New Jersey civil service law Tag Archives

Published on: October 21, 2024

NJ Appeals Court Confirms Government Employees Can Only Litigate Employment Claims in One Forum

New Jersey public employees have multiple venues to litigate employment claims against their government employers.

Forums Available to New Jersey Public Employees

New Jersey government employees can sue in New Jersey state court, beginning with the Superior Court of New Jersey which sits in each county, for violation of state laws such as the New Jersey Conscientious Employee Protection Act, the New Jersey Civil Rights Act and the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination, and then the state appellate courts. For employment-related civil rights claims or violations of Federal laws, such as Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Americans with Disabilities Act or the Fair Labor Standards Act, employees can file suit in the Federal courts beginning with the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey which sits in Camden, Trenton and Newark, with appeals heard by the United Staes Third Circuit Court of Appeals and then the United States Supreme Court. A civil service employee who alleges that she was disciplined in violation of civil service laws can appeal to the New Jersey Civil Service Commission, with appeals from Commission decisions being heard by the Appellate Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey. Tenured teachers and other education employees can appeal to the New Jersey Department of Education. Public employees can utilize the grievance procedure in the contract for allegations of violations of the contract for discipline, pay violations and other related matters. Grievance procedures in many union contracts often provide for binding arbitration with the Public Employment Relations Commission (“PERC”). PERC will also hear allegations of unfair labor practices, binding arbitration of certain contract negotiation impasses, scope of negotiations disputes, bargaining unit disputes, and certain appeals of discipline by law enforcement officers who are not employed in civil service jurisdictions.

Published on: May 3, 2023

New Jersey Civil Service Resignations and Job Abandonment Appeals

by Maurice W. McLaughlin

How a New Jersey Civil Service employee’s separation from service is characterized, either “in good standing” or “not in good standing,” has significant consequences, particularly on the employee’s ability to obtain future government employment, and may even effect her employment in the private sector. Moreover, if the employee is council-of-state-535721__340-300x103 found to have abandoned her position she may be involuntarily terminated. Thus, the right to appeal these characterizations is important.

When a Resignation is Considered to be in Good Standing

Obviously, civil service employees want their separations to be considered in good standing, which will allow them to be reemployed. This will also allow them to answer that they resigned in good standing when asked at job interviews even for private sector jobs. For a resignation to be considered “in good standing” the requirements under New Jersey civil service law are that the employee actually was in good standing when she resigned and that she gave her employer at least 14 days notice, either verbally or in writing (the employer may consent to shorter notice which would allow the resignation to be in good standing despite a shorter notice period). The resignation is considered accepted when the notice is received by the employer. The employer may allow an employee to rescind her resignation prior to the employee’s last day.

Published on: March 11, 2023

New Jersey Civil Service Commission Not Afraid to Call B.S. on Employers

by Maurice W. McLaughlin

In my last post I wrote about the Appellate Division case of In the Matter of Ambroise, which demonstrated that employees will get a fair hearing before the New Jersey Civil Service Commission and in appeals to state appellate Courts. Another recent Appellate Division opinion columns-round-300x201 in the case of In the Matter of Christopher Dunlap, Fire Fighter (M1838W), Township of Hillside shows that the Civil Service Commission and Appellate Division are not afraid to call B.S. on employers when the situation warrants.

Background

Christopher Dunlap passed the civil service examination for firefighter, and his name was placed on the eligible list. His name was certified for employment with Hillside Township. He completed the application process, but was rejected by the Township for allegedly making a “material misrepresentation” on his application. Making any “material misrepresentation” in the hiring process will cause an applicant to be removed from the eligible list. The Township said that he failed to disclose juvenile charges against him. Facts are everything, so I will quote at length from the Appellate Division’s decision.

