|
|
Post by moopigsdad on May 7, 2014 7:35:20 GMT -5
Well if he doesn't know, he doesn't know. But this register differs from those in the past, because for those the outer limits of the size of the register were known by the number of applications accepted. So it doesn't seem an unreasonable question; whether it is for Bob or his OPM counterpart I do not know. Maybe I will muster the resolve to ask. You could always do a FOIA to OPM for register size. You may still not find out, but it is one way to try to find out. Besides, what difference does the size of the register really make? The issues of whether you ever acquire the position relate around the size of one's GAL, one's score and the cities listed on the cert. If you have a limited GAL for popular cities, your odds are probably not so good, but if you have a wide GAL (even with a lower score) you are likely at some point to be interviewed for a position whether second, third or subsequent cert. The person with a wide GAL will be fine until the register is refreshed. |
|
|
|
Post by hopefalj on May 7, 2014 7:58:22 GMT -5
Are interviews based on knowledge of Social Security laws? Is it a panel? Any info? From what I've garnered from this board, the first answer to your question is no. The second answer is yes. I'm sure there are plenty of threads about it on the board. |
|
|
|
Post by christina on May 7, 2014 8:02:04 GMT -5
ok, help me out. Am I correct in understanding that all those who got an e-mail Friday saying that they made cert have around a 50 percent chance of getting hired this fiscal year?
|
|
|
|
Post by hopefalj on May 7, 2014 8:02:05 GMT -5
With regard to the register size, the most important thing for me is that the register will be 100-120 names fewer as of July, and most of those gone will be high scores with relatively wide GALs. Good news for those with middling scores and wide GALs for round two.
|
|
|
|
Post by moopigsdad on May 7, 2014 8:07:02 GMT -5
ok, help me out. Am I correct in understanding that all those who got an e-mail Friday saying that they made cert have around a 50 percent chance of getting hired this fiscal year? If SSA truly does hire 90 ALJs, then yes the odds are better than 50/50 the first certers will land a spot. I am just not so sure SSA will be able to hire 90, unless it holds it's nose on some candidates (not from this Board of course  ) and hires them anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by 71stretch on May 7, 2014 8:07:46 GMT -5
Puerto Rico is not making a big difference in these numbers either way. Remember, EVERY city has a separate cert now... the PR cities are just "more separate than others" |
|
|
|
Post by sealaw90 on May 7, 2014 8:12:00 GMT -5
Well if he doesn't know, he doesn't know. But this register differs from those in the past, because for those the outer limits of the size of the register were known by the number of applications accepted. So it doesn't seem an unreasonable question; whether it is for Bob or his OPM counterpart I do not know. Maybe I will muster the resolve to ask. Here's another issue besides the fact that Bob doesn't own the register, OPM does: Appeals and 10 point vets will always be adjusting the size of the register, so trying to nail it down to a single number is like trying to nail down Jello... I'm sure you'd like to not log into the board every week/month/etc. but I suggest you forget about this s$%t AND log in every once in awhile. It is like checking your favorite comedian's website for the 'joke of the day' - levity is good on a daily basis. The SCOB crew completely understands how you feel, and honestly there won't be much substantive reporting until interviews happen and offers are made (no offense to everyone who continues to post , it is exciting times for many of you!) |
|
|
|
Post by moopigsdad on May 7, 2014 8:14:33 GMT -5
Well if he doesn't know, he doesn't know. But this register differs from those in the past, because for those the outer limits of the size of the register were known by the number of applications accepted. So it doesn't seem an unreasonable question; whether it is for Bob or his OPM counterpart I do not know. Maybe I will muster the resolve to ask. Here's another issue besides the fact that Bob doesn't own the register, OPM does: Appeals and 10 point vets will always be adjusting the size of the register, so trying to nail it down to a single number is like trying to nail down Jello... I'm sure you'd like to not log into the board every week/month/etc. but I suggest you forget about this s$%t AND log in every once in awhile. It is like checking your favorite comedian's website for the 'joke of the day' - levity is good on a daily basis. The SCOB crew completely understands how you feel, and honestly there won't be much substantive reporting until interviews happen and offers are made (no offense to everyone who continues to post , it is exciting times for many of you!) It is not quite such an exciting time for me because I didn't make the cert, but I may continue to post anyway sealaw. Whether my posts will be substantive or not is another question. |
|
|
|
Post by sealaw90 on May 7, 2014 8:17:29 GMT -5
