NJ Civil Service Navigator

N.J.A.C. 4A:2-2.5 Opportunity for hearing before the appointing authority

N.J.A.C. 4A:2-2.5, Opportunity for hearing before the appointing authority. An employee must be served with a Preliminary Notice of Disciplinary Action setting forth the charges and statement of facts supporting the charges (specifi Full text with 4 recorded amendments, 85 citing decisions, cited by

Appeals, Discipline, and Separations · Major Discipline

Current through New Jersey Register, Vol. 58 No. 14, July 20, 2026. Reviewed as of July 26, 2026.

This is an annotated mirror, not the official publication. Verify against the Civil Service Commission before relying on it.

In plain language

Before major discipline is imposed you must be served with a Preliminary Notice of Disciplinary Action setting out the charges and the facts supporting them, and offered a hearing. That is the general rule, and the exceptions are what make the section long. An employee can be suspended immediately, before any hearing, where they are found unfit for duty, a hazard to somebody if left on the job, or where immediate suspension is needed to maintain safety, health, order or effective direction of public services. Somebody appointed on or after 1 September 2011 without a New Jersey principal residence and without a residency exemption falls into that category by statute. Even then the Preliminary Notice and the offer of a hearing must follow within five days, in person or by certified mail. Immediate suspension delays the process; it does not remove it.

Written by the NJ Civil Service Navigator editorial team from the text of N.J.A.C. 4A:2-2.5. It is a description of the rule, not the rule itself, and not legal advice.

You have been served with a disciplinary notice. What happens now

Before major discipline can be imposed, you must be served with a Preliminary Notice of Disciplinary Action setting out the charges and the facts supporting them, and offered a hearing. Major discipline means removal, disciplinary demotion, or a suspension or fine of more than five working days, and that threshold decides everything downstream: below it you are on the minor discipline track under 4A:2-3, which has different rights.

The charge on the notice will trace to one of the twelve general causes. Two of them, conduct unbecoming a public employee and other sufficient cause, are broad by design and account for a large share of the decisions that have cited the rule.

You can be suspended immediately, before any hearing, where the appointing authority finds you unfit for duty, a hazard to somebody if left on the job, or where immediate suspension is needed to maintain safety, health, order or effective direction of public services. Even then the Preliminary Notice and the offer of a hearing must follow within five days. Immediate suspension delays the process rather than removing it.

The departmental hearing is held before the appointing authority or its designee, which means the employer hears the case against its own charges. You may be represented by an attorney or an authorised union representative, both sides may examine witnesses, and you cannot be made to testify. The appointing authority then has 20 days to decide and give you a Final Notice of Disciplinary Action.

That Final Notice starts a 20-day clock to appeal to the Commission, and the rule states expressly that the clock runs from YOUR receipt, not from the day your lawyer or union representative got it. Before relying on any of this, check your collective agreement: where one provides a negotiated review procedure it becomes the exclusive procedure, and where it provides binding arbitration it replaces the Commission appeal entirely.

Related on this site: /discipline-removal

Written by the NJ Civil Service Navigator editorial team. Every statement here traces to the rules cited on this page. It is not legal advice, and a collective agreement may change how these rules apply to you.

(a) An employee must be served with a Preliminary Notice of Disciplinary Action setting forth the charges and statement of facts supporting the charges (specifications), and afforded the opportunity for a hearing prior to imposition of major discipline, except: #

1. An employee may be suspended immediately and prior to a hearing where it is determined that the employee is unfit for duty or is a hazard to any person if permitted to remain on the job, or that an immediate suspension is necessary to maintain safety, health, order or effective direction of public services. An employee who has been appointed on or after September 1, 2011, who does not have a principal residence in New Jersey and who has not received a residency exemption in accordance with P.L. 2011, c. 70, within one year of appointment, is defined by that statute as illegally holding and unqualified for employment, and therefore subject to immediate suspension as unfit for duty. However, a Preliminary Notice of Disciplinary Action with opportunity for a hearing must be served in person or by certified mail within five days following the immediate suspension. #

2. An employee may be suspended immediately when the employee is formally charged with a crime of the first, second or third degree, or a crime of the fourth degree on the job or directly related to the job. See N.J.A.C. 4A:2-2.7. #

(b) Where suspension is immediate under (a)1 and 2 above, and is without pay, the employee must first be apprised either orally or in writing, of why an immediate suspension is sought, the charges and general evidence in support of the charges and provided with sufficient opportunity to review the charges and the evidence in order to respond to the charges before a representative of the appointing authority. The response may be oral or in writing, at the discretion of the appointing authority. #

