|
Post by privateatty on Mar 16, 2014 9:24:47 GMT -5
I have done the same. Hoping for the best Are you going to prove that you were an active Member of a Bar in good standing for 7 years and that your current position precludes you from being in that status?
|
|
|
Post by State ALJ on Mar 17, 2014 7:25:53 GMT -5
I intend to, although I can't get that documentation from the bars for a few days, especially now that snow is slowing everything down in my area.
|
|
|
Post by 71stretch on Mar 17, 2014 8:23:24 GMT -5
This might have been covered somewhere, but my impression of OPM is that they are looking for the easiest way to nix someone - for bar membership, I applied one year and instead of the exact date that I received bar membership, I only put the month and year - I got dinged on it and didn't get to move on in the process. I didn't bother appealing - while it might have been a "technicality", I was in error. I don't think I ever gave them, this time or last time, the exact date that's on my bar certificate. Just the month and the year. We've seen that there are apparent inconsistencies in how the initial applications are evaluated. In some cases, the bar membership issue is no different. That said, I disagree that they are intentionally "looking for the easiest way to nix someone".
|
|
|
Post by downbutnotout on Mar 17, 2014 12:34:05 GMT -5
Thanks for that link - I plan to send another email to the help desk as I view this as a celrical error and not one that should rise to the level of an appeal. At the least, I will have had a dry run at my core argument should I have to appeal. Good luck to all!
Update - official help desk email sent. I explained that in my view a clerical error had occured. I attached letters of good standing (for 2012 and 2013) along with my membership fee submittal form that clearly shows I am authorized my current status and authorized to practice law as a Federal attorney. I am hopeful this canbe cleared up without the need for an appeal.
By the way - has anyone seen an appeal form yet? I would have expected it to have followed on the heels of the initial notice.
|
|
|
Post by 71stretch on Mar 17, 2014 13:05:31 GMT -5
By the way - has anyone seen an appeal form yet? I would have expected it to have followed on the heels of the initial notice. No. Be assured there will be a thread here when those arrive, as EVERYONE gets them, even those who got a score.
|
|
|
Post by downbutnotout on Mar 17, 2014 13:08:46 GMT -5
Thanks - I'll be on the lookout for that thread.
|
|
|
Post by gingerbread on Mar 17, 2014 16:16:14 GMT -5
Hi, I had the same issue -- was quite shocked to get "ineligible" after all these tests, based on failure to supply bar #. I've been active member of my state bar since 1997, so I can't understand why they didn't either contact me re: the bar number, or the state bar (my bar # is available by punching my name in online).
In any event, can anyone supply the email address to send proof of membership, and please share any responses anyone gets! I was set to appeal this, but haven't gotten any appeal form. Why would they say I passed the initial screening, then have me take all these tests, only to eliminate me based on a non-substantive issue like failure to supply my bar #?
|
|
|
Post by JudgeRatty on Mar 17, 2014 17:22:22 GMT -5
Hi, I had the same issue -- was quite shocked to get "ineligible" after all these tests, based on failure to supply bar #. I've been active member of my state bar since 1997, so I can't understand why they didn't either contact me re: the bar number, or the state bar (my bar # is available by punching my name in online). In any event, can anyone supply the email address to send proof of membership, and please share any responses anyone gets! I was set to appeal this, but haven't gotten any appeal form. Why would they say I passed the initial screening, then have me take all these tests, only to eliminate me based on a non-substantive issue like failure to supply my bar #? I personally know of 2 people from the last application process both of whom were ineligible for exactly this reason...leaving off the bar number. This issue seems to come up on every application. They do not have a duty to contact your state bar at all and they will not do so. The folks I know who had this happen were supremely sad and frustrated for this technical omission. aljdiscussion.proboards.com/post/36858/threadI have to add, this is usually something that they catch at the first step! Going through testing all the way and THEN getting ineligible for this is no doubt more than frustrating!
