|
|
Post by moopigsdad on Aug 5, 2013 9:40:24 GMT -5
I see there are at least two people who made it to Phase 3 who have decided (they have declared their intentions in posts on this Board) not to go to DC for the testing. If there are two, there are probably more who are not members of the Board or will not state their intentions on the Board. Some Board members have guessed that between non-attendees and those who somehow fail Phase 3 testing that there will be about a 10% drop in the number of original people approved to attend Phase 3. I think this estimate may be pretty much on point. I believe a 5-10% drop is very likely in this part of the process. Anyone else think the numbers of people going on to actually earn a NOR will be the same, higher or lower than the 5-10% drop in total numbers of participants from those originally invited to Phase 3?
|
|
|
|
Post by bartleby on Aug 5, 2013 10:00:43 GMT -5
I am not sure anyone fails Phase 3, I think all attempting it will be given NOR's, but some NOR's will be so low that they will never be considered for a CERT. This new testing model is so different from past ones I may be entirely wrong..
|
|
|
|
Post by moopigsdad on Aug 5, 2013 10:56:25 GMT -5
I am not sure anyone fails Phase 3, I think all attempting it will be given NOR's, but some NOR's will be so low that they will never be considered for a CERT. This new testing model is so different from past ones I may be entirely wrong.. According to the original listing for the examination in USA Jobs, it stated it's possible for someone not to score high enough on the WD to continue on in the process to be listed on the register. |
|
|
|
Post by 71stretch on Aug 5, 2013 11:08:54 GMT -5
All this minutiae about numbers of people really doesn't matter. For those of us doing phase 3, the only thing that matters at this point is doing as well as possible on that testing.
The announcement made everyone think that the WD and LBMT had to be scored before it could be determined that someone would be eligible to move on to the SI. People were fretting about making two trips to DC on their own dime, though some suspected that only one trip would be needed. We now know that one trip is in fact the case. Does it really matter whether someone scores so low on their NOR they will NEVER see a cert, or somehow flunks and doesn't make the register? I think not.
|
|
|
|
Post by bartleby on Aug 5, 2013 11:22:42 GMT -5
Observer53, you are right. I imagine less than 5% of the applicants will be hired in the long run. JMHO.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2013 11:29:33 GMT -5
Observer53, you are right. I imagine less than 5% of the applicants will be hired in the long run. JMHO. Seems like there is a violation of contest/lottery laws somewhere here resulting from the non-disclosure of the actual odds of winning the ALJ lottery. |
|
|
|
Post by hopefalj on Aug 5, 2013 12:35:32 GMT -5
Observer53, you are right. I imagine less than 5% of the applicants will be hired in the long run. JMHO. Seems like there is a violation of contest/lottery laws somewhere here resulting from the non-disclosure of the actual odds of winning the ALJ lottery. Well, 5% of applicants means about 20% of those making it to step 3, so by the time you have skin in the game, your odds have increased significantly. |
|
|
|
Post by moopigsdad on Aug 5, 2013 12:51:02 GMT -5
Seems like there is a violation of contest/lottery laws somewhere here resulting from the non-disclosure of the actual odds of winning the ALJ lottery. Well, 5% of applicants means about 20% of those making it to step 3, so by the time you have skin in the game, your odds have increased significantly. Well stated hopefalj. Using bartleby's only 5% of the applicants will be hired would mean somewhere between 240 to 300 ALJs will be hired. If there are only 1500 left right now and 10% of those get cut in the process for one reason or another (don't travel to DC or just fail miserably in DC), then your odds are really somewhere between 16% to 20% of acquiring a position or one out of every five or six left on the Register will be hired. |
|
|
|
Post by bartleby on Aug 5, 2013 12:55:32 GMT -5
Question is, are the odds of the insiders better than the odds of the outsiders and by what percentage??