(c) The employee may request a departmental hearing within five days of receipt of the Preliminary Notice. If no request is made within this time or such additional time as agreed to by the appointing authority or as provided in a negotiated agreement, the departmental hearing may be considered to have been waived and the appointing authority may issue a Final Notice of Disciplinary Action. #

(d) A departmental hearing, if requested, shall be held within 30 days of the Preliminary Notice of Disciplinary Action unless waived by the employee or a later date as agreed to by the parties. See N.J.A.C. 4A:2-2.13 for hearings regarding removal appeals by certain law enforcement officers and firefighters. #

(e) Appeals concerning violations of this section may be presented to the Civil Service Commission through a petition for interim relief. See N.J.A.C. 4A:2-1.2. #

Amendment history

Rule numbers, effective dates and New Jersey Register citations as published. 4 recorded changes.

  1. AmendedR.2012 d.056
    43 N.J.R. 2691(a); 44 N.J.R. 576(a); 52 N.J.R. 971(a)
  2. ReadoptedR.2010 d.176
    42 N.J.R. 693(a); 42 N.J.R. 1855(a)
  3. AmendedR.1992 d.414
    24 N.J.R. 2491(a); 24 N.J.R. 3716(a); 41 N.J.R. 2720(a)
  4. AmendedR.1989 d.569
    21 N.J.R. 1766(a); 21 N.J.R. 3448(b)

How this rule has been applied

85 decisions have cited N.J.A.C. 4A:2-2.5. The list below is citations to those decisions, not the decisions. The summary above is ours, written from the opinion after reading it. Nothing here is legal advice.

Decisions we have read

Cunningham v. Dept. of Civil Service69 N.J. 13, December 16, 1975

Two Directors of Design lost their titles in a departmental reorganisation and went onto a special reemployment list, then claimed a prior right to a newly classified position they said did the same work. A chief examiner decided by letter that the two titles were not comparable, and that was the end of it until the Supreme Court held the question could not be settled on paper. People in that position have enough at stake to be entitled to a hearing as a matter of fundamental fairness, and the agency owes them findings that actually compare the duties rather than a sentence echoing the words of the statute.

Read the opinion (free, via CourtListener). Summary written from the decision, checked July 26, 2026.

