Casey Adams, CSC Docket No. 2023-796

BackgroundCasey Adams, represented by John Warren, CWA Local 1033, appeals the decision of the Division of Agency Services (Agency Services) that the proper classification of his position with Department of the Treasury (Treasury) is Printing Machine Operator 2. The appellant seeks a classification of Printing Operations Technician 2.

By way of background, the appellant filed a request for a position classification review of his permanent title as Printing Machine Operator 1. The appellant is assigned to the Digital Printers/Copy Unit, Print Shop, Division of Administration, Treasury, reports to a Printing Operations Technician 4, and has no supervisory responsibilities. The appellant sought a reclassification of his position, alleging that his duties are more closely aligned with the duties of a Printing Operations Technician 2. Agency Services reviewed all documentation supplied by the appellant including his Position Classification Questionnaire (PCQ), Performance Assessment Review (PAR) and organizational chart. Based on its review of the information provided, Agency Services concluded that the appellant’s position was properly classified as Printing Machine Operator 2. Nonetheless, it did not include in its determination a consideration of the requested title. On appeal to the Civil Service Commission (Commission), the appellant states that Agency Services failed to consider the title that he requested. In In the Matter of Casey Adams (CSC, decided June 15, 2022), the Commission ordered Agency Services to issue a determination in compliance with N.J.A.C. 4A:3-3.9(c)5ii(3), and Agency Services again found that the proper classification of the position was Printing Machine Operator 2. The appellant appealed a second time. In that appeal, he relies on information already submitted to Agency Services and presents no additional arguments.

CONCLUSION

RuleN.J.A.C. 4A:3-3.9(e) states that in classification appeals, the appellant shall provide copies of all materials submitted, the determination received from the lower level, statements as to which portions of the determination are being disputed, and the basis for appeal. Information and/or argument which was not presented at the prior level of appeal shall not be considered.

The definition section of the job specification for Printing Machine Operator 2 states:

A position in this job category typically set-ups, operates, repairs, and cleans various printing operation equipment such as offset presses, cutting machines, and copiers; determines appropriate printing material; determines appropriate printing techniques; determines printing styles, and reviews finished items; does other related duties.

Level 1

AnalysisA position at this level typically is the entry level for this job category.

Performs work under the direct supervision of a higher-level supervisor.

Level 2

A position at this level is typically an experienced worker proficient in the use of equipment. Works independently or may lead a team or other group of subordinates in assigned tasks.

RuleThe definition section of the job specification for Printing Operations Technician 2 states:

A position in this category typically analyzes printing requests;

Analysisdetermines appropriate printing techniques; estimates the quantity of time, costs, materials or personnel for assignments; consults with vendors or contractors; provides technical advice to staff; sets up, operates, and adjusts copier machines.

Level 1

A position at this level typically performs entry level tasks for the job category.

Level 2

A position at this level typically receives less direct supervision than positions at Level 1 and are permitted to exercise some independent judgment in carrying out their assignments.

At the outset, it is noted that how well or efficiently an employee does his or her job, length of service, volume of work and qualifications have no effect on the classification of a position currently occupied, as positions, not employees are classified. See In the Matter of Debra DiCello (CSC, decided June 24, 2009).

In the instant matter, Agency Services found that the duties of the position include: prepping and arranging assigned files for printing, while also operating various printing machines; performing various machine operator functions at an experienced level by maintaining supplies and inventory, while also utilizing printing equipment and software; operating multiple high speed digital printers and copiers while also processing several printing projects and ensuring work orders are completed accurately; and, determining, preparing and establishing high-quality printing techniques when loading printers and making proper adjustments. These duties fall squarely into the definition of Printing Machine Operator 2, and do not rise to the level and scope of the requested title. Moreover, on appeal, the appellant has not presented any additional arguments or evidence to demonstrate that Agency Services’ determination was in error.

Accordingly, a thorough review of the entire record indicates that Casey Adams has not presented a sufficient basis to warrant a Printing Operations Technician 2 classification of his position.

ORDER

Therefore, it is ordered that the position of Casey Adams is properly classified as a Printing Machine Operator 2.

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