant matter and does not provide precedent in any other matter.

Appellant's argument1 The appellant also indicated that he performed the required duties on a part-time basis since

AnalysisJuly 2016. However, as he did not indicate the number of hours per week he performed the required duties while working part-time, this experience cannot be used to determine his eligibility.

ORDER

Therefore, it is ordered that the appeal be granted, the examination cancellation be rescinded, 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.