New Jersey Supreme Court (7)
  • Cunningham v. Dept. of Civil Service69 N.J. 13; 350 A.2d 581975
  • 142 N.J. 446; 663 A.2d 1354
  • 142 N.J. 446; 663 A.2d 1354
  • 142 N.J. 446; 663 A.2d 1354
  • 142 N.J. 446; 663 A.2d 1354
  • 127 N.J. 555; 606 A.2d 367
  • Nicoletta v. No. Jersey District Water Supply Commission77 N.J. 145; 390 A.2d 90
Appellate Division (4)
  • , Docket No. A-3934-05T52007 N.J. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 1121
  • , Docket No. A-3934-05T52007 N.J. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 1121
  • , No. A-2481-05T12007 N.J. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 907
  • Grexa v. State168 N.J.Super. 202; 402 A.2d 938
Superior Court (2)
  • Goodman v. Department of Corrections367 N.J.Super. 591; 844 A.2d 543
  • Melani v. County of Passaic345 N.J.Super. 579
Federal courts (1)
  • Reilly v. City of Atl. City427 F. Supp.2d 507
Civil Service Commission final determinations (54)
  • In re S.J., Boonton, CSC Docket No. 2025-24262025 N.J. CSC LEXIS 253Docket 2025-2426
  • In re S.J., Boonton, CSC Docket No. 2025-24262025 N.J. CSC LEXIS 253Docket 2025-2426
  • In re Boller, Ewing, CSC Docket No. 2025- 27682025 N.J. CSC LEXIS 229Docket 2025-
  • In re Fuller, Paterson, CSC Docket No. 2024-14412024 N.J. CSC LEXIS 200Docket 2024-1441
  • In re O'Brien, Jersey City, CSC Docket No. 2023-19112023 N.J. CSC LEXIS 252Docket 2023-1911
  • In re Aiello, Independence Twp., Dep't of Public Safety2022 N.J. CSC LEXIS 441Docket CSV 04810-20
  • In re F.B., et al., Twp. of West Orange, CSC Docket Nos. 2022-1079, et al. (Consolidated)2022 N.J. CSC LEXIS 119Docket 2022-1079
  • In re Scott, Dep't of Corr., CSC Docket No. 2021-18682021 N.J. CSC LEXIS 339Docket 2021-1868
  • In re Blithe, Judiciary, Burlington Vicinage 3, CSC Docket No. 2021-19532021 N.J. CSC LEXIS 302Docket 2021-1953
  • In re Lazzarini, Union City, CSC Docket No. 2021-14182021 N.J. CSC LEXIS 260Docket 2021-1418
  • In re Stuiso, Bergen Cnty., Dep't of Pub. Works, CSC DKT. NO. 2019-25912021 N.J. CSC LEXIS 228
  • In re Ruiz, City of Perth Amboy, Dep't of Pub. Safety, CSC Docket No. 2021-14862021 N.J. CSC LEXIS 200Docket 2021-1486
  • In re Bonds, Judiciary, Middlesex Vicinage 8, CSC Docket No. 2021-13342021 N.J. CSC LEXIS 177Docket 2021-1334
  • FNDA. In re Nace, Warren Cnty., CSC Docket No. 2021-11042021 N.J. CSC LEXIS 134Docket 2021-1104
  • In re Davis, City of Wildwood, CSC Docket No. 2021-5572021 N.J. CSC LEXIS 50Docket 2021-557
  • In re Blount, et al., Newark, CSC Docket Nos. 2021-391, et al. (Consolidated)2020 N.J. CSC LEXIS 1028Docket 2021-391
  • In re Cerami, City of Newark, CSC Docket No. 2021-2272020 N.J. CSC LEXIS 981Docket 2021-227
  • In re Nieves, Lawrence Twp., CSC Docket No. 2021-072020 N.J. CSC LEXIS 937Docket 2021-07
  • In re Aiello, Independence Twp., CSC Docket No. 2020-17262020 N.J. CSC LEXIS 176Docket 2020-1726
  • In re Ricks, East Orange, CSC Docket No. 2019-26142019 N.J. CSC LEXIS 419Docket 2019-2614
  • In re Bermudez, Cumberland Cnty., CSC Docket No. 2019-14312019 N.J. CSC LEXIS 3Docket 2019-1431
  • In re Williams, Newark, CSC Docket No. 2018-28782018 N.J. CSC LEXIS 776Docket 2018-2878
  • In re James, Irvington, CSC Docket No. 2018-35952018 N.J. CSC LEXIS 702Docket 2018-3595
  • In re Raciti, Middlesex Cnty., CSC Docket No. 2018-37112018 N.J. CSC LEXIS 612Docket 2018-3711
  • In re Taylor, Vineland Developmental Ctr., Dep't of Human Servs., CSC Docket No. 2018-10372018 N.J. CSC LEXIS 124Docket 2018-1037
  • PNDA. In re Galan, Passaic Cnty. Sheriff's Office, CSC Docket No. 2018-19822018 N.J. CSC LEXIS 123Docket 2018-1982
  • In re Cardona-Malatino, Camden Cnty. Police, CSC Docket No. 2018-18342018 N.J. CSC LEXIS 122Docket 2018-1834
  • In re Robles, City of Newark, CSC Docket No. 2017-37792017 N.J. CSC LEXIS 604Docket 2017-3779
  • In re Shay, CSC Docket No. 2016-38342017 N.J. CSC LEXIS 515Docket 2016-3834
  • In re Graves, City of Newark, CSC Dkt. No. 2017-5122017 N.J. CSC LEXIS 127
  • In re Walker, City of Hoboken, Dep't of Transp. & Parking, CSC DKT. NO. 2016-40742017 N.J. CSC LEXIS 104
  • In re Reyes, CSC Docket No. 2016-15352015 N.J. CSC LEXIS 164Docket 2016-1535
  • In re Torsiello, Twp. of Nutley Dep't of Pub. Works, CSC Dkt. Nos. 2012-950 and 2013-83 (Consolidated)2015 N.J. CSC LEXIS 108
  • In re Kelsey, Police Officer (Special), City of Trenton, CSC Dkt. No. 2015-10212015 N.J. CSC LEXIS 345
  • In re Gould, Atlantic Cnty., CSC Dkt. No. 2015-1452015 N.J. CSC LEXIS 371
