|
Post by funkyodar on Apr 13, 2014 9:45:50 GMT -5
Ladies and Gentlemen, boys and girls, candidates of all ages!!!
I just got a pm from someone I would characterize as a majorly reliable source concerning the cert. I realize its hearsay and you guys can of course give It any level of credence you want, but I personally think its veracity, given the source, is dead on. And its huge.
Here's the info:
Certs are being requested from OPM tomorrow and will be for 40 to 45 cities.
They are requesting 5 names per city. Not sure if that means 200 to 225 folks or if it means some that are on multiple cities will be counted as multiple cert slots.
And the biggest news yet.....Under the new process, odar is not just gonna allow you to opt out of a city or so, they are gonna let you rank the cities you are on the certs for in order of which you prefer most. Wow.
Guys, this just got real. Again, believe or don't at your own discretion. I'm just the conduit. But, the source has proven highly reliable and "in the know" way too often for me to doubt.
Good luck everybody.
(And no, I will not disclose the source, not in a pm or otherwise. Folks tell me this stuff in pm and let me pass it on because I think they know they can trust me when I say I won't disclose their identity. You arejust gonna have to trust me, or dont.)
|
|
|
Post by westernalj on Apr 13, 2014 10:00:33 GMT -5
That doesn't sound like a 90 hire cert, unless most cities have multiple slots.
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Apr 13, 2014 10:04:56 GMT -5
I think most do, western. Some will get more than the 2 average, some just 1. But I expect the average of 2 per office is about right.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeRatty on Apr 13, 2014 10:09:00 GMT -5
Thanks for sharing!
|
|
|
Post by JudgeRatty on Apr 13, 2014 10:16:05 GMT -5
I really think this ranking will benefit all including the agency. Less transfers would be likely and less wasted funds.
|
|
|
Post by westernalj on Apr 13, 2014 10:29:57 GMT -5
I'm wondering if it will only benefit the top ranked person for that location. In other words, I don't see how they can juggle everyone's preferences. Based on the earlier explanation as to how they move through the cert, it seems they would take the highest remaining scorer and go to that person's highest preferred city that is still available. The 2nd and 3rd high scorer would be pulled regardless of where that city ranked in their preferences. But perhaps there is another way to do it. And even that would be better than the prior practice.
|
|
|
Post by Gaidin on Apr 13, 2014 10:40:08 GMT -5
I don't think it affects who gets hired. I think it affects where those people get placed. Hypothetically, speaking 3 ALJ hires each have the same 3 cities on their cert. But if they would prefer to go to a different 1 then you ODAR can slot them in and hope for fewer transfers. It probably still only helps people who are able to get hired at multiple locations but for those folks it could be huge.
|
|
|
Post by ed on Apr 13, 2014 10:51:03 GMT -5
I think city ranking is a great idea and I have thought it a good idea for years, my transfer alone would have saved over 100k and kept me in a city no one wanted, further the agency paid for at least 10 people to go there and then turn around and leave. I would suspect the candidate with the highest NOR wins, or should. That is actually the way duty stations were rationed out in the Navy when I was in.
Alas, where was this when I was selected. Good luck all, when will those interviews begin? Soon?!
|
|
|
Post by sandiferhands (old) on Apr 13, 2014 11:01:50 GMT -5
Thanks for the heads up, Funky.
You wrote "Not sure if that means 225 to 250 folks or if it means some that are on multiple cities will be counted as multiple cert slots."
Again, how are they handling the high scoring, wide open candidates? If 5 of them are hired for their dream cities, and thus removed from consideration for 45 others, ODAR will be left with no one to consider for some of the cities. It would make more sense if they request 5 "unique" candidates for each city (i.e., if a name is submitted for a city, that name no longer counts against the 5 for that candidate's other cities) guaranteeing that when that city is reached, there will be at least 5 candidates available. Otherwise, ODAR will have to go back to the well and request additional certs multiple times.
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Apr 13, 2014 11:10:45 GMT -5
Thanks for the heads up, Funky. You wrote "Not sure if that means 225 to 250 folks or if it means some that are on multiple cities will be counted as multiple cert slots." Again, how are they handling the high scoring, wide open candidates? If 5 of them are hired for their dream cities, and thus removed from consideration for 45 others, ODAR will be left with no one to consider for some of the cities. It would make more sense if they request 5 "unique" candidates for each city (i.e., if a name is submitted for a city, that name no longer counts against the 5 for that candidate's other cities) guaranteeing that when that city is reached, there will be at least 5 candidates available. Otherwise, ODAR will have to go back to the well and request additional certs multiple times. I agree that makes the most sense sandi. The source didn't say, but I presume that would be the only way to do it. Unless, in their reported back and forth with opm, they have somehow discerned that by asking for 5 people for these specific cities that when gals are considered, they will have atleast 3 unique candidates among the 5 for each city. Figuring that out would seem a major undertaking tho.
|
|
|
Post by westernalj on Apr 13, 2014 11:18:35 GMT -5
If it was only unique names for each city, you wouldn't need 5. 3 would do it. Also, 5 unique names per city would mean that each person could only be considered for one city. That seems very limiting compared to prior practice.
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Apr 13, 2014 11:19:48 GMT -5
How they use this new metric of preferences is gonna be quite interesting.
Lets say you are top 3 for City A and the agency likes you. You have City A ranked #1. But lets say you are #2 behind a vet and that vet also has City A ranked 1.