Here's another issue besides the fact that Bob doesn't own the register, OPM does: Appeals and 10 point vets will always be adjusting the size of the register, so trying to nail it down to a single number is like trying to nail down Jello... I'm sure you'd like to not log into the board every week/month/etc. but I suggest you forget about this s$%t AND log in every once in awhile. It is like checking your favorite comedian's website for the 'joke of the day' - levity is good on a daily basis. The SCOB crew completely understands how you feel, and honestly there won't be much substantive reporting until interviews happen and offers are made (no offense to everyone who continues to post , it is exciting times for many of you!) It is not quite such an exciting time for me because I didn't make the cert, but I may continue to post anyway sealaw. Whether my posts will be substantive or not is another question. yeah, me too.  But we've always got each other...and Gary... and the rest of the SCOBies. |
|
|
|
Post by moopigsdad on May 7, 2014 8:18:25 GMT -5
It is not quite such an exciting time for me because I didn't make the cert, but I may continue to post anyway sealaw. Whether my posts will be substantive or not is another question. yeah, me too. But we've always got each other...and Gary... and the rest of the SCOBies. At least we aren't and don't have SCABies. |
|
|
|
Post by Gaidin on May 7, 2014 8:28:43 GMT -5
ok, help me out. Am I correct in understanding that all those who got an e-mail Friday saying that they made cert have around a 50 percent chance of getting hired this fiscal year? If SSA truly does hire 90 ALJs, then yes the odds are better than 50/50 the first certers will land a spot. I am just not so sure SSA will be able to hire 90, unless it holds it's nose on some candidates (not from this Board of course ) and hires them anyway. I think you are being to harsh on the applicant pool. I am sure there is still some coal in the diamond pile but I just don't see there being as many as people keep talking about. I believe that the multiple batteries of testing actually did a decent job of looking for judicial temperment. I truly believe that the vast majority of the register is solid enough that SSA won't have to hold their nose. I am sure some folks will get 3 struck but the idea that there are so many bad candidates sitting at the top of the register that SSA can't get 90 hires seems a bit of stretch. |
|
|
|
Post by prescient on May 7, 2014 9:18:14 GMT -5
If SSA truly does hire 90 ALJs, then yes the odds are better than 50/50 the first certers will land a spot. I am just not so sure SSA will be able to hire 90, unless it holds it's nose on some candidates (not from this Board of course ) and hires them anyway. I think you are being to harsh on the applicant pool. I am sure there is still some coal in the diamond pile but I just don't see there being as many as people keep talking about. I believe that the multiple batteries of testing actually did a decent job of looking for judicial temperment. I truly believe that the vast majority of the register is solid enough that SSA won't have to hold their nose. I am sure some folks will get 3 struck but the idea that there are so many bad candidates sitting at the top of the register that SSA can't get 90 hires seems a bit of stretch. All this new testing process has accomplished is identifying candidates who (a) have had successful legal careers and (b) have successfully navigated all of the hurdles of the new examination process that OPM created. Can a leap be made to assume that all, or nearly all of those top scorers will be great fits for SSA? SSA has always had some interest in using its input to strike candidates it deems as poor fits. Otherwise, why even have an SSA interview? They could just rubber stamp whatever scores OPM provides, without having any input, if it was supremely confident that OPM's testing methodology resulted in 100% excellent future ALJs. 1 thing to keep in mind, is over the past couple years, SSA has been increasingly interested in having more control over its ALJ corp (IE the PD changes, the crackdown on outliers, etc). I think, even more than before, the SSA interview will result in an increased number of NR. But that's just my 2 cents. |
|
|
|
Post by christina on May 7, 2014 9:34:57 GMT -5
agreed prescient and imo, if SSA does not think it can properly "control" a candidate(still not sure what that means yet and shake my head thinking of where that could go), such candidates may have to come back to the waiting Q or enter the three strike zone. Sorry to throw a wet blanket on the candidates, but sadly, that is my take on things. and it has nothing to do with sour grapes either. just my observations over the years.
|
|
|
|
Post by carrickfergus on May 7, 2014 9:37:51 GMT -5
Are interviews based on knowledge of Social Security laws? Is it a panel? Any info? From what I've garnered from this board, the first answer to your question is no. The second answer is yes. I'm sure there are plenty of threads about it on the board. They will want to know if you play well with others and can handle a high-volume caseload. |
|
|
|
Post by Gaidin on May 7, 2014 9:41:18 GMT -5
Nowhere above did I indicate 100%. This process had an SJT and the LBMT which both tested for temperment. The SI had specific test sections designed to get better ALJ candidates not just successful lawyers. To think that those new sections were added just for kicks is to discount the cost of creating and administering those tests and the fact that ODAR had input into the creation of this very new and very expensive process.
