|
Post by funkyodar on Sept 19, 2013 9:16:54 GMT -5
Mpd, your calculator obviously did 27.4 (the average) multiplied by 27 to get the 739.8.
I subtracted the 9 reported days and multiplied the average by the 18 days we didn't have numbers for to get 493.2. Then I addedin the actual reported numbers for the nine days, 247. That gave me 740.2. Rounded up that's the 741.
But if 1287 makes you feel more confident than 1289, by all means use your methodology.
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Sept 19, 2013 9:20:10 GMT -5
Also, Columbus day is monday 10/14 so that's another day without testing. Subtracting the average from the 1289 gets us to 1262 rounded up.
|
|
|
Post by moopigsdad on Sept 19, 2013 9:28:44 GMT -5
Also, Columbus day is monday 10/14 so that's another day without testing. Subtracting the average from the 1289 gets us to 1262 rounded up. I like your math and logic funky, I was just making a joke. I still think we have no real idea as we only had numbers on 9 of twenty seven testing dates or 1/3 of the time. Hence, there could have been 30 or more on those 18 days without numbers or there could have been 25 or less on those 18 days without numbers. Also, I think as we get into October the actual numbers will actually drop from the average you have. You may have days with only 15 or so testing, if that high. So, let's just say 1100 to 1250 is a reasonable guess on the total numbers of people testing. The actual number making the Register is likely to be less than the number who did Phase 3 testing. Hence, the overall number on the Register could be a big unknown in the end.
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Sept 19, 2013 10:13:08 GMT -5
Agreed. I think the vast number of unkown numbers makes any estimate highly suspect. but sureis fun in a sick sort of way.
Best guess is final register of 1200 plus/minus 50.
Depends a lot on the "minimum score". Saw someone post they didn't think opm knew the minimum untill all were tested. That implies some sort of curve and that there will definitely be cuts at phase 3 similar to those at phase 2. This further implies opm has a set # they want on the register, just like phase 2.
I'm not sure that's right. I was thinking the phase 3 minimal score stuff was an already set score that opm has in mind as a sort of last protection against letting someone unqualified on the register. That idea stems from the fact that few haVe reported going to dc then not making the register in the past. Sort of like you only don't make reg if you really crap the bed in dc. you may score so low you never get a job, but you still make the reg.
Which of these scenarios is true? would make a big diff in the total number on the reg I would think.
|
|
|
Post by lurker/dibs on Sept 19, 2013 10:21:16 GMT -5
Funky I must say that I am proud of you for your mathematical skills. I, on the other hand, went to law school so I wouldn't have to do math! But, in practice I do bankruptcies nearly every day, so I still ended up doing math! I try to avoid it at almost all costs.
I think the safe answer (beyond saying that no one knows) is that there are going to be at least 1200 testing, which would make sense if the register will contain about 1200, since we all know that most who go to DC will make the register.
|
|
|
Post by epic0ego on Sept 19, 2013 11:15:21 GMT -5
I have seen funkyodar's math before, and have always found it reasonable. We all recognize that these are mere guesstimates, but some guesstimates are more reasonable than others. The other part of that equation is how many they will pick from this 1200+/- pool of register folk. I have seen estimates of 200 or so projected annual attrition rate, not even including existing vacancies. Over the next 3 years, that puts the job acceptance rate somewhere around 50%, which is what we guesstimated several threads and pages back. I think its good news folks. If you make this register you could be looking at a shot akin to a coin toss, especially if you have a fairly wide open GAL. Since I only have a few "popular" cities, however, my chances are slim to none no matter what I score. I have come to accept these trade-offs.
|
|
|
Post by moopigsdad on Sept 19, 2013 11:33:36 GMT -5
I have seen funkyodar's math before, and have always found it reasonable. We all recognize that these are mere guesstimates, but some guesstimates are more reasonable than others. The other part of that equation is how many they will pick from this 1200+/- pool of register folk. I have seen estimates of 200 or so projected annual attrition rate, not even including existing vacancies. Over the next 3 years, that puts the job acceptance rate somewhere around 50%, which is what we guesstimated several threads and pages back. I think its good news folks. If you make this register you could be looking at a shot akin to a coin toss, especially if you have a fairly wide open GAL. Since I only have a few "popular" cities, however, my chances are slim to none no matter what I score. I have come to accept these trade-offs. Epic, while I love your odds as someone in the process, I wouldn't post odds that are that good for an ALJ position. The normal attrition rate is around 100 or so ALJ's a year. It could be higher in 2014 because of retirement changes, but 200 a year is pushing it too much. Further, as we all just saw SSA only hired 28 ALJs when they were down 90 ALJs. Hence, the replacement rate is about 1/3 of the total ALJs, SSA is down. So, if I wanted to extrapolate some guesstimate math numbers, it would be closer to about 300 to 350 ALJs leaving over the next three years with SSA replacing about 100 to 125 of these ALJs, if Sequestration remains in effect. Therefore, your shot at an ALJ position, if funky's 1200 people on the Register is correct, is about a 10% shot at a position. If Sequestration ends and SSA can replace fully, the chances of being hired increase to 25 to 30% of those listed on the Register. The coin toss scenario is more of a dream or would require an extreme mass exodus of ALJs, which is not likely to happen.
