|
Post by 71stretch on Oct 17, 2013 12:33:17 GMT -5
The three strike rule and the rule of three are two completely different things. Getting rid of having to look first at the top three scores (and I have no idea what the status/effect of that EO really is) doesn't change the rule about only having to give an applicant bona fide consideration three times for the same job. I agree that they are different. I disagree that Category Rating "doesn't change the rule about only having to give an applicant bona fide consideration three times for the same job." OPM policy on Category Rating specifically states "(4)The “three consideration” rule embodied in 5 CFR 332.405 does not apply in category rating." www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/human-capital-management/hiring-reform/reference/categoryratingpolicytemplate.pdfThanks for that! I really would like to know to what extent OPM, and more importantly, the agencies it serves, have implemented the EO at all. They obviously have not done it in the ALJ process, and SSA/ODAR is still cheerfully striking people, of course, and excluding them en masse from even being on certs.
|
|
|
Post by zebra51 on Oct 17, 2013 12:44:34 GMT -5
FROM THE MOST RECENT ANNOUNCEMENT:
Receiving Employment Consideration:
If you receive a NOR with a final numerical rating, your name will be placed on the new ALJ register. The ALJ register is a list of candidates eligible for selection used to make referrals to agencies for employment consideration when they have entry level ALJ vacancies to fill. Names are referred in descending rank order, based on the duty location of the position(s) to be filled and the geographical preference of candidates. It is the responsibility of the hiring agency to make selections from the list of candidates referred for employment consideration from among the highest three available names, taking into consideration veterans' preference and other civil service rules.
I guess in theory OPM could take the "and other civil service rules" disclaimer and do hiring on any new certs by Category Rating.
|
|
|
Post by 71stretch on Oct 17, 2013 12:57:07 GMT -5
Still says "from the highest three available names".... sounds like they (SSA/ODAR) aren't playing yet.
|
|
|
Post by epic0ego on Oct 17, 2013 13:02:53 GMT -5
FROM THE MOST RECENT ANNOUNCEMENT: Receiving Employment Consideration: If you receive a NOR with a final numerical rating, your name will be placed on the new ALJ register. The ALJ register is a list of candidates eligible for selection used to make referrals to agencies for employment consideration when they have entry level ALJ vacancies to fill. Names are referred in descending rank order, based on the duty location of the position(s) to be filled and the geographical preference of candidates. It is the responsibility of the hiring agency to make selections from the list of candidates referred for employment consideration from among the highest three available names, taking into consideration veterans' preference and other civil service rules.
I guess in theory OPM could take the "and other civil service rules" disclaimer and do hiring on any new certs by Category Rating. I don't want to belabor the point, but I think that language also leaves alot of room for construing "available." With so many candidates having wide open GALs, high-scorers could be moved around to reflect the desired hierarchy in a given city. Sometimes we think rigid application of the rules results in the most fair outcome, but I'm not sure that's true. In the end, all agencies end up with the people they think they want, at least initially.
|
|
|
Post by ssaogc on Oct 17, 2013 13:16:33 GMT -5
Folks, please read the EO, the ALJ Job announcement and the OPM guidance regarding categorical hiring/rating--it is all on the web. The EO was issued on 5/11/10. I do not want to belabor the point but the one in three selections will be used in hiring folks to be ALJs. The job announcement made that abundantely clear granting 5 or 10 vet points (does not exist in categorical scheme) and as the lead agency OPM can choose to exempt the ALJ hiring from categorical method. Categorical methodology requires that each vet be passed by a non vet after burdensome administrative procedures. Moreover, the ALJ register itself, with the ranking of scores from an examination does not lend itself to the Categorical methodology of Highly qualified and qualified personnel.
|
|
|
Post by Ace Midnight on Oct 17, 2013 14:53:19 GMT -5
I agree. The rule of three is still in effect for this register - it is explicit in all of the documentation. I don't know how much "wiggle" room they have with the other (some, not me, might call it weaselly) language, but, as always, the 10-point Veterans (with 10% or greater disability) have the ultimate leg up, the non-compensable 10-point (Ace Midnight raises hand) and 5-point are next (with the Veterans who also score high objectively, pre-preference being in a particularly advantageous position), and the non-Vet high scorers are next.
It is NOT a guarantee - as veterans and/or high-scorers go unhired and people with 50s got hired last year. However, as with ANY percentage/numbers game - your chances of winning are better with better numbers/odds/cards, period.
|
|
|
Post by redryder on Oct 17, 2013 16:01:05 GMT -5
It is amazing that for all of these comments about SSA not playing by the rules in ALJ selection, no one has been able to point to so much as one legal action where someone proved this was so. Seems like with all the hiring since 2007, someone, somewhere would have done this, and succeeded if this practice is as rampant as it sounds. Or the people in Falls Church are geniuses to be able to perpetrate this practice without being detected even once. Or is it an interagency conspiracy? Having witnessed the flurry of activity/grievances a non-selection can generate in an ODAR field office, I tend to believe the rules are being applied. The people not selected simply did not do well in their agency interviews. If they were insiders, there may be something in the info gathered from management or their own work records that worked against them. Were the people who did not get selected bad people? No. But it is like every other competition in life. Not everyone will win. Not everyone is admitted to law school. Not everyone passes the bar exam. Not everyone will be selected to be an ALJ.
|
|
|
Post by 71stretch on Oct 17, 2013 16:37:34 GMT -5
It is amazing that for all of these comments about SSA not playing by the rules in ALJ selection, no one has been able to point to so much as one legal action where someone proved this was so. Seems like with all the hiring since 2007, someone, somewhere would have done this, and succeeded if this practice is as rampant as it sounds. Or the people in Falls Church are geniuses to be able to perpetrate this practice without being detected even once. Or is it an interagency conspiracy? Having witnessed the flurry of activity/grievances a non-selection can generate in an ODAR field office, I tend to believe the rules are being applied. The people not selected simply did not do well in their agency interviews. If they were insiders, there may be something in the info gathered from management or their own work records that worked against them. Were the people who did not get selected bad people? No. But it is like every other competition in life. Not everyone will win. Not everyone is admitted to law school. Not everyone passes the bar exam. Not everyone will be selected to be an ALJ. I think they are playing by the rules. There's plenty of ways to work around issues, within the rules, when you are hiring many people at a time as opposed to filling one job from the top three applicants. And, ODAR does that. All anyone can do is do the best they possibly can with the interview, choosing/prepping references, etc.
|
|
|
Post by Ace Midnight on Oct 17, 2013 18:05:10 GMT -5
For all the urban legend about the process - I agree with redryder. And as I said earlier, there are veterans throughout the Federal service. Would all of them remain silent if they became aware of mistreatment of the preference eligibles?
Also, there are a significant number of judges who came from the outside - who sat in the same position that many of our current applicants are in now. Would they all remain silent, if they became aware of a bias against outsiders?
The process is not fully transparent, and that is on the people who administer it. It does cause rank speculation (to bring back our favorite activity of the past summer) and it is understandable. However, this does not mean they are concealing some nefarious practice. It is a complicated, perhaps unnecessarily so, but a complicated and complex procedure. It is also clear that OPM and ODAR do not always see eye-to-eye on this process. However, I have seen no credible evidence of any nefarious intent.
|
|