Post by valkyrie on Jul 14, 2013 15:00:31 GMT -5
Fight! Fight! Fight! Woo-hoo! Here is a more appropriate thread hijacked from the Dear John Emails thread...
When it comes to Insiders vs Outsiders in the SSA ALJ Corps, former SSA staff attorney accounted for at most 5% of the total. Those 5% or less usually only made it through with a Veteran's preference, and some kind of moonlighting in alternative dispute resolution, Special US Attorney detail, or something of that nature. Even if a staff attorney was found qualified, they were actively discriminated against throughout the rest of the process. Many ALJs became notorious for stabbing people in the back as references, and others were openly proud that not a single SSA staff attorney survived any of their interview panels. There are many theories as to why the discrimination occurred. Ego, petty jealousy, concern for the integrity of the ALJ Corps, fear of exposure, etc.
It wasn't until the 2009 hiring that we saw the first substantial hiring of SSA staff attorneys. The primary factor was the changed criteria that allowed admin law experience to be given equal qualifying credit as litigation experience. That alone got the SSA staff attorneys, including yours truly, through the opening gate. There were still problems though, in that many on this Board, Insider and Outsider, found that they were found "unqualified" even after a mere 20 years of legal practice. After that, it was a matter of surviving the OPM SI and Written Exam, both of which could be beaten regardless of one's background. From there we received our vaunted "OPM Score," which was again reflective of OPM's arbitrariness. I knew of at least three other Insiders such as myself that were indisputably more qualified than myself, yet received substantially lower scores than me. FInally, we arrived at the SSA interviews, and in the first half of those hirings, there were a substantial number of Insiders hired. I won't deny it. However, after all of the years of SSA staff attorneys being shut out of the process on the basis of initial qualification, there was a significant glut of known talent just waiting fro an opportunity. Logically, as the hires went on, the number of Insider staff attorneys hired went down along with the talent glut. Admittedly, not every staff attorney hire has been a success. On the other hand, the failure rate was certainly no higher than amongst the outsiders, and arguably lower. This can logically be attributed to the Agency's advantage of "pre-elimination," or recognizing most of the dogs before making the mistake of promoting them. As a statistical group, the Outsiders did not have the advantage of having their ranks filtered "in-house."
I have tried to interpret the actual numbers here without suggesting one group or the other is a superior class of candidates, but that the discrepancies in the hiring numbers were skewed by an artificially created talent glut that eventually righted itself. Now, my first reaction to the most recent selections has been admittedly negative. I have seen all but one of the staff attorneys that I know get rejected this time around, despite the fact that I believe the vast majority of them would make excellent ALJs. What is noticeably different from the past is that the rejected applicants with ODAR-only experience are actually a minority. I have not seen the new electronic application system, but I have been told that it appears to heavily favor litigation experience. While I feel the ODAR-only rejected are a tragedy, I am somewhat baffled by the rejection of some multiple attorneys with 10-plus years of experience, the majority of which is intense litigation experience.
So here is my current theory; As we all know, the legal field has been steadily contracting in spite of what the rest of the economy is doing, though the majority of the employment news since the last OPM process has been average to bad. Perhaps my prior taken-glut theory has come back to haunt me, in that the crappy legal field has created a much larger than normal base of high-end talent this time around. Last time around, the number of applicants with an OPM score of 90 or above was a distinct minority. Maybe the legal field has contracted enough to push a much larger number of people with the 90+ legal resumes to apply?
When it comes to Insiders vs Outsiders in the SSA ALJ Corps, former SSA staff attorney accounted for at most 5% of the total. Those 5% or less usually only made it through with a Veteran's preference, and some kind of moonlighting in alternative dispute resolution, Special US Attorney detail, or something of that nature. Even if a staff attorney was found qualified, they were actively discriminated against throughout the rest of the process. Many ALJs became notorious for stabbing people in the back as references, and others were openly proud that not a single SSA staff attorney survived any of their interview panels. There are many theories as to why the discrimination occurred. Ego, petty jealousy, concern for the integrity of the ALJ Corps, fear of exposure, etc.
It wasn't until the 2009 hiring that we saw the first substantial hiring of SSA staff attorneys. The primary factor was the changed criteria that allowed admin law experience to be given equal qualifying credit as litigation experience. That alone got the SSA staff attorneys, including yours truly, through the opening gate. There were still problems though, in that many on this Board, Insider and Outsider, found that they were found "unqualified" even after a mere 20 years of legal practice. After that, it was a matter of surviving the OPM SI and Written Exam, both of which could be beaten regardless of one's background. From there we received our vaunted "OPM Score," which was again reflective of OPM's arbitrariness. I knew of at least three other Insiders such as myself that were indisputably more qualified than myself, yet received substantially lower scores than me. FInally, we arrived at the SSA interviews, and in the first half of those hirings, there were a substantial number of Insiders hired. I won't deny it. However, after all of the years of SSA staff attorneys being shut out of the process on the basis of initial qualification, there was a significant glut of known talent just waiting fro an opportunity. Logically, as the hires went on, the number of Insider staff attorneys hired went down along with the talent glut. Admittedly, not every staff attorney hire has been a success. On the other hand, the failure rate was certainly no higher than amongst the outsiders, and arguably lower. This can logically be attributed to the Agency's advantage of "pre-elimination," or recognizing most of the dogs before making the mistake of promoting them. As a statistical group, the Outsiders did not have the advantage of having their ranks filtered "in-house."
I have tried to interpret the actual numbers here without suggesting one group or the other is a superior class of candidates, but that the discrepancies in the hiring numbers were skewed by an artificially created talent glut that eventually righted itself. Now, my first reaction to the most recent selections has been admittedly negative. I have seen all but one of the staff attorneys that I know get rejected this time around, despite the fact that I believe the vast majority of them would make excellent ALJs. What is noticeably different from the past is that the rejected applicants with ODAR-only experience are actually a minority. I have not seen the new electronic application system, but I have been told that it appears to heavily favor litigation experience. While I feel the ODAR-only rejected are a tragedy, I am somewhat baffled by the rejection of some multiple attorneys with 10-plus years of experience, the majority of which is intense litigation experience.
So here is my current theory; As we all know, the legal field has been steadily contracting in spite of what the rest of the economy is doing, though the majority of the employment news since the last OPM process has been average to bad. Perhaps my prior taken-glut theory has come back to haunt me, in that the crappy legal field has created a much larger than normal base of high-end talent this time around. Last time around, the number of applicants with an OPM score of 90 or above was a distinct minority. Maybe the legal field has contracted enough to push a much larger number of people with the 90+ legal resumes to apply?