|
|
|
Post by zebra51 on Sept 19, 2013 11:36:41 GMT -5
Depends a lot on the "minimum score". Saw someone post they didn't think opm knew the minimum untill all were tested. That implies some sort of curve and that there will definitely be cuts at phase 3 similar to those at phase 2. This further implies opm has a set # they want on the register, just like phase 2. I'm not sure that's right. I was thinking the phase 3 minimal score stuff was an already set score that opm has in mind as a sort of last protection against letting someone unqualified on the register. That idea stems from the fact that few haVe reported going to dc then not making the register in the past. Sort of like you only don't make reg if you really crap the bed in dc. you may score so low you never get a job, but you still make the reg. Which of these scenarios is true? would make a big diff in the total number on the reg I would think. Agree with Funky, don't think "minimum score" scenario for phase 3 cut being similar to phase 2 cut (phase 2 was a cumulative score cut) is correct. That is not supported by the announcement. Announcement states: "If you do not receive the required minimum score on the WD, you will not receive a final numerical rating and will not be placed on the ALJ register." and "If you do not receive the required minimum score on the SI, you will not receive a final numerical rating and will not be placed on the ALJ register.". I read this as the cut at phase 3 is not a cut based on overall score (SJT/WS/EA/WD/LBMT/SI). The cut at phase 3 is based on only one score, the Written Demonstration. And, although the SI was done on the next day it is really a phase 4 test, because according to the announcement you have to pass it independent of all that has come before. Thus, the cut at the "phase 4" is based on only one score, the Structured Interview. So a person could have the highest score on the list moving forward from phase 2 and if they bomb the WD (phase 3) or the SI (phase 4) the don't get on the ALJ register.
|
|
|
Post by moopigsdad on Sept 19, 2013 11:41:42 GMT -5
Depends a lot on the "minimum score". Saw someone post they didn't think opm knew the minimum untill all were tested. That implies some sort of curve and that there will definitely be cuts at phase 3 similar to those at phase 2. This further implies opm has a set # they want on the register, just like phase 2. I'm not sure that's right. I was thinking the phase 3 minimal score stuff was an already set score that opm has in mind as a sort of last protection against letting someone unqualified on the register. That idea stems from the fact that few haVe reported going to dc then not making the register in the past. Sort of like you only don't make reg if you really crap the bed in dc. you may score so low you never get a job, but you still make the reg. Which of these scenarios is true? would make a big diff in the total number on the reg I would think. Agree with Funky, don't think "minimum score" scenario for phase 3 cut being similar to phase 2 cut (phase 2 was a cumulative score cut) is correct. That is not supported by the announcement. Announcement states: "If you do not receive the required minimum score on the WD, you will not receive a final numerical rating and will not be placed on the ALJ register." and "If you do not receive the required minimum score on the SI, you will not receive a final numerical rating and will not be placed on the ALJ register.". I read this as the cut at phase 3 is not a cut based on overall score (SJT/WS/EA/WD/LBMT/SI). The cut at phase 3 is based on only one score, the Written Demonstration. And, although the SI was done on the next day it is really a phase 4 test, because according to the announcement you have to pass it independent of all that has come before. Thus, the cut at the "phase 4" is based on only one score, the Structured Interview. So a person could have the highest score on the list moving forward from phase 2 and if they bomb the WD (phase 3) or the SI (phase 4) the don't get a NOR. I would agree with that interpretation completely zebra. There is no doubt that some people may be cut for "bombing" the WD or the SI and never receive a NOR. I do not believe it will be a high number, but there may be some.
|
|
Benny
Full Member
Posts: 56
|
Post by Benny on Sept 19, 2013 14:13:12 GMT -5
So, the prevailing thought is that someone would have to BOMB big time in DC to get left off the register? I suppose that the "minimum score" requirement affords OPM the latitude to cut really poor performers. Since there was such a substantial cut at the last stage, which cut some good people, maybe those left are qualified....unless they BOMB?...
