|
Post by moopigsdad on Apr 13, 2014 17:05:20 GMT -5
Sorry I have been MIA today brother funky, but busy with non-Board things. I have a question, you now have listed two different scenarios as to when the certs would be occurring for SSA. The first rumor from a reliable source was that certs would not come out until May due to issues of figuring out how to use OPM's new process. Now, you state a reliable source says certs will be occurring this week. So, funky which source is the reliable source? Is it the same source that has now changed his/her mind? If different sources, which one is more reliable? Sorry brother, but after being burned by DLOTS as to the NOR release I am a little bit shy of trusting any rumors without more information to show its reliability. I hope this latest source is correct, but if will believe it when I see it.
|
|
|
Post by robespierre on Apr 13, 2014 17:07:34 GMT -5
Thanks for sharing, Funky.
My gut is strongly telling me that this ranking procedure is somehow ODAR's way of countering OPM's new "one cert per vacancy" system. But I have no idea how that would work.
|
|
cat
Member
Fog comes in on little cat feet . . . .
Posts: 28
|
Post by cat on Apr 13, 2014 17:08:28 GMT -5
Any way it comes out, regardless of the math, thanks for the scoop Funkster!
|
|
|
Post by 71stretch on Apr 13, 2014 17:22:20 GMT -5
Sorry I have been MIA today brother funky, but busy with non-Board things. I have a question, you now have listed two different scenarios as to when the certs would be occurring for SSA. The first one rumor from a reliable source was that certs would not come out until May due to issues of figuring out how to use OPM's new process. Now, you state a reliable source says certs will be occurring this week. So, funky which source is the reliable source? Is it the same source that has now changed his/her mind? If different sources, which one is more reliable? Sorry brother, but after being burned by DLOTS as to the NOR release I am a little bit shy of trusting any rumors without more information to show its reliability. I hope this latest source is correct, but if will believe it when I see it. Funky's hardly responsible if , hypothetically, ODAR figured out what to do with OPM's new system a bit quicker than expected. Asking for the cert this week (which is what he said, not that they were coming this week) would mean that ODAR would receive them soon, but I don't think it's a quick turnaround. Could be a week. None of us has to trust any of the stuff that gets passed on. People get so worked up about this whole process, especially the first-timers. But in this case, I'm not going to shoot the messenger, DLOTS asked for it, with the way he stated his extremely "out there" info in a "take it to the bank" fashion.
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Apr 13, 2014 17:24:34 GMT -5
Sorry I have been MIA today brother funky, but busy with non-Board things. I have a question, you now have listed two different scenarios as to when the certs would be occurring for SSA. The first one rumor from a reliable source was that certs would not come out until May due to issues of figuring out how to use OPM's new process. Now, you state a reliable source says certs will be occurring this week. So, funky which source is the reliable source? Is it the same source that has now changed his/her mind? If different sources, which one is more reliable? Sorry brother, but after being burned by DLOTS as to the NOR release I am a little bit shy of trusting any rumors without more information to show its reliability. I hope this latest source is correct, but if will believe it when I see it. The original rumor, from a different source, was that odar had not yet requested the cert and needed more time to figure out just how to do it. That source indicated they thought it would take a bit longer (it has, a week or so) and that they would be surprised if the cert emails to candidates went out before May 1. This new source says the cert is being requested tomorrow. Not that candidates will be advised they are on the cert tomorrow. Opm will get the cert request, I imagine it will take a couple days to get the cert back to odar, then odar will probably have it for a couple or few days before sending the emails (afterall, they have to form the individualized emails). If you glance at a calendar, we seem to be getting close to that May 1 estimate. I don't see any reason both sources arent reliable. The best defense against getting "sithed" is to just give no credence to any rumors. I invite you to do that. I honestly couldn't care less if anyone on here believes the rumor or not. I'm merely passing along the info I've heard. While I do trust the reliability of both these sources, I have never given any guarantees that the info I pass is completely accurate. Things change, people hear things differently, etc. You take the info for whatever its worth to you.
|
|
|
Post by anotherfed on Apr 13, 2014 17:37:12 GMT -5
But if Funky is right, I win the pool!!!! Go Team Funky!
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Apr 13, 2014 18:00:25 GMT -5
The source of todays info just pm to clarify. Its 5 per slot not necessarily per city. Some cities have more than 2 slots. They still plan 90 hires, 45 to start in Aug and 45 to start in Sept.
