tab58
Full Member
Posts: 63
|
Post by tab58 on Aug 29, 2009 14:12:07 GMT -5
Since there were two certs this go round, what are the possibilities that the 1st cert will get calls earlier than the second.
The benefit being that at least one group would have more lag time to close up shop.
|
|
|
|
Post by ed on Aug 31, 2009 7:19:18 GMT -5
Well if anyone gets a call, I hope they post when and where.
|
|
|
|
Post by Legal Beagle on Aug 31, 2009 8:25:23 GMT -5
My recommendation (from recent experience), is to start making plans now and have them ready to go, because no matter how much or how little lag time there is, your life will become a torrent of things to do with too little time. Even if the call does not come this time, it may still come, and you will be ready and feeling a lot less pressure!
|
|
|
|
Post by tigerfan on Sept 2, 2009 7:19:22 GMT -5
Tab58: the chances of getting two sets of calls is zero. As I understand it, there is only one cert and names were added to it but a 2nd cert was not issued.
|
|
|
|
Post by sharonzano on Sept 2, 2009 8:33:18 GMT -5
Tab58: the chances of getting two sets of calls is zero. As I understand it, there is only one cert and names were added to it but a 2nd cert was not issued. Do you know if the names were added to expand the locations OR to expand the number to be considered for the locations originally certified in late July? |
|
|
|
Post by tigerfan on Sept 3, 2009 12:16:35 GMT -5
just the number as i understand it.
|
|
|
|
Post by sharonzano on Sept 3, 2009 14:57:00 GMT -5
 Sounds like that lessens the odds of those on the cert who are being considered regardless of whether or not they were just interviewed for the 55 slots and that the Agency didn't initially anticipate needing additional candidates to fill those slots so it would appear they were disappointed with those already being considered and, thus, needed additional candidates.
|
|
|
|
Post by roggenbier on Sept 3, 2009 17:52:22 GMT -5
I don't think you can draw a negative inference from the addt'l names. OPM issues a cert so that three names are for every opening. They only send over more names if there was an error in the GAL Alternatively, I think HOCALJ prescreen people, before you get notice. Under this scenario, the first ones are the ones considered more prime. I do not think asking for more, lower scored names, when there are uninterviewed higher scored candidates, indicates an ill omen.
|
|
|
|
Post by tigerfan on Sept 4, 2009 7:25:31 GMT -5
there were several that declined interviews, hence, the additional number. nothing sinister about it.
|
|
Sounds like that lessens the odds of those on the cert who are being considered regardless of whether or not they were just interviewed for the 55 slots and that the Agency didn't initially anticipate needing additional candidates to fill those slots so it would appear they were disappointed with those already being considered and, thus, needed additional candidates.