Marcos Ossandon, CSC Docket No. 2024-1118
NJ Civil Service Commission decision of September 25, 2024, CSC Docket No. 2024-1118: discipline, penalty modified. Marcos Ossandon, County Correctional Police Officer, Passaic County, Sheriff’s Department, 25 working day suspension, on charges of chronic or excessive absenteeism or lateness and oth
Commission decisions · Meeting of September 25, 2024
Marcos Ossandon, County Correctional Police Officer, Passaic County, Sheriff’s Department, 25 working day suspension, on charges of chronic or excessive absenteeism or lateness and other sufficient cause.
- Matter
- Discipline
- Decided
- September 25, 2024, item A-7
- Outcome
- Penalty modified
- ALJ's recommendation
- Modify the 25 working day suspension to a five working day suspension.
- What the Commission did with it
- Adopted the ALJ's recommendation
- Penalty appealed
- 25 working day suspension
- Penalty after the decision
- 5 working day suspension
- Title
- COUNTY CORRECTIONAL POLICE OFFICER
- Employer
- Passaic County
- Chair at the time
- Allison Chris Myers, Acting Chairperson
- Official decision
- CSC's PDF
Action recorded in the minutes: The Civil Service Commission affirmed the recommendation of the Administrative Law Judge.
Rules this decision applies
The decision
CSC published this decision as a scanned image. The text below was recognized by OCR, read twice and checked against the meeting minutes, but OCR can misread a word. The official document is the record.
BackgroundThe appeal of Marcos Ossandon, County Correctional Police Officer,! Passaic County, Sheriffs Department, 25 working day suspension, on charges, was heard by Administrative Law Judge Jude-Anthony Tiscornia (ALJ), who rendered his initial decision on August 30, 2024. No exceptions were filed.
AnalysisHaving considered the record and the ALJ’s initial decision, and having made an independent, de novo evaluation of the record, the Civil Service Commission (Commission), at its meeting on September 25, 2024, adopted the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law as contained in the initial decision and the ALJ's recommendation to modify the 25 working day suspension to a five working day suspension.
Since the suspension has been modified, the appellant is entitled to 20 working days of back pay, benefits, and seniority pursuant to N.J.A.C. 4A:2-2.10. However, he is not entitled to counsel fees. N.J.A.C. 4A:2-2.12(a) provides for the award of counsel fees only where an employee has prevailed on all or substantially all of the primary issues 1n an appeal of a major disciplinary action. The primary issue in the disciplinary appeal is the merits of the charges. See Johnny Walcott v. City of Plainfield, 282 N.J. Super. 121,128 (App. Div. 1995): Jn the Matter of Robert Dean (MSB, decided January 12, 1993); In the Matter of Ralph Cozzine (MSB, decided September 21, 1989). In the case at hand, although the penalty was modified by the Commission, charges were sustained, and discipline was imposed. Consequently, as the appellant has failed to meet the standard set forth at N.J.A.C. 4A:2-2.12, counsel fees must be denied.
Administrative Law Judge1 The ALJ incorrectly identified that appellant as a Sheriffs Officer.
ORDER
The Civil Service Commission finds that the action of the appointing authority in suspending the appellant was justified. However, it modifies the suspension to a five working day suspension. The Commission further orders that the appellant be granted 20 working days of back pay, benefits, and seniority. The amount of back pay awarded is to be reduced as provided for in N.J.A.C. 4A:2-2.10(d)3. Proof of income earned shall be submitted by or on behalf of the appellant to the appointing authority within 30 days of issuance of this decision.
Counsel fees are denied.
ClosingThis is the final administrative determination in this matter. Any further review should be pursued in a judicial] forum.
Decisions this one cites
- Johnny Walcott v. City of Plainfield 282 N.J. Super. 121,128
- Matter of Robert Dean (January 12, 1993)
- In the Matter of Ralph Cozzine (September 21, 1989)
About this page
Not an official copy. The decision of record is CSC's PDF. The text above was extracted from it by OCR and may differ in layout or, rarely, in a character.
Names appear as the Commission published them in its public minutes and decisions, initials where it used initials. This site does not offer a search by a person's name.
The labels are ours. The kind of matter and the outcome are our reading of the minutes; the ACTION text the Commission recorded is quoted verbatim above. A decision applies the rules to its own facts and is not a prediction for any other matter, and nothing here is legal advice.
To report an error on this page, use the contact form.