The source didn't say this, but I'm assuming the 5 names per slot includes those that are on several certs and not 5 "unique" to each city names. otherwise it would be 450 names (half our estimated register) and I think (though I don't know) that that large a number would be too unwieldy for interviews. I'm betting the math on it is still pretty close to 3x the slots (270) and the reason they are getting 5 names per slot is to account for multiple certers.
As MPD noted, I had a source last week tell me that someone that would know told them it would be unlikely that odar send out cert notifications till after May 1. The reported reason was they were still just trying to figure out how to ask for these new certs in a way to ensure they get enough candidates to consider when high scoring/wide galers are considered.
My guess is, the omha cert may have been offered up by opm as an example. Kind of a "here's how they did it" sort of guidance. And now odar thinks it knows what to ask for and that's 5 per slot.
All rampant and rank speculation, of course. YMMV.
|
|
|
Post by moopigsdad on Apr 13, 2014 18:33:17 GMT -5
Funky information changes and it's not your fault they conflict. We appreciate you sharing the information brother. I was just trying to determine why the difference that's all.
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Apr 13, 2014 19:23:42 GMT -5
I can appreciate that, MPD. But, I still don't see a conflict between the sources' info. One said, last week, it appeared that figuring out how to get the cert was taking longer than expected and he doubted people would get cert notifications before May. This is a good source with great connections and relayed their honest opinion based upon what they were seeing and hearing then.
New source, also very credible and in the know, says they got it figured out and will request the cert tomorrow. No conflict at all. If its the hard date that's bugging you, remember that its been a week, things change and the new source hasn't said when emails to candidates will go. Could be very close to that May 1 date. Probably a little before that, which will undoubtedly make all of us and that first source happy.
I must admit that I'm not convinced DLOTS was the troll so many assume he was. I think its just as likely he heard what he thought was reliable info and posted it. Then, when it proved wrong he fled the board rather than face the onslaught of ridicule for going all in on a rumor.
Whether he was a troll or not, I trust no one thinks I am. If I post, I clearly point out if its my own theory or some rumor I've heard. if I don't know the reliability of the source, I just post the rumor with no personal voucher for the source. If I think the source is reliable, I say so. Has some of the info proven wrong? Sure, but I won't run away from the board.
In the end, this is an anoymous message board. if you are planning your vacation or trial calendar based on rumors someone named "funkyodar" passes along, you probably aren't fit to be a judge. You may need to be fit for a straight jacket.
Take any rumor I pass along with all the salt your blood pressure will allow. But, I assure you I don't post them from a trolling or mind game playing perspective. I appreciate the comraderie of the board. Folks on here are the only people going thru exactly what I am going thru. Competition or not, when I hear exciting news or rumors, I share because I know exactly what you all are going thru and I know I want to hear any and all rumors or news. I then weigh them against my own knowledge and theories and accept or not. I expect everyone does the same.
Good night and good luck board brethren. If accurate, this info means one of our long, dark waits is ending soon.
|
|
|
Post by hopefalj on Apr 13, 2014 19:33:44 GMT -5
Neither funky nor funky's source nor funky's source's source are dealing with exact or perfect information. There are multiple parties dealing with multiple issues for multiple spots on multiple certs (we think). funky's source has given us a timetable for when SSA will next act. The source previously said SSA needed some time to get things sorted out with the new process. Apparently it took a little more than a week, which is some time. I suspect a sitting ALJ will post information about interviewer solicitations before candidates are notified that they've made it on a cert or certs, though. It could still very well be May before anyone hears.
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Apr 14, 2014 7:40:43 GMT -5
Also, I wanted to add some encouraging news for some who, like myself, think it's probable they may miss this first cert and be waiting for a second or later cert.
There was a management conference call last week. Alj hiring was reportedly discussed (I wasn't on the call so this is hearsay but from multiple sources, some who have posted details of the call already). It was stated that they intend to hire the 90 this year and a similar size hire next fiscal. It was also stated that, after that second large hire, they intended to keep hiring in smaller, more targeted numbers (subject, I presume to budgeting).