  • PNDA. In re Negra, City of E. Orange, CSC Docket No. 2014-16042014 N.J. CSC LEXIS 495Docket 2014-1604
  • In re Boelhower, Woodbridge Fire Dist. # 1, CSC Docket No. 2014-22982014 N.J. CSC LEXIS 568Docket 2014-2298
  • Data Processing Systems Programmer. In re Juan Bellu, Twp. of Brick, CSC Dkt.no. 2014-18962014 N.J. CSC LEXIS 348
  • Office of Administrative Law. In re David Anthony, CSC Dkt. No. 2014-8742014 N.J. CSC LEXIS 259
  • In re Ricca, Newark, CSC Docket No. 2013-14852013 N.J. CSC LEXIS 1202Docket 2013-1485
  • In re Johnson, City of Long Branch, CSC Docket No. 2013-19122013 N.J. CSC LEXIS 1155Docket 2013-1912
  • In re Johnathan Taylor, City of Newark, CSC Dkt. No. 2013-35702013 N.J. CSC LEXIS 943
  • In re Glen Green, CSC Dkt. No. 2013-14462013 N.J. CSC LEXIS 585
  • In re Jared Stemetzki, Dep't. of Corr., CSC Dkt. No. 2013-4562013 N.J. CSC LEXIS 596
  • In re Christopher Chin, Cnty. of Cape May, CSC Dkt. No. 2013-12642013 N.J. CSC LEXIS 348
  • In re Michael Watts, West Orange, CSC Dkt. No. 2013-19672013 N.J. CSC LEXIS 271
  • In re Robert Bayard2013 N.J. CSC LEXIS 111Docket CSR 3546-12
  • In the Matter of Cheryl Goins, Essex County, CSC Dkt. No. 2013-2742013 N.J. CSC LEXIS 118
  • In the Matter of Cheryl Goins, Essex County, CSC Dkt. No. 2013-2742013 N.J. CSC LEXIS 118
  • Coley v. Rowan College94 N.J.A.R.2d (CSV) 4
  • Marjarum v. Hamilton Township Division of Police93 N.J.A.R.2d (CSV) 143
  • Hamilton v. Camden Housing Authority93 N.J.A.R.2d (CSV) 85
  • McManus v. Housing Authority of the City of Englewood92 N.J.A.R.2d (CSV) 747
  • Gabbianelli v. Monroe Township Police Department91 N.J.A.R.2d (CSV) 79
Office of Administrative Law initial decisions (16)
  • In re Beagin, City of Paterson (Fire Dep't)2019 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 970Docket CSR 16140-15
  • In re Chirico, City of Newark Police Dep't2017 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 487Docket CSV 00321-16
  • In re Shay, Sussex Cnty. Dep't of Human Servs.2017 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 318Docket CSV 06715-16
  • In re Reyes, Camden Cnty. Dep't of Corrs.2017 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 173Docket CSV 07433-16
  • In re Walker, City of Hoboken, Dep't of Transp. & Parking2016 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 1252Docket CSV 08262-16
  • Shay v. Sussex Cnty. Dep't of Human Servs.2016 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 1100Docket CSV 06715-16
  • In re Layton, Dep't of Human Servs., Ancora Psychiatric Hosp.2015 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 539Docket CSV 03440-14
  • In re Bayard2013 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 11Docket CSR 3546-12
  • In re Paul Drayton, City of Newark2008 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 1547Docket CSV03780-08
  • In re Leach2008 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 1230Docket CSV 6373-07
  • In re Paris2008 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 708Docket CSV 12208-06
  • In re Bugg2008 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 542Docket CSV 3975-05
  • Office of Administrative Law. In re Ferreira, Union Cnty., OAL Docket No. CSV 3771-022007 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 1314
  • In re Mangual2006 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 1110Docket CSV 4032-06
  • In re Smith2006 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 1100Docket CSV 2147-05
  • In re Wilson2005 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 1046Docket CSV 2162-05
Other decisions (1)
  • Court denied reconsideration of its denial of county employers' motion for summary judgment on employee's claim that her due process rights were violated because she was not provided a prompt post-deprivation hearing concerning her suspension, as required by N.J.A.C. 4A:2-2.5 because even if N.J.A.C. 4A:2-2.5 did not apply and the employee had the general right to appeal the appropriateness of her suspension under N.J.A.C. 4A:2-1.1, the employee could not reasonably be expected to know which appeal process applied to her suspension as she was never advised whether or not the suspension was disciplinary in nature, and without that information, the employee could not have known that she should look to N.J.A.C. 4A:2-1.1 for the proper appeal procedure as opposed to N.J.A.C. 4A:2-2.5. Bentley v. Atl. County2008

This rule points to

Rules that point here

Elsewhere in Major Discipline

Elsewhere