|
Post by hopefalj on Mar 29, 2014 19:43:52 GMT -5
I haven't kept up with this entire thread - but I've dug through some of the GAL, region-by-region polls and I've come up with an estimate - when people vote within a region, roughly half the voters are picking the least popular city within that region. So, again with my stubby pencil and Big Chief tablet, I estimate that roughly half of the register includes people with, give or take 179 locations on their GAL. Doesn't that sound low, though? ETA: I added a poll (my first) to try to firm these numbers up - I called it, cryptically, "Classify your GAL". To be honest, that actually sounds high to me. This is one area where I think there is going to be a bias from the board that will not accurately reflect the register. People who researched the board prior to the application likely have broader GALs on the whole than those who were not familiar with it. This to me is most clearly shown by the numerous threads cited by experienced posters to choose as wide a GAL as humanly possible as well as the regret/disappointment expressed by folks that found this board at some point after their applications were submitted.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeRatty on Mar 29, 2014 19:53:47 GMT -5
I haven't kept up with this entire thread - but I've dug through some of the GAL, region-by-region polls and I've come up with an estimate - when people vote within a region, roughly half the voters are picking the least popular city within that region. So, again with my stubby pencil and Big Chief tablet, I estimate that roughly half of the register includes people with, give or take 179 locations on their GAL. Doesn't that sound low, though? ETA: I added a poll (my first) to try to firm these numbers up - I called it, cryptically, "Classify your GAL". To be honest, that actually sounds high to me. This is one area where I think there is going to be a bias from the board that will not accurately reflect the register. People who researched the board prior to the application likely have broader GALs on the whole than those who were not familiar with it. This to me is most clearly shown by the numerous threads cited by experienced posters to choose as wide a GAL as humanly possible as well as the regret/disappointment expressed by folks that found this board at some point after their applications were submitted. Agree 100%.
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Mar 29, 2014 20:37:29 GMT -5
Propmasters demographic poll indicated around 33% had gals of 76 or more cities if I recall correctly.
I don't think the individual city (by region) polls can be extrapulated to mean 50% are wide open ace. I think people may be wide open within a region but have no selections in other regions.
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Mar 29, 2014 20:43:00 GMT -5
Take, for instance, region 5. The lowest getting vote totals for any city was 21. There were 49 voters. While some of the 21 may actually have a narrow gal that includes mt pleasant or peoria, I bet most of the 21 voted for them because they have every office in reg 5 in their gal. but they may have none in regions 4, 6 and so on.
Also, there is a not insignificant difference in the total numbers voting in each region.
|
|
|
Post by 71stretch on Mar 29, 2014 21:35:27 GMT -5
Propmasters demographic poll indicated around 33% had gals of 76 or more cities if I recall correctly. I don't think the individual city (by region) polls can be extrapulated to mean 50% are wide open ace. I think people may be wide open within a region but have no selections in other regions. I also suspect this is the case with a significant number of people.
|
|
|
Post by Ace Midnight on Mar 29, 2014 21:54:03 GMT -5
Propmasters demographic poll indicated around 33% had gals of 76 or more cities if I recall correctly. I don't think the individual city (by region) polls can be extrapulated to mean 50% are wide open ace. I think people may be wide open within a region but have no selections in other regions. And I agree this can certainly be the case - a region by region preference, with individual cuts and "selectives" from outside the region picking choice locations. However, in the early results of my poll - it looks like only 1/3 are at 100% (and I agree that one area our board population might be overrepresented is 100% - or wide GAL) - when you add in the "wide, but not everywhere" group, it gets to approximately half. What really surprised me - again, this is early, only 34 when I last checked - the single biggest category is the 25 cities or less - getting 12 votes, or less than 1/3. If we leap to a conclusion that many of these very "selectives" (heck, why not?) may have also picked popular cities that are traditionally filled by transfers, rather than new appointments - as has been the subject of many discussions of late - that could make some of these certificates very interesting.
|
|
|
Post by westernalj on Mar 30, 2014 12:58:55 GMT -5
I submitted a wide open GAL, but always planned to narrow it at the cert stage. I would like to begin a deeper analysis as to which locations I would select for this cert. I thought others might be in a similar position. I'd be appreciative of the board's thoughts as to which locations are most likely to be on the first cert for the new register.
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Mar 30, 2014 14:00:07 GMT -5
I gave my theory on the way the 90 hires will be broken down in some other thread. Based on historical trends, the transfer list, insider rumors on which offices have space and need, and the report by some judges in the know concerning region 9 being "judge heavy," I believe it will look something like this:
2/3 of the hires (60) will go to Regions 5 and 4. They are two large regions, have many offices in places some consider crapland, are heavy on the "transfer out" side of the list (except for certain popular cities) and have historically been the landing place for a majority of new hires. Thus, I think if your score is above the mean and you have all or most of region 5 and 4 in your gal, you are sitting pretty. Assuming you would really go to the rust belt or deep south.