As I said above there will be people who are not good fits for ODAR or another agency but I think you will find fewer people who are NR than years past not more. Does that mean you get more HRs I don't know and none of us may ever know but I just don't see the NRs consuming more than 15 - 20% of a given cert and my guess would really be much closer to 10%.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gaidin on May 7, 2014 9:44:16 GMT -5
From what I've garnered from this board, the first answer to your question is no. The second answer is yes. I'm sure there are plenty of threads about it on the board. They will want to know if you play well with others and can handle a high-volume caseload. But knowing that going in how many people can't at least demonstrate those things. Seriously, how many of you people don't have ample examples of your ability to handle a high volume case load? I think most folks who get 3 struck will have personality issues not apparent production issues. I know lots of lawyers with personality issues but most of them can keep it covered for an hour in an interview. |
|
|
|
Post by hopefalj on May 7, 2014 10:32:15 GMT -5
They will want to know if you play well with others and can handle a high-volume caseload. But knowing that going in how many people can't at least demonstrate those things. Seriously, how many of you people don't have ample examples of your ability to hand a high volume case load? I think most folks who get 3 struck will have personality issues not apparent production issues. I know lots of lawyers with personality issues but most of them can keep it covered for an hour in an interview. Another aspect they'll look at is how well you can handle technology and whether you turn into Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer ("Your world frightens and confuses me.") at the sight of a computer. Thinking back to my interview for my attorney position, there were questions framed in a way to try to discern your thoughts on productivity without simply asking whether you can handle a high pressure, high volume workload. Getting dinged won't mean you necessarily have an incompatible personality for ODAR, but as you noted, such a personality will certainly get you dinged. |
|
|
|
Post by hopefalj on May 7, 2014 10:41:32 GMT -5
...but I just don't see the NRs consuming more than 15 - 20% of a given cert and my guess would really be much closer to 10%. I'll do you one better. I'd bet 10% is even high for the NR category, although it'll probably be about right for the number of three-strikees. |
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on May 7, 2014 10:54:18 GMT -5
They will want to know if you play well with others and can handle a high-volume caseload. But knowing that going in how many people can't at least demonstrate those things. Seriously, how many of you people don't have ample examples of your ability to hand a high volume case load? I think most folks who get 3 struck will have personality issues not apparent production issues. I know lots of lawyers with personality issues but most of them can keep it covered for an hour in an interview. Based on my score and the reported cert cut off score, I suspect I am at the bottom of this cert and unless things unfold just right, regardless of the 90 from 168 odds, I may well be just filler on this cert. With that realization, I share the competive thoughts and hopes of prescient and others that there will be a lot of 3 striking and no recs among those above me. Not so much so that they don't fill the 90 slots and thus make the second cert bigger and more easily obtainable, but just so they could reach me on this cert. Alas, I strongly suspect Gaidan is right and we won't see as much of the 3 striking and no recing as certs past. The reasons are multiple. 1. One of the main reasons people were 3 struck in the past was so the path could be cleared for favored candidates, generally thought to be insiders. This register and cert have far fewer insiders than in the past so less reason to 3 strike to get to them. 2. I assume ssa is resigned to the new game. They have budgeted and planned and desperately need the 90 hire. Supposedly they wanted more this fiscal but opms delay supposedly made more than 90 impractical. Under the new rules, they have to choose that 90 from 168. Thats gonna be the case, or close there to, next cert too. So why delay? They will find the best 90, or very very close to that number, whom they can reach and hire them. 3. This is the very first cert from a brand new register. The top scorers. To expect that its full of scrubs is just illogical. Past history has shown that with each additional cert they have to go further down to find acceptable folks. IE it takes more on cert 3 than cert 2 which took more than cert 1. 4. In the past, no recs were handed out when a person revealed a lack of judicial temperment in the interview. But, in the past, that was the first place, other than maybe the SI, where that element was assessed. Now though, such folks were more than likely identifed at the online component level and cut. Ssa had input in developing that testing. So, I have to assume less of them got thru to the reg, much less this cert made up of the highest scorers. 5. Finally, some people were no recs before because they just don't interview well. That won't be very frequent now. Now there is a minimum score on the SI, so bad interviewees were likely cut then, not moved on and interviewed by ssa as they were in the past. Further, this cert is the top scorers. Logic would dictate that to have such high scores, they probably did very well on the SI proving they aren't crappy interviewees. Again, I hope there is all kind of 3 striking and no recing above me so i'm more than just filler. But I really don't expect it and I would imagine a lot of these very high quality candidates, 60+ of them is my wag, that don't get hired this time will be on the second cert where they are again competing for a reported 90 slots sometime next spring. |
|
|
|
Post by robespierre on May 7, 2014 12:00:36 GMT -5
ok, help me out. Am I correct in understanding that all those who got an e-mail Friday saying that they made cert have around a 50 percent chance of getting hired this fiscal year? No. 50% or thereabouts is the AVERAGE chance of being hired. Someone who scored an 80+, had a wide GAL, and made the cert for 40 different cities, has a superb chace of being hired if she interviews well. She'll be Top 3 for many cities and, with so many chances, is likely to be chosen. But someone who scored 74 and made the cert for only one city has only a small chance of being hired. He probably won't be Top 3 for his one city and thus, by law, can't be chosen. In fact, his only chance arises if (a) his city is one of the last to be reached for hiring, and (b) by that time almost all the people above him have been either hired for other cities or three-struck. |
|
) and hires them anyway.
