Lynn Martin, CSC Docket No. 2023-291

BackgroundLynn Martin appeals the decision of the Division of Agency Services (Agency Services) which found that she did not meet the experience requirements for the promotional examination for Accounting Procedures Analyst (PC4058D), Camden County.

The subject examination announcement was issued with a closing date of May 23, 2022. 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 competitive title, and who met the announced requirements. These requirements included, in pertinent part, graduation from an accredited college or university with a Bachelor’s degree including or supplemented by 21 semester hour credits in accounting courses, and two years of accounting or auditing experience. The appellant was determined to be ineligible for below minimum requirements in experience. As the appellant was the sole applicant, the examination was cancelled on August 18, 2022.

On her application, the appellant indicated possession of a Bachelor’s degree in Accounting. She listed three positions on her application: provisional Accounting Procedures Analyst, Principal Account Clerk, and Clerk 2. She did not provide a resume with her application. As none of this experience was accepted, she was found to be lacking two years of applicable experience.

Appellant's argumentOn appeal, the appellant states that she has been working in the Accounting and Auditing Division for several years. She states that she has assessed and implemented efficiency for the Division, composed and updated accounting procedures, and reviewed and maintained fiscal records. In support, a Senior Personnel Technician with Human Resources states that as a Principal Account Clerk the appellant conducted numerous procedures and wrote various accounting and revenue collections for the Finance Department, streamlining efficiency in these areas. She states that the appellant is the only person qualified for the job, meets the educational requirements, and has more than two years of experience.

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. N.J.A.C. 4A:4-2.6(c) provides that except when permitted for good cause, applicants for promotional examinations may not use experience gained as a result of out-of- title work to satisfy eligibility requirements.

AnalysisAt the outset, it is noted that 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 Accounting Procedures Analyst 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.

The appellant’s prior-held titles do not require a Bachelor’s degree and therefore are not professional titles. The titles Principal Account Clerk and Clerk 2 are considered non-professional titles since they do not require completion of any college credits. In addition to the requirement of a Bachelor’s degree, professional work is basically interpretive, evaluative, analytical and/or creative requiring knowledge or expertise in a specialized field of knowledge. This is generally acquired by a course of intellectual or technical instruction, study and/or research. See In the Matter of Lewis Gordon (Commissioner of Personnel, decided September 27, 1997). Experience acquired in non-professional titles does not technically satisfy the requirements for eligibility in higher level category titles. See In the Matter of Irma Camilo (MSB, decided February 9, 2005).

When an applicant indicates extensive experience in titles established under the State Classification Plan, it is appropriate to utilize the job specifications to determine the primary focus of the duties of incumbents serving in career service titles. In the eligibility screening process, reliance on the job specifications to determine the primary focus of duties for incumbents of a particular title or title series provides a standardized basis on which Agency Services can compare what an applicant indicates on his or her application to what incumbents in a particular title series generally perform. In order to maintain the integrity of the State

Classification Plan, Agency Services cannot simply accept carte blanche how an applicant describes his or her experience when such a barometer exists. In this regard, it is noted that N.J.A.C. 4A:3-3.4 contemplates that employees are appointed to a title appropriate to the duties to be performed in the title and will not be assigned duties other than those properly pertaining to the assigned title which the employee holds. See In the Matter of William Moore (MSB, decided May 10, 2006).

On her application, for the duties of her provisional position the appellant copied the Examples of Work from the job specification for the title. Then, she added additional duties of performing accounting work involved in the installation, operation and auditing of accounts; preparing complex accounting and statistical tabulations; preparing and submitting all financial reports due to other agencies; maintaining all essential accounting records and files; and analyzing payroll records, disbursements and revenues in preparation of monthly reports. 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). Additionally, the duties that were in her own words are not those of an Accounting Procedures Analyst. On appeal, the appellant selects for review a few duties that match the announced requirements, assessing and implementing efficiency for the Division, and composing and updating accounting procedures. She also states that she reviews and maintains fiscal records. This information is insufficient to determine if the announced experience requirement is the primary focus of the position, or if the two duties provided on appeal are ancillary duties to the review and maintenance of fiscal records.

In any event, the appellant had been in her provisional position for six months as of the May 2022 closing date and even if this experience had been accepted, she would still fall one year, six months short as of the closing date. Human Resources indicates that the appellant was working out-of-title while in her Principal Account Clerk title. Even if she was, the description of the duties of her current position are insufficient to determine that the position is properly classified.

As there were no duties in her own words on her application that would verify the primary focus of the position, if the appointing authority wants the appellant to remain in her current position, the appellant should provide a duties questionnaire (enclosed) to Agency Services detailing the duties of the position, along with a completed examination application within 30 days of the issuance of this decision, so that an appropriate provisional title can be assigned, and a pre- qualification determination can be made. Should the appellant be found not eligible for the new provisional appointment, she should be returned to her underlying permanent title at that time.

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 her burden of proof in this matter.

ORDER

Therefore, it is ordered that this appeal be denied, and the matter of the classification of the appellant’s provisional position be referred to the Division of Agency Services for review.

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