The remaining 1/3 of this hire (30) I think will be split up among the other 8 regions. I think region 1 offices are pretty popular so maybe only 1 there. Region 2, which includes PR, I think will get 5 or 6.
Region 3, my guess is 5. Region 6 is in some need and has a fair share of "crapland," so I think 10 there.
The remaining 8 or 9 positions going to regions 7,8, 10 and 9. In that order of likelihood. Maybe none in region 9 this go round.
As for where in each region....the transfer list is probably the best indicator. if it looks like everyone wants out and there are none wanting in...good bet they have open office space. As someone pointed out, that's maybe the driving factor. Not workload (because excess can be shifted to nhc or other judges with less thanks to video hearings) and not staff (if under staffed for the number of aljs they can hire. They don't really appear to care if overstaffed per alj, they just outsource some understaffed offices writing and even workup to an overstaffed office periodically).
Also, I wouldn't expect too many openings in any of the newest offices. There was mass hiring and transferring to them in 2010 and I gotta think most people that transferred there won't want out.
|
|
|
Post by futuressaalj on Mar 30, 2014 14:07:34 GMT -5
I gave my theory on the way the 90 hires will be broken down in some other thread. Based on historical trends, the transfer list, insider rumors on which offices have space and need, and the report by some judges in the know concerning region 9 being "judge heavy," I believe it will look something like this: 2/3 of the hires (60) will go to Regions 5 and 4. They are two large regions, have many offices in places some consider crapland, are heavy on the "transfer out" side of the list (except for certain popular cities) and have historically been the landing place for a majority of new hires. Thus, I think if your score is above the mean and you have all or most of region 5 and 4 in your gal, you are sitting pretty. Assuming you would really go to the rust belt or deep south. The remaining 1/3 of this hire (30) I think will be split up among the other 8 regions. I think region 1 offices are pretty popular so maybe only 1 there. Region 2, which includes PR, I think will get 5 or 6. Region 3, my guess is 5. Region 6 is in some need and has a fair share of "crapland," so I think 10 there. The remaining 8 or 9 positions going to regions 7,8, 10 and 9. In that order of likelihood. Maybe none in region 9 this go round. As for where in each region....the transfer list is probably the best indicator. if it looks like everyone wants out and there are none wanting in...good bet they have open office space. As someone pointed out, that's maybe the driving factor. Not workload (because excess can be shifted to nhc or other judges with less thanks to video hearings) and not staff (if under staffed for the number of aljs they can hire. They don't really appear to care if overstaffed per alj, they just outsource some understaffed offices writing and even workup to an overstaffed office periodically). Also, I wouldn't expect too many openings in any of the newest offices. There was mass hiring and transferring to them in 2010 and I gotta think most people that transferred there won't want out. Hey Funk change ypur name to the "voice of reason"
|
|
|
Post by westernalj on Mar 30, 2014 17:10:38 GMT -5
I appreciate the input as to the regions that will be hiring, but that doesn't help me do my analysis. I'm really interested in specific locations.
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Mar 30, 2014 17:22:47 GMT -5
I don't think anybody can tell you that western. Other than I'd bet my tsp contributions that toledo is one of em, no other insight.
|
|
|
Post by sandiferhands (old) on Mar 30, 2014 17:30:35 GMT -5
Western, I and others have asked in threads if it was possible to find out at this point where vacancies are currently, or where hiring is targeted to take place. The gist of the responses in-the-know is that we cannot get that info now, it is just not available.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeRatty on Mar 30, 2014 17:32:38 GMT -5
Western, I and others have asked in threads if it was possible to find out at this point where vacancies are currently, or where hiring is targeted to take place. The gist of the responses in-the-know is that we cannot get that info now, it is just not available. Exactly. It is a moving target. Transfers first then leftovers for new hires.
|
|
|
Post by costco on Mar 30, 2014 22:39:29 GMT -5
I appreciate the input as to the regions that will be hiring, but that doesn't help me do my analysis. I'm really interested in specific locations. Western, here are the offices in R4: Atlanta (Downtown) HO Atlanta (North) HO Augusta HO Birmingham HO Charleston HO Charlotte HO Chattanooga HO Columbia HO Covington HO Fayetteville HO Florence HO Fort Lauderdale HO Fort Myers SO Franklin HO Greensboro HO Greenville HO Hattiesburg HO Jackson HO Jacksonville HO Kingsport HO Knoxville HO Lexington HO Louisville HO Macon HO Memphis HO Miami HO Middlesboro HO Mobile HO Montgomery HO Nashville HO Orlando HO Paducah HO Raleigh HO Savannah HO St. Petersburg HO Tallahassee HO Tampa HO Tupelo HO And, here are the offices in R5: Akron HO Chicago HO Chicago NHC Cincinnati HO Cleveland HO Columbus HO Dayton HO Detroit HO Evanston HO Evansville HO Flint HO Fort Wayne HO Grand Rapids HO Indianapolis HO Lansing HO Livonia HO Madison HO Milwaukee HO Minneapolis HO Mount Pleasant HO Oak Brook HO Oak Park HO Orland Park HO Peoria HO Toledo HO Valparaiso HO That should give you a good start. However, if you see a city that you would like to live in, like maybe Tampa, then you can bet that city won't be on the cert.