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Sept 19, 2013 14:58:41 GMT -5
So, the prevailing thought is that someone would have to BOMB big time in DC to get left off the register? I suppose that the "minimum score" requirement affords OPM the latitude to cut really poor performers. Since there was such a substantial cut at the last stage, which cut some good people, maybe those left are qualified....unless they BOMB?... That's the way it has been in the past. Unless you really ship the bed in dc you make the register. Your score may be so low you have no real chance of ever getting on a cert much less a job, but you are on the register. Seems like there should be t-shirts or a years supply of Ticonderoga #2 pencils for those in that scenario.
|
|
|
Post by Ace Midnight on Sept 19, 2013 15:14:30 GMT -5
Funk - does anyone know when the last time other agencies had a cert? I know there was a small (Medicare and, maybe, Labor) in 2010, but I don't recall anything in 2011 or 2012. I'm just wondering if they have any pent up demand. Not that it would be significant, but 8 to 10 high scorers getting picked off frees up 8 to 10 vacancies at ODAR.
We're through the looking glass here, people.
|
|
|
Post by 2dognite on Sept 19, 2013 16:16:23 GMT -5
28 tested on 9/19.
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Sept 19, 2013 17:59:33 GMT -5
Funk - does anyone know when the last time other agencies had a cert? I know there was a small (Medicare and, maybe, Labor) in 2010, but I don't recall anything in 2011 or 2012. I'm just wondering if they have any pent up demand. Not that it would be significant, but 8 to 10 high scorers getting picked off frees up 8 to 10 vacancies at ODAR. We're through the looking glass here, people. All I can find reference to is the 6/10 medicare cert. Observer, bart anyone else have any additional info?
|
|
|
Post by nikster on Sept 20, 2013 7:04:08 GMT -5
Funk, I think Labor is going to hire a few for the Federal Mine Safety and Health Commission. They have folks retiring and they haven't filled those positions. Also, they are borrowing ALJs from other agencies (e.g. EPA) to hear cases concerning the Mine Safety and Health Act.
Now, that is just a guess, but I think it's a good one. Lol
|
|
|
Post by Gaidin on Sept 20, 2013 8:43:18 GMT -5
Funk, I think Labor is going to hire a few for the Federal Mine Safety and Health Commission. They have folks retiring and they haven't filled those positions. Also, they are borrowing ALJs from other agencies (e.g. EPA) to hear cases concerning the Mine Safety and Health Act. Now, that is just a guess, but I think it's a good one. Lol That could be good news for those folks who really want to work outside of SSA.
|
|
|
Post by sealaw90 on Sept 20, 2013 8:46:10 GMT -5
Thanks 2dognite for posting! I hope things went well for you and good luck. With a name like that, I hope we get an avatar of your pooches! My dog runs away from the camera, and my kitty either makes obscene poses not suitable for public forums while cleaning himself, or he's sleeping with his face tucked under a paw - neither of which is good for an avatar!
|
|
|
Post by zebra51 on Sept 20, 2013 10:43:13 GMT -5
Funk, I think Labor is going to hire a few for the Federal Mine Safety and Health Commission. They have folks retiring and they haven't filled those positions. Also, they are borrowing ALJs from other agencies (e.g. EPA) to hear cases concerning the Mine Safety and Health Act. Now, that is just a guess, but I think it's a good one. Lol Having spend a number of years as a Safety Professional prior to law school that would be a gig I would very much enjoy.
|
|
Benny
Full Member
Posts: 56
|
Post by Benny on Sept 20, 2013 12:05:55 GMT -5
Speaking of the Bureau of Mine Safety........where are their offices???
|
|
|
Post by sealaw90 on Sept 20, 2013 12:23:37 GMT -5
Speaking of the Bureau of Mine Safety........where are their offices??? Benny, if you are referring to Nikster's post, it is the FMSHC, an independent commission. They have about 20 ALJs (a lot compared to other agencies and commissions!) and are located in DC, Pittsburgh and Denver. Not sure about the Bureau of Mines, some states have those, but Feds have changed the regulation of mining and broken it up, from what I can remember.
|
|