The Commission denied the Appellant's reclassification appeal as he was unable to show that he performed the level distinguishing duties of a Construction Coordinator a majority of the time.
Reclassification appeal allowed. In the unique position that she occupies at PRHC, the majority of her duties are most properly described to be more consistent with the responsibilities of an RN-III (the title that her predecessor held) than an RN-II.
Reclassification appeal denied. The Appellant was unable to show that he continuously performed the level distinguishing duties of a Civil Engineer III a majority of the time.
Classification appeal denied. The Appellant failed to show that he performed the level distinguishing duties of a Civil Engineer V a majority of the time.
Classification appeal denied. The Appellant was unable to show that she performed the level distinguishing duties of Program Coordinator I a majority of the time.
Classification appeal denied. The Appellant was unable to show that she performed the level distinguishing duties of a Program Coordinator III a majority of the time.
Reclassification appeal denied. The Appellant was unable to show that she spent a majority of her time performing the level-distinguishing duties of a Customer Service Representative IV.
Classification appeal denied. Appellant unable to show that she performed the level distinguishing duties of Administrative Assistant. Commission dismissed with future effective date for matters related to a prior reclassification request.