Published on: February 22, 2022

New Jersey Civil Service Disciplinary Procedures at the Employer Level

by Maurice W. McLaughlin

New Jersey’s Civil Service System was enacted to keep politics, discrimination, favoritism out of employment decisions. Therefore, civil service employees may only be disciplined for “just cause.” The New Jersey and Federal Constitutions require that before any government body may take action against anyone they must receive due process, which is notice, the right to be heard, and fundamental fairness. Since government employers, even acting in their role as employers, are still the government, employees must receive due process before they can be disciplined. The New Jersey Civil Service Act and the Civil Service Commission’s regulations implementing it provide that due process to employees.

Written Notice and the Opportunity for a Hearing

When a government employer wants to discipline a civil service a permanent, career service employee or an employee in a working test period, it must give the employee written notice of the charges and specifications alleged against her (specifications are a statement of the facts underlying the charges) and the opportunity for a hearing at the employer level by the governmental jurisdiction or its designee. The employer must hold the hearing within 30 days of the notice unless the employee waives her right it.

Published on: June 17, 2021

New Jersey Employment Law Decision Examines When a New Jersey Civil Service Law Enforcement Officer May be Fined as a Form of Discipline

by Maurice W. McLaughlin

A recent New Jersey employment law decision in the case of In the Matter of Wilfred Guzman, Rockaway Township Police Department, examined what penalties are available against a New police-hoboken-train-station Jersey civil service law enforcement officer.

Background

Wilfredo Guzman was a police officer with the Rockaway Township Police Department, a civil service jurisdiction. Guzman was suspended without pay from April 24, 2017, when he was indicted, until June 19, 2019, when he was served with a Final Notice of Disciplinary Action which terminated him. The termination was triggered by Officer Guzman’s guilty pleas to two counts of second degree official misconduct. The Township also fined Officer Guzman the equivalent of 1040 hours worth of pay. Guzman appealed the fine to the New Jersey Office of Administrative Law (“NJOAL”) – New Jersey employment law allows civil service law enforcement officers to skip appeals to the New Jersey Civil Service Commission requesting that the appeal be considered a contested case, and instead file instead directly with the NJOAL.

Published on: March 15, 2020

The New Jersey Civil Service Veteran’s Preference

by Maurice W. McLaughlin

Qualified candidates for permanent, career, classified New Jersey Civil Service veterans-300x200 employment who meet the Civil Service definition are eligible to receive a veterans and disabled veterans preference, which increases their ranks on eligible lists. The courts have explained that the purpose of the preference is to “reward those whose military commitments, commissioned or enlisted, were of such a nature and duration as to interfere substantially with an individual’s civilian status.”

Veterans Eligible for Preference

Not all “veterans”, as the term is generally used, are eligible for a New Jersey Civil Service preference. Only “veterans” and “disabled veterans” of certain military operations as defined by the New Jersey Civil Service Act are eligible. Thus, veterans of some military operations, such as, for example, Operations Earnest Will, Nimble Archer and Praying Mantis, in the Persian Gulf Region in 1987 and 1988, are excluded.

Published on: March 2, 2020

New Jersey Civil Service Testing and Examination Appeals

by Maurice W. McLaughlin

The key to New Jersey Civil Service hiring and promotion is the examination. The State Constitution and New Jersey Civil Service Act require merit-based appointments based, whenever possible, on examinations.

Announcements. The New Jersey Civil Service Commission is responsible for administrating examinations which fairly test applicants’ mulitple-choice-exam-300x200 knowledge, skills and abilities for the job. Announcements are posted on the Commission’s website, and provided by the employer. Announcements include title, salary information, admission qualifications, filing information, and duties and responsibilities. No unannounced requirements can be considered. Applications must be filed by the announced date. The applicant must be a resident of New Jersey and the specified local jurisdiction, unless a different residency requirement is specified or there are not enough available qualified residents. Applicants for municipal law enforcement or firefighter positions must be under 35 for open competitive examinations, except that applicants under 45 may subtract prior law enforcement experience to meet the 35 year age requirement. Veterans may subtract their service from their age to determine eligibility.

Types of Examinations. Examinations may be written; oral; performance evaluation; physical performance tests; assessment exercises; and evaluation of education, training and experience. The goal is to objectively measure an applicant’s fitness and merit. Thus, while subjectivity in developing an examination is not forbidden, it must be limited.