|
|
Post by JudgeRatty on Mar 18, 2014 12:02:18 GMT -5
I signed a waiver and had 2 ALJs and 1 OPM person. Large visible clock. I have yet to hear of anyone who did not sign a waiver.
|
|
|
|
Post by pubdef on Mar 18, 2014 12:05:31 GMT -5
When they called me from the waiting area the guy had the waiver form ready. From reading here, I expectedit to say no private attorney and I would just have the opmer and an alj. It did say no private attorney, but they had found a retired alj so I ended up having 3 interviewers, a sitting alj, a retired alj and the opm rep. Same thing happened to me. I signed a waiver saying they wouldn't have someone, so I expected two people. I went in an interviewed with three people. Not only was there a large digital clock on the table, but the lead interviewer made a point of showing it to me and telling me to keep an eye on it. |
|
|
|
Post by futuressaalj on Mar 18, 2014 12:21:44 GMT -5
When they called me from the waiting area the guy had the waiver form ready. From reading here, I expectedit to say no private attorney and I would just have the opmer and an alj. It did say no private attorney, but they had found a retired alj so I ended up having 3 interviewers, a sitting alj, a retired alj and the opm rep. The form was flashed before me and the guy said no private attorney. I did not really read the form and commented to the OPM staffer "not much of a choice at this point" and he chuckled and said "yeah". I assumed that it would be an ALJ and an OPM person but now that I look back they were both in their early thirties and I think I got stuck with two OPM folks. I do not know how I would have felt if I had not made it on the SI but I would have wondered if not having an ALJ in the room was actually fair to me as opposed to the other candidates who did have the benefit of having an ALJ. Bottom line however is that if I had a problem with the make up of the panel I had the option to no sign the form so in the end it would all be on me |
|
|
|
Post by 71stretch on Mar 18, 2014 12:26:32 GMT -5
Tested during the shutdown, so felt lucky that the SI happened at all, since sitting ALJs were not allowed to participate as they normally would have. Everyone signed a waiver for no private atty. All two person panels as far as I know.. a retired ALJ and an OPM person did mine.
NO visible clock. There was one in 2010, and I was directed to keep an eye on it.
|
|
|
|
Post by steelrain on Mar 18, 2014 12:30:42 GMT -5
I was in the group that tested first and my SI had only two panelists (OPM and ALJ), they had the waivers ready which I signed. There was also a digital clock on the table.
|
|
|
|
Post by moopigsdad on Mar 18, 2014 12:47:42 GMT -5
I was in the group that tested first and my SI had only two panelists (OPM and ALJ), they had the waivers ready which I signed. There was also a digital clock on the table. Same for me (one OPM person and one ALJ, no private attorney), but no digital clock on the table, however I had my wrist watch to use and I did so. |
|
|
|
Post by murphyslaw on Mar 18, 2014 13:23:44 GMT -5
I had no ALJ.
|
|
|
|
Post by FlaTreeFarm on Mar 18, 2014 13:35:22 GMT -5
No, but safe to say there will be a thread on it here when it's received. Looks like that thread just started! |
|
|
|
Post by Gaidin on Mar 18, 2014 13:42:53 GMT -5
When they called me from the waiting area the guy had the waiver form ready. From reading here, I expectedit to say no private attorney and I would just have the opmer and an alj. It did say no private attorney, but they had found a retired alj so I ended up having 3 interviewers, a sitting alj, a retired alj and the opm rep. Same thing happened to me. I signed a waiver saying they wouldn't have someone, so I expected two people. I went in an interviewed with three people. Not only was there a large digital clock on the table, but the lead interviewer made a point of showing it to me and telling me to keep an eye on it. This was exactly my experience. |
|
|
|
Post by murphyslaw on Mar 18, 2014 14:46:44 GMT -5
I just received my appeal email. What basis can we appeal for not receiving the minimum score on the SI? It states that if we believe that it was assigned in error. Of course, we do believe that it was done in error. What should some of the reasons be?
|
|
|
|
Post by JudgeRatty on Mar 18, 2014 14:51:03 GMT -5
I just received my appeal email. What basis can we appeal for not receiving the minimum score on the SI? It states that if we believe that it was assigned in error. Of course, we do believe that it was done in error. What should some of the reasons be? As stated on another thread about the WD, this is the first time anyone has appealed the WD or the SI since it is new to this register process. Hard question to answer for this reason. |
|
|
|
Post by 71stretch on Mar 18, 2014 14:55:00 GMT -5
I just received my appeal email. What basis can we appeal for not receiving the minimum score on the SI? It states that if we believe that it was assigned in error. Of course, we do believe that it was done in error. What should some of the reasons be? As sratty notes, a minimum score on the SI or WD was never required before to get on the register, so no one has done that kind of appeal before. Did you run short of time in answering? Was there a clock in the room? On another thread, some have addressed that as an issue, as it appears the clock was not standard equipment. I would find the SI appeal particularly difficult, as unlike the WD, no reviewer has access to your actual "work product", just the reviewer's notes and score sheet. |
|
|
|
Post by pubdef on Mar 18, 2014 15:02:53 GMT -5
I just received my appeal email. What basis can we appeal for not receiving the minimum score on the SI? It states that if we believe that it was assigned in error. Of course, we do believe that it was done in error. What should some of the reasons be? First, I would not rush to send anything today. My dq was for the written decision, so I guess I am happy they have afforded me 30 days to draft a brief statement about the basis for the appeal. Here is my gameplan. 1) I am going to really think about what it is that happened when I wrote the decision. If it was for SI, I would think about questions that were asked, competencies, and my responses. Did I fully address the question? Did I consider the nuance it was asking for? Did I give them concrete examples? 2) Consider environmental factors or structural error that might have affected my score in a way that there was overall fairness. Was your laptop messed up or did the computer crash and you weren't given additional time? Was there a fire? Was OPM evacuated? Did I ask for a reasonable accommodation that wasn't granted? With the SI, did you not have to sign a waiver but only had a couple people in the room? Did you have access to a clock? Did they refuse to repeat questions? 3) I will consolidate my basis for believing my rating code was an error into a brief statement. I think if you give them a novel you are only going to hurt yourself. They want it to be brief so just give the your reasons you believe you should have at least met the minimum qualifications for the WD/SI. I suspect if you work on this for a few days you can think of some reasons that there might have been an error. Just give them some reason to look back through notes your Structured Interview. Good luck to you. |
|
|
|
Post by pubdef on Mar 18, 2014 15:05:03 GMT -5
For people looking for reasons that their structured interview might not have been fairly scored, I would spend some time looking at OPM's website about how to properly conduct SIs. That might or might not give you some grounds for appealing. It also should give you an idea about what sorts of notes or records are preserved for appeals. www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/assessment-and-selection/structured-interviews/ |
|