|
|
|
|
Post by moopigsdad on Aug 5, 2013 13:20:41 GMT -5
Question is, are the odds of the insiders better than the odds of the outsiders and by what percentage?? Depends upon many factors, but "insiders" will slightly be favored over "outsiders", yet I can see known "outsiders" acquire ALJ positions as well as "insiders". Guessing percentages would be like guessing the numbers of angels that could dance on the head of a pin. However, since you challenge me with your question above, I would venture to guesstimate the breakdown of hires would be 2 out of every three will be "insiders" and 1 out of every 3 will be an "outsider" or perhaps even a 60%/40% breakdown of "insiders" over "outsiders" in terms of hiring at SSA. Do you care to give a guess, bartleby the great???  |
|
|
|
Post by gunner on Aug 5, 2013 13:25:45 GMT -5
Observer53, you are right. I imagine less than 5% of the applicants will be hired in the long run. JMHO. Seems like there is a violation of contest/lottery laws somewhere here resulting from the non-disclosure of the actual odds of winning the ALJ lottery. Usually it's enough to say that the odds of winning depend on the number of entries, so... |
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Aug 5, 2013 13:36:37 GMT -5
The prevailing rumor is this new register is expected to last 3 years. Further, the best info and speculation is the size of the register is based on the number of vacancies each agency that hires from it is expected to have over the period the register is expected to last.
It has been reported on here that SSA loses about 10% of its aljs each year to retirement and other atrition. Further, there are 90+ vacancies now and up to 30 are being hired next month. This means 510 expected SSA alj vacancies over the 3 year life expectancy of the register. The other agencies have less than 10% of the total aljs of SSA. So lets say they have 40 vacancies over the three years and go with a 550 number for total vacancies.
If the new register has 1500 on it, that's around a 35% shot of landing the job for everyone on the register. Should 10% drop out or flub phase 3, those on the register inch closer to 40% shot.
These numbers assume 2 factors as true that are obviously false. For them to be accurate, all candidates on the register would have to be equal. Score differentials, gal differences and maybe insider/outsider status will increase the odds for some and decrease the odds for others.
The largest falsity is the actuality of hiring, however. If we can take the hiring of 30 when there are 90+ vacancies as an indicator, apparently agencies will be constrained by the budget to fill no more than a third of their vacancies. If thatis the case, no more than 183 slots will be filled and baseline chances hover around 12% on a register of 1500. Then, though, the score, gal and perhaps insider/outsider status become even more a factor.
Of course, no one can predict the budgetary future over the expected 3 year life of the register. Noone can even be sure of the life span of the register orits final numbers. So all of thisis an exercise in rank speculation.
As someone noted above, all you can do is try to get the highest score possible. Of all the factors that determine whether you get the gig or not, your scoreis all you can control.
If you score in the top 3rd, have vet pref, have a relatively wide gal and are an insider, my gut says you have as good a chance to land an alj job as any other job you could apply for. Remove anyone of those facts and you still have a decent shot, remove 2 and its a crapshoot. Take away 3 and you have about as much chance as if you bought lottery tickets. None of the 4? Maybe you could sell some tshirts that say "I made the register".
Just my crazy opinion based on pure rumor, speculation and reading this board.