|
|
|
Post by 71stretch on Mar 17, 2014 17:33:29 GMT -5
Hi, I had the same issue -- was quite shocked to get "ineligible" after all these tests, based on failure to supply bar #. I've been active member of my state bar since 1997, so I can't understand why they didn't either contact me re: the bar number, or the state bar (my bar # is available by punching my name in online). In any event, can anyone supply the email address to send proof of membership, and please share any responses anyone gets! I was set to appeal this, but haven't gotten any appeal form. Why would they say I passed the initial screening, then have me take all these tests, only to eliminate me based on a non-substantive issue like failure to supply my bar #? I personally know of 2 people from the last application process both of whom were ineligible for exactly this reason...leaving off the bar number. This issue seems to come up on every application. They do not have a duty to contact your state bar at all and they will not do so. The folks I know who had this happen were supremely sad and frustrated for this technical omission. aljdiscussion.proboards.com/post/36858/threadI have to add, this is usually something that they catch at the first step! Going through testing all the way and THEN getting ineligible for this is no doubt more than frustrating! It's something that they caught much earlier in the process with the prior registers. They have had PLENTY of time to check such things while the other phases of the testing were being completed. It does seem unfair to wait this long to DQ on info submitted (or not submitted) at phase 1. Word to the wise: Read the instructions carefully. If they ask for something, (and they did ask for bar number) give it to them. Hopefully providing that info will keep you from having to do a formal appeal. It may not, however. Do not wait on a response to any email to the help desk before appealing, once you get that info.
|
|
|
Post by gingerbread on Mar 17, 2014 19:42:17 GMT -5
Yes, I think if they had disqualified me at the beginning for leaving my bar number off the questionnaire, I would have thought it was petty, but hey, my bad, right? But if they tell me I passed the initial screening, I take hours and hours of tests, fly to DC, etc., then it's a different story. Kind of seems like equitable estoppel principles would apply . . . we shall see.
|
|
leo68
Full Member
Posts: 33
|
Post by leo68 on Mar 18, 2014 9:32:20 GMT -5
I sent a message to the ALJ application help desk in which I cut and pasted the responses I provided in my original application regarding my licensure. In my original application I provided my bar number, the date of my admission to the bar, and confirmation that I am, and have been since 1998, an active member of the bar. My hope is that someone will see this is not an instance of an applicant omitting pertinent information or erring in some other way. Instead, this is simply a mistake on the part of a personnel tech who overlooked, or maybe misunderstood what (s)he was looking at. Fingers crossed.
|
|
|
Post by gingerbread on Mar 18, 2014 10:23:20 GMT -5
leo68, do you mind posting the email address for the help desk? I am going to go over to my state bar office tomorrow to get a letter of proof of membership. Good luck and let us know what happens!
|
|
|
Post by 71stretch on Mar 18, 2014 10:47:25 GMT -5
leo68, do you mind posting the email address for the help desk? I am going to go over to my state bar office tomorrow to get a letter of proof of membership. Good luck and let us know what happens! Here's the help desk address (also added to the "how to" sticky thread on hiring) ALJApplication@opm.gov
|
|
leo68
Full Member
Posts: 33
|
Post by leo68 on Mar 18, 2014 11:14:37 GMT -5
leo68, do you mind posting the email address for the help desk? I am going to go over to my state bar office tomorrow to get a letter of proof of membership. Good luck and let us know what happens! Thanks observer. I will certainly keep you posted.
|
|
|
Post by dpageks on Mar 18, 2014 12:01:48 GMT -5
There seem to be a few of us who got bumped because of issues with bar membership although we are active/in good standing. I thought I would start a thread here so we can consolidate our discussions and share strategies. Here's something that may help with your issue.
|
|
|
Post by 71stretch on Mar 18, 2014 12:21:43 GMT -5
There seem to be a few of us who got bumped because of issues with bar membership although we are active/in good standing. I thought I would start a thread here so we can consolidate our discussions and share strategies. Here's something that may help with your issue.