So, if you miss this first cert, you may make the second big one or one or several of what's expected to be many smaller ones. Dont lose heart if you don't get a cert email this time, it appears they plan for this reg to be used for a good long while and I think most everyone on it (subject to gal, of course) will eventually get their chance at a make or break interview. Some just have longer to wait.
|
|
|
Post by moopigsdad on Apr 14, 2014 8:38:02 GMT -5
This is indeed encouraging news for many on the Register and Board. Thank you for sharing buddy!
|
|
|
Post by Ace Midnight on Apr 14, 2014 8:53:39 GMT -5
So, if you miss this first cert, you may make the second big one or one or several of what's expected to be many smaller ones. Dont lose heart if you don't get a cert email this time, it appears they plan for this reg to be used for a good long while and I think most everyone on it (subject to gal, of course) will eventually get their chance at a make or break interview. Some just have longer to wait. And I don't want to interject too much "logic" in this process (as it generally defies it), but this actually does make a lot of sense. They left it open for a huge initial applicant pool, added objective sections to the test, and minimum cutoffs at the D.C. phase - resulting in a current register consisting of about 1 out 6 or 1 out of 7 of the original applicants. Not to pat ourselves on the back too vigorously, but those of us on the register have run a pretty formidable gauntlet - there are many, many well-qualified folks (many of whom, in my opinion would make wonderful ALJs) that applied that are watching from the sidelines. While I'm not saying that every member of this register should be appointed, I think it would be a silly waste of time and money (on everyone's part) if upwards of 90% don't get at least bonafide consideration after an interview over the next 3 to 4 years. So, this plan to hire 90 (and I'm using multiples of that because of the reported capacity of the training space in Falls Church) this year, 90 next year, perhaps 45 to 90 in 2016 - all off this register, seems consistent with good personnel management practices - it is also more efficent to do something on a regular basis, rather than sporadically in large batches - at least in my experience. With the average age of the current ALJ corps, a steady stream of new judges is probably smarter than the feast or famine approach of the past few years, as long as the budget will accomodate it.
|
|
|
Post by thankful1 on Apr 14, 2014 8:56:23 GMT -5
General question -- If a cert is being requested of OPM today, what would be the timeline for OPM to create that cert and send out interview invitations. Is that how the process would work?
|
|
|
Post by moopigsdad on Apr 14, 2014 9:00:40 GMT -5
General question -- If a cert is being requested of OPM today, what would be the timeline for OPM to create that cert and send out interview invitations. Is that how the process would work? A request for cert by SSA means that OPM gives SSA a list of candidates that match the cert requested. Then, it is up to SSA to use the names given and send out the email notice to participants who qualify for an interview, etc. OPM's only job is to provide the appropriate number of Register participants that meet the cert and have the highest NOR scores. The rest is then up to SSA.
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Apr 14, 2014 9:07:46 GMT -5
General question -- If a cert is being requested of OPM today, what would be the timeline for OPM to create that cert and send out interview invitations. Is that how the process would work? I don't think anyone knows under the new process. I think its safe to assume its not instantaneous. My guess is a couple days to get the certs to ssa. Then ssa will likely spend a couple days putting together the emails to each candidate including the list of cities they are in consideration for, the reference forms and financial disclosures. So I bet friday at the earliest for notification emails, but probably next week. As an aside, I understand the reference form for omha was significantly different in regard to the number of references and other info. Ie it only asked for 5 years of work history and supervisors. It also supposedly has references to ssa on it. Any guesses on whether its a standard form that odar will also use and thus another change from historical norms?
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Apr 14, 2014 9:13:35 GMT -5
As I understand it (and someone on the omha cert please correct any misunderstandings), their reference form only requested your supervisors for the last 5 years (and if ssa or omha it tells you exactly who you have to list, ie group sup, hod, hocalj, rocalj) and then only asks for 5 or 6 personal references.
No mandate to list adversarial attorneys. That right?
|
|
|
Post by thankful1 on Apr 14, 2014 9:15:30 GMT -5
Thanks Funky!
|
|
|
Post by hopefalj on Apr 14, 2014 9:37:05 GMT -5
As I understand it (and someone on the omha cert please correct any misunderstandings), their reference form only requested your supervisors for the last 5 years (and if ssa or omha it tells you exactly who you have to list, ie group sup, hod, hocalj, rocalj) and then only asks for 5 or 6 personal references. No mandate to list adversarial attorneys. That right? Another question would be whether OMHA and SSA used the same materials in the past. I've given a cursory look on the board but have not found anything of relevance.
|
|
|
Post by agilitymom on Apr 14, 2014 9:39:14 GMT -5
The OMHA request was for: names/phone numbers of supervisors from last five years (w/to and from dates); if you worked for SSA/ODAR, name/phone number of Hearing Office Chief ALJ & Hearing Office Directors; if you worked for HHS/OS/OMHA, name/phone number of the Managing ALJ or Associate Chief ALJ; if you worked for any other federal adjudicative agency, name/phone number of Chief ALJ. The form also requested 5 personal references, name/phone numbers.
This appeared to be a word document and, most likely, will not be a standard form.
|
|