|
|
|
|
Post by 71stretch on Aug 5, 2013 15:05:54 GMT -5
Back to insiders/outsiders again. Good grief, it never ends, finding its way into every thread on this board.  |
|
|
|
Post by moopigsdad on Aug 5, 2013 15:11:34 GMT -5
Back to insiders/outsiders again. Good grief, it never ends, finding its way into every thread on this board. Well you can't stick your head in the sand and pretend it doesn't exist observer53. Based on many posts in the past, SSA does indeed treat certain classes of people off the Register different than others. I am not saying an "outsider" cannot acquire a position, but an "insider" has a slightly better shot with all things being equal. By the way, I am an "outsider", so I know this going in and I am still willing to make a great effort at acquiring a position. |
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Aug 5, 2013 15:11:38 GMT -5
Back to insiders/outsiders again. Good grief, it never ends, finding its way into every thread on this board. Sorry observer. But any discussion/thread trying to guesstimate a person's actual chances of getting a job will have to include some reference to insider/outsider. Reading threads from years ago,it was an issue then and remains an issue now. Atleast this one has not devolved into the debate of which background makes the best aljs. |
|
|
|
Post by valkyrie on Aug 5, 2013 15:14:03 GMT -5
Back to insiders/outsiders again. Good grief, it never ends, finding its way into every thread on this board. If you don't want to be an Insider or Outsider, just be an Offsider! While less controversial, it will cost you five yards and you must replay the down. |
|
|
|
Post by 71stretch on Aug 5, 2013 15:18:23 GMT -5
Back to insiders/outsiders again. Good grief, it never ends, finding its way into every thread on this board. Sorry observer. But any discussion/thread trying to guesstimate a person's actual chances of getting a job will have to include some reference to insider/outsider. Reading threads from years ago,it was an issue then and remains an issue now. Atleast this one has not devolved into the debate of which background makes the best aljs. I don't think it makes as much difference as others do. I've seen plenty of both get hired in my time here. I just think the endless discussion of it gets very old. NONE of us knows what the percentages of both will be on the register, or on any given cert, (nor did they know in the past, when they went around and around about this). Besides, there are so many factors that enter into why someone is or isn't hired that one really can't say that one was, or was not, hired because of their insider/outsider status. Do your best on the test and see what happens. No one can control present or past employment history, so obsessing about one's chances based on that one factor just doesn't make sense. What will be, will be. |
|
|
|
Post by 71stretch on Aug 5, 2013 15:24:55 GMT -5
Back to insiders/outsiders again. Good grief, it never ends, finding its way into every thread on this board. Well you can't stick your head in the sand and pretend it doesn't exist observer53. Based on many posts in the past, SSA does indeed treat certain classes of people off the Register different than others. I am not saying an "outsider" cannot acquire a position, but an "insider" has a slightly better shot with all things being equal. By the way, I am an "outsider", so I know this going in and I am still willing to make a great effort at acquiring a position. Whether it will exist on any future cert (let's just leave it at that) we don't know. I'm not sticking my head in the sand, but I can't DO anything about it either, so obessively thinking about how many of this or that will make the register or make a cert and what will happen when they do is not worth my time, or, IMO, anyone else's. Concentrate on your real life and real job, do the best you can on the testing, and do your best to pick good references and "interview well" if you land on a cert. Beyond that, it is completely out of the control of any of us. I think bartleby's number is a bit low, but it is still a very competitive environment in which the large majority will end up disappointed. |
|
|
|
Post by redryder on Aug 5, 2013 15:38:13 GMT -5
Observer 53: Take heart. When someone on the cert is an SSA insider, you can count on the following: the candidate's immediate supervisor/hearing office director/hearing office chief judge will all be contacted and asked to give opinions regarding the candidate's suitability as a judge whether these folks were listed as references or not; the candidate has a personnel folder containing performance evaluations; and SSA can easily ascertain how productive that candidate was as the agency keeps records of these things. If all of these are favorable, that candidate may have an advantage over the outsider. But if not, . . .
|
|
|
|
Post by valkyrie on Aug 5, 2013 15:39:58 GMT -5
The insider/outsider issue appears to be very different this time around. Trying to extrapolate the numbers from the Board is by definition a pretty inexact science, but we can get a pretty good idea of the insider numbers through those that post on the board, as well as our own personal networks of ODAR employees. The overall impression I am getting at this point is that, regardless of the reasons, very few ODAR insiders have advanced in the selection process this time around. Thats huge. Whether anyone likes it or not, an insider that is well-regarded by the powers-that-be can only trump everyone else if he/she makes it onto the register.
|
|