View AttachmentView Attachment
That's exactly the language that was quoted on the application as well.
|
|
|
Post by downbutnotout on Mar 18, 2014 12:24:14 GMT -5
I sent a message to the ALJ application help desk in which I cut and pasted the responses I provided in my original application regarding my licensure. In my original application I provided my bar number, the date of my admission to the bar, and confirmation that I am, and have been since 1998, an active member of the bar. My hope is that someone will see this is not an instance of an applicant omitting pertinent information or erring in some other way. Instead, this is simply a mistake on the part of a personnel tech who overlooked, or maybe misunderstood what (s)he was looking at. Fingers crossed. I wish I'd thought of copying and pasting my original answers. Like you I had the bar # etc in there. I did send outside documentation to support my responses, so I am also hoping that highlights it as a mistake. I noticed when I sent that in that there were are about 45 more helop tickets that have been issues since I sent my first request in Thursday night. Perhaps if there are a significant enough number focused on this issue, the agency will self-correct and save us the delay the appeal process.
|
|
tinkerbell
Full Member
All you need is faith, trust and a little bit of pixie dust. - Tinker Bell
Posts: 60
|
Post by tinkerbell on Mar 18, 2014 12:30:14 GMT -5
There seem to be a few of us who got bumped because of issues with bar membership although we are active/in good standing. I thought I would start a thread here so we can consolidate our discussions and share strategies. Here's something that may help with your issue.
How I read the language is that "good standing" is a replacement for "active." While reasonable minds may disagree, the jurisdiction I am licensed in does not have an "active" status. Those who are able to practice law in the jurisdiction have a "good standing" designation.
|
|
|
Post by 71stretch on Mar 18, 2014 12:43:30 GMT -5
Here's something that may help with your issue.
How I read the language is that "good standing" is a replacement for "active." While reasonable minds may disagree, the jurisdiction I am licensed in does not have an "active" status. Those who are able to practice law in the jurisdiction have a "good standing" designation. It does say that it depends on what your licensing authority says, or calls "active" practice. If your licensing authority confirms in writing to OPM that "good standing" is their equivalent for active, (which status they don't have) you should be in good shape on this issue.
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Mar 18, 2014 13:02:24 GMT -5
I sent a message to the ALJ application help desk in which I cut and pasted the responses I provided in my original application regarding my licensure. In my original application I provided my bar number, the date of my admission to the bar, and confirmation that I am, and have been since 1998, an active member of the bar. My hope is that someone will see this is not an instance of an applicant omitting pertinent information or erring in some other way. Instead, this is simply a mistake on the part of a personnel tech who overlooked, or maybe misunderstood what (s)he was looking at. Fingers crossed. I find it appalling that folks would be cut after going to DC for something that should have been, and was on past testing, caught at the initial phase. If you didn't prove active licensure at the initial assessment phase (not saying you folks didn't) how were you allowed to go forward when so many others were cut for similar perceived failures to prove basic qualifications at that phase? I suspect the answer is one party was assigned those checks at phase 1 and you, in that party's judgemnt passed. But, just prior to nor release another party was tasked with making sure all the details were met and took a more technical approach. in any event, you folks have my sympathy and empathy. Now, I sincerely don't wish to be considered a downer, but I highly doubt the fine folks at the helpdesk will be able to help you. Some have mentioned steelrain's successful helpdesk interaction as providing hope for you on this route. But his situation is entirely different. He had received an nor and was on the register. It wasn't a disqualification. He merely pointed out a math error (he was given 5 instead of the 10 vet points he was entitled and had previously submitted documentation for). In contrast, your situation has resulted in a DQ. The help desk folks don't DQ and can't "re-Q" anyone. While the timing of your DQ is new and tragic, the type of DQ is not. There has been much written in old posts about people who were cut at the old initial phase (the accomplishment record) for putting only the month/year of bar admission or having been deemed not "active." From what I have read and heard, all required Appeals. One alj friend told me he missed the cut in 2007 for failing to put the actual day of his bar admission. He appealed and lost. Apparently the review is not de novo. They will look only at your submissions and determine if the requirements in the instrux were met. He ultimately reapplied in 2010, carefully checked every dotted I and crossed T and was hired in 2011. He told me had heard others won the Appeal so there you go. I tell you this not to discourage you from trying the help desk, by all means do so. I would as well. But don't invest too much hope in the thought that this is some easily fixed error on their part. Prepare yourself for the emotional drain of appealing and waiting for a response. Best of luck all. While I have seen many friends from the board get cut at the different phases, you folks in this boat got the deepest shafting by far IMHO.
|
|