Title Comparability Determinations for Reemployment
The following is a new statement and explanation of policy on title
comparability and certification for the purposes of reemployment.
THIS BULLETIN REPLACES POLICY BULLETINS 96-01, 96-02 WHICH SHOULD BE
This policy unifies the standard for comparisons made to determine
title comparability for primary redeployment lists, reemployment rosters,
placement rosters and transfer lists. It also restates the policy on
preferred list title comparability. This bulletin replaces all extant
policy statements on comparability determinations established pursuant
to Civil Service Law §§78, 79, 81, 81-a, and 81-b.
General Policy on Comparisons of Titles, Selection Plans, Qualifications,
Duties and Responsibilities
In order to meet the requirements and intent of the Civil Service Law,
Rule and Regulations, and to certify that individuals are eligible for
appointments to positions in the classified service, the Department
of Civil Service must make comparisons among titles and, for the competitive
class, must also make comparisons among selection plans.
Factors Analyzed When Making ALL Comparability Decisions
Regardless of the type of list, the following factors are considered:
- the tasks and activities typically performed by incumbents in the
- the essential knowledges, skills and abilities required for successful
performance of the duties and responsibilities for the target titles
- the selection plans which have been or may be used to fill the
target titles, including:
- minimum qualifications for admission to examinations
- types of tests, their contents and difficulty
- the on-the-job training, or orientation, or formal training
required for completion of the probationary period
- titles found comparable for transfer pursuant to §70.1
Comparability Policy for Reemployment Lists
- The standard for title comparability will be the same for reemployment
roster (§81-a), ARTL transfer (§78), redeployment list
(§79) and placement roster (§81-b) determinations except
as noted below.
Comparable titles shall be those in which the eligibles are likely
to be able to successfully perform the required duties and responsibilities
within a reasonable period of time after a standard period of orientation
and training, as determined by analysis of the factors listed above.
In order to mitigate the impact of position abolitions or movement,
these determinations shall be as broad as possible. Moreover, since
a probationary period is required for almost all of these appointments,
determinations should be made with a presumption in favor of inclusion
when analysis discloses a similarity in the factors listed above.
In this regard, similarity need not be found for every factor as
long as the analysis suggests overall comparability exists. Competitive
class titles may be certified to non-competitive and labor class
titles, but not the reverse
- In determining comparable titles for preferred list certification,
only those titles in the same jurisdictional class in which all
employees in the layoff title are likely to be able to fully perform,
with limited orientation, the essential duties and responsibilities
of the positions in the titles being filled shall be declared comparable.
The necessary degree of similarity in the factors for comparison
for redeployment list, reemployment roster, placement roster and
ARTL transfer list certification shall be less than the degree of
similarity required for preferred list comparability.
General Description of the Titles Determined to be Comparable
for the Various Types of Reemployment Lists
Preferred lists (§81) -- must include same title, and for
the competitive class, direct line promotion titles (if any). Except
in rare cases where there is a very high degree of similarity between
two titles, the "other" titles mentioned in the law should
be comparable on a reemployment roster basis.
Redeployment lists (§79) -- must include same title and
comparable titles at the same or a similar level. Because of provisions
for salary protection, the intent is to redeploy affected employees
to positions in their title or to titles at similar grade levels. Thus,
redeployment determinations will generally be made to titles within
one organizational level (or within five salary grades, if one organizational
level is less than five salary grades) below that of the impacted title.
Where that would result in few or no redeployment opportunities, lower
level titles will be considered.
Agency Reduction Transfer Lists (ARTLs) (§78) -- must be
same title, direct line, and all comparable titles deemed comparable
for reemployment roster certification.
Reemployment rosters (§81-a) -- may not be title to title
or direct line lower level titles, but will include all other titles
deemed comparable at all levels.
Placement rosters (§81-b) -- have been expanded to include
the same titles as ARTLs and Reemployment rosters.
Employees may potentially be certified to all grade levels for which
their comparable titles exist for preferred lists, ARTLs, reemployment
rosters and placement rosters. Because individual employees may be unwilling
to accept positions at lower levels, Civil Service will ask employees
to designate the lowest grade level to which they would accept employment,
and will certify based on their choices.
- Specialists, including parenthetics, can be certified to generalist
positions but generalists may not, in all cases, be appropriate
to certify for specialist positions.
- Titles with language parenthetics should be comparable to fill
the same titles as their non-language parenthetic counterparts.
- A managerial or supervisory layoff title may be comparable to
fill another title at a similar level in a different agency or program
when the occupation is found in both places, such as financial or
information management, and does not require extensive knowledge
of agency-specific programs or operations.
- A program management or higher-level professional title may be
certified against other agencies' program titles at the journey
level, but not to higher levels where these require extensive program
expertise and knowledge of agency operations, and/or where incumbents
must supervise and train subordinates in program operations, and/or
where they must make substantial contributions to policy development.
- Managers and directors of multiple function program areas are
generally presumed appointable to lower level positions in all those
Return to Top ^