So, they hire the vet. The agency likes you and wants you. Do they hire you for city b? Or, if they know there's more than one slot in City A and decide to not hire you from this cert, but to wait and hire you on next fiscal's cert when they will be hiring again for City A and can slot you in then?
|
|
|
Post by westernalj on Apr 13, 2014 11:23:56 GMT -5
I also realized after I posted my last comment that the terminology was 5 names per city - not for available ALJ opening. If it's 45-50 cities but an average of 2 openings (to get to 90 hires), that's another factor at play. I just don't see how they ask for unique names, because they would end up going deep in the register but everyone could only be considered once. Perhaps they could tell OPM not to include someone after they are only on 3 cities or similar. OK, I'm making my own head spin. It will be interesting to see how it plays out when people post the cities for which they made the cert.
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Apr 13, 2014 11:27:37 GMT -5
If it was only unique names for each city, you wouldn't need 5. 3 would do it. Also, 5 unique names per city would mean that each person could only be considered for one city. That seems very limiting compared to prior practice. I don't think the "unique names" theory means quite that. I think it means the agency requests 5 unique names per city but will get those 5 plus any that also have other citys for which they are top 3. Ie, a cert for City A would include 5 people that are just own city A, plus anyone with city A on their gal that's on a cert for another city if their score puts them in the top 3 for city A as well.
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Apr 13, 2014 11:28:55 GMT -5
Damn western...between you and me I got motion sickness.
You are right, nothing to do but wait and see how it unfolds.
|
|
|
Post by dpageks on Apr 13, 2014 11:42:03 GMT -5
Funky rocks! Thanks for the info!
|
|
|
Post by sandiferhands (old) on Apr 13, 2014 11:57:22 GMT -5
If it was only unique names for each city, you wouldn't need 5. 3 would do it. Also, 5 unique names per city would mean that each person could only be considered for one city. That seems very limiting compared to prior practice. I don't think the "unique names" theory means quite that. I think it means the agency requests 5 unique names per city but will get those 5 plus any that also have other citys for which they are top 3. Ie, a cert for City A would include 5 people that are just own city A, plus anyone with city A on their gal that's on a cert for another city if their score puts them in the top 3 for city A as well. Yes, Funky has it right, Western. If superstar1 is on all 50 certs, and they like him, and he is hired for city A, he is no longer available. Likewise for superstar2 and superstars 3-5. So, when ODAR interviews for crapland city B, if superstars 1-5 comprised the entire cert for that city (remember, they have wide open GALs), it would leave ODAR with no one to interview. The unique name method would ensure that crapland city B would still have 5 names available for it even after more highly-ranked candidates had been scooped up by other cities.
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Apr 13, 2014 11:59:05 GMT -5
Not advancing this as a theory, merely asking a question. Many of you folks know way more about the rule of 3 and opm regs than I ever could.
Would it be possible for them to use the "preference rankings" as a way to sort of force people to narrow their gal? For instance:
Say you are a high scorer with a relatively wide gal. They notify you that you are on the cert for 10 cities. But, here's the kicker, they ask you to choose and rank your top 3. Then, any city you didn't choose among the top 3 they treat as if you struck it? Maybe not as harsh as an actual strike where, once done, you never can be considered for that city again. But maybe just on this cert you are essentially out of consideration for all but the three you selected?
Then, you either get hired for one of the three, get bona fide consid for the three and not hired so they can three strike you, or, by your preference selection, you chose cities where you were too far down for bon fide consid and just go back to reg?
Could they do that under the rules?
|
|
|
Post by sandiferhands (old) on Apr 13, 2014 12:02:04 GMT -5
How they use this new metric of preferences is gonna be quite interesting. Lets say you are top 3 for City A and the agency likes you. You have City A ranked #1. But lets say you are #2 behind a vet and that vet also has City A ranked 1. So, they hire the vet. The agency likes you and wants you. Do they hire you for city b? Or, if they know there's more than one slot in City A and decide to not hire you from this cert, but to wait and hire you on next fiscal's cert when they will be hiring again for City A and can slot you in then? Good Q. My WAG is that they take a page from Yogi Berra's book and don't save a candidate for the next cert. If your #2 guy gets bumped for city A by a vet, then they offer him city B. They want him, he has declared that he will go to city b and that it is his second favorite city--what's not to love?
|
|
|
Post by sandiferhands (old) on Apr 13, 2014 12:07:52 GMT -5
Not advancing this as a theory, merely asking a question. Many of you folks know way more about the rule of 3 and opm regs than I ever could. Would it be possible for them to use the "preference rankings" as a way to sort of force people to narrow their gal? For instance: Say you are a high scorer with a relatively wide gal. They notify you that you are on the cert for 10 cities. But, here's the kicker, they ask you to choose and rank your top 3. Then, any city you didn't choose among the top 3 they treat as if you struck it? Maybe not as harsh as an actual strike where, once done, you never can be considered for that city again. But maybe just on this cert you are essentially out of consideration for all but the three you selected? Then, you either get hired for one of the three, get bona fide consid for the three and not hired so they can three strike you, or, by your preference selection, you chose cities where you were too far down for bon fide consid and just go back to reg? Could they do that under the rules? WAG: Yes, but how wasteful. They will lose dozens of high scorers who were willing to go anywhere. That doesn't seem to be in ODAR's interest, to me.
|
|