|
|
|
Post by Gaidin on Mar 31, 2014 8:50:09 GMT -5
I appreciate the input as to the regions that will be hiring, but that doesn't help me do my analysis. I'm really interested in specific locations. However, if you see a city that you would like to live in, like maybe Tampa, then you can bet that city won't be on the cert. This made me chuckle. Gallows humor at its finest. Probably also completely accurate. Western nobody has any idea which specific cities will be on the cert. I predict Cincinnati but that is based on how many people were on the transfer list out last fall.
|
|
|
Post by moopigsdad on Mar 31, 2014 8:50:51 GMT -5
I appreciate the input as to the regions that will be hiring, but that doesn't help me do my analysis. I'm really interested in specific locations. Western, here are the offices in R4: Atlanta (Downtown) HO Atlanta (North) HO Augusta HO Birmingham HO Charleston HO Charlotte HO Chattanooga HO Columbia HO Covington HO Fayetteville HO Florence HO Fort Lauderdale HO Fort Myers SO Franklin HO Greensboro HO Greenville HO Hattiesburg HO Jackson HO Jacksonville HO Kingsport HO Knoxville HO Lexington HO Louisville HO Macon HO Memphis HO Miami HO Middlesboro HO Mobile HO Montgomery HO Nashville HO Orlando HO Paducah HO Raleigh HO Savannah HO St. Petersburg HO Tallahassee HO Tampa HO Tupelo HO And, here are the offices in R5: Akron HO Chicago HO Chicago NHC Cincinnati HO Cleveland HO Columbus HO Dayton HO Detroit HO Evanston HO Evansville HO Flint HO Fort Wayne HO Grand Rapids HO Indianapolis HO Lansing HO Livonia HO Madison HO Milwaukee HO Minneapolis HO Mount Pleasant HO Oak Brook HO Oak Park HO Orland Park HO Peoria HO Toledo HO Valparaiso HO That should give you a good start. However, if you see a city that you would like to live in, like maybe Tampa, then you can bet that city won't be on the cert. I am willing to bet more than half or almost 60% of those cities you listed costco, will not be on the cert.
|
|
|
Post by useorlose on Mar 31, 2014 9:25:55 GMT -5
More evidence that one person's crapland is another's dreamland. From where I live, Toledo would work nicely.
|
|
|
Post by sealaw90 on Mar 31, 2014 9:37:56 GMT -5
Is there any relation to the last group of hires (fall 2013)and their office locations, and which locations might be available this spring? I ask because last years hires were as follows; R4, Greenville 2 Knoxville 1 Macon 1 Middlesboro 1 Paducah 1 Tupelo 1
R5, Columbus 1 Fort Wayne 1 Indianapolis 1 Mt Pleasant 2 Toledo 2 Valparaiso 1
This info was from a very generous current ALJ who posted this last year. As far as this year, I know that transfers are currently going on, but no one has posted any info about specific locales getting transfers, or offices that have enough space for another ALJ, etc. Any takers???
|
|
paris
New Member
Posts: 16
|
Post by paris on Mar 31, 2014 13:31:11 GMT -5
Hello. Are you referring to the cert just requested and or received when you say no region 9. Is it speculation or from someone who knows. Can you give more info about what transfers made to region 9 or info about expected transfers or openings. Thank you very much.
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Mar 31, 2014 13:47:30 GMT -5
Hello. Are you referring to the cert just requested and or received when you say no region 9. Is it speculation or from someone who knows. Can you give more info about what transfers made to region 9 or info about expected transfers or openings. Thank you very much. Paris (talk about a popular city), If you are referring to my theory on where the hires will go, its all pure speculation. No one will know for sure until the cert notifications start to go out. As to the basis of my belief that region 9 may be left out in the cold this time around, its really based on 3 things. 1. the last cert reportedly had only one city from region 9 on it. 2. region 9 cities are all generally popular places. A quick perusal of the recent transfer lists (posted by some helpful folks on here) reveals a lot more wanting into region 9 than wanting out. That generally means openings will be filled from transfer and not from new hires so no cert necessary. 3. finally, a couple of board member judges have reported that region 9 is "judge heavy" meaning overstaffed. So, not a lot of needin those areas. I may be totally wrong, but given all that I'd be very surprised if region 9 offices are on this cert. Maybe one or 2, but not many.
|
|