|
|
Post by gary on Jun 13, 2014 10:04:45 GMT -5
I'm with you, sealaw. A broom closet would suit me fine. Windows can be so distracting when you are doing your best to churn out 700 meaningful decisions a year. My first job out of law school was at a small firm in a converted row house. My "office" was a desk on a landing on the stairway between the second and third floors. With a middle of the pack score and a limited GAL, I am not the least bit picky. With that firm, how could you tell if your career was on its way up or on its way down? |
|
|
|
Post by sealaw90 on Jun 13, 2014 10:29:56 GMT -5
Let's look at the timeline. Certs were requested in April. Notifications went out May 2. Interviews were first two weeks of June. During that period there were apparently supplemental certs for some cities and a whole new cert request for Morgantown. Those new certs apparently netted the same names as the first as i have seen no reports of someone not on the first now making morgantown for instance. The best estimates no time frames remaining puts offers at the end of July or very early August. The two training classes are clearly calendared for September 15 and October 10. So, with the normal prereport notice times, start dates happening at the beginning of a pay period and the new plan to have newbies do 3 weeks at the new office pretraining, August 25 looks like the first group start date. We know the original plan was to hire 90. But with the supplemental certs, the addition of morgantown and Sklars "200 by the end of the year" comments, i think this hire will be more than 90. Maybe not the full 120 i guesstimated above. 100 would be logical. A perfect split of the reported 200 with 50% in this fiscal, 50% in the next. So, if they do that, the second cert will be for 100 slots, just like the first and should take a similar amount of time to complete. So, say they do all the offers and get acceptances for the first cert 100 slots in late July or early August. With those hired and thrice struck out of the way they could then do requests for the second round of certs. if it is also for 100 + or - slots, there is no reason to believe opm will give them much more than the 168 names they got this time. Maybe GAL differences bumps it up to 180 or so. But, i really think as many as 30 of that 180 or so will be leftover from the first cert that werent 3 struck and are at least recommended. Those wont have to be reinterviewed and will logically be at the top of many of the certs by score. In any city where those 20 to 30 are the top 3, they dont even have to interview if they dont want to. But lets assume they go ahead and interview all the other 150 of the 180 that hasnt previously been interviewed. Following the timeline of this first cert, candidates could get notice of making the cert the first week of Sept. Interviews would be the first two weeks of October putting all that expense on next fiscal as is expected. I would guess offers would come the week after Thanksgiving. Those 100 or so hires would be done "before the end of the year," would have prereport date notice of the entire moth of December (Happy Holidays selectees) and would report the first new pay period Monday in January (the first group anyway) and begin training late January. Second group in late Feb. Seems very doable to me. Based on this very doable scenario, plus the poll on scores that had 237 votes, it looks like if you scored between 65.xx and 73.41 and have the 'right' cities, you will be on the next cert. JMHO and some quick math. |
|
|
|
Post by Ace Midnight on Jun 13, 2014 12:42:40 GMT -5
Let's look at the timeline. Certs were requested in April. Notifications went out May 2. Interviews were first two weeks of June. During that period there were apparently supplemental certs for some cities and a whole new cert request for Morgantown. Those new certs apparently netted the same names as the first as i have seen no reports of someone not on the first now making morgantown for instance. Funky - I don't want to say your analysis isn't reasonable, because it is. Just based on our experiences with the process thus far - that seems somewhat optimistic - although I agree that the time-consuming part of the process is in the past - certain things just take a certain amount of time. For the second certers (1Aers?) - whether I'm in that number or not, I hope you're correct. |
|
|
|
Post by orchid on Jun 13, 2014 13:29:53 GMT -5
Is it possible the calls for the first hire will come out earlier than expected? If hiring 90, the decision makers have the equivalent of choosing a little less than 50% of the candidates interviewed, so shouldn't it be pretty easy to decide, make calls, and move on to the next cert?
|
|
|
|
Post by robespierre on Jun 13, 2014 13:37:57 GMT -5
Sealaw - A 65 score would put the applicant in the bottom 10% of the register. So I'm surprised to hear you say that that kind of score would get him/her onto the next cert, even with the "right cities." I mean, this is a new register. And Cert #1 is only going to eliminate ~90 hirees and a modest number of 3-strikers. Seems like it's too early to plumb the bottom of the register. Can you elaborate on your math?
I'm not saying that not a single 65 will make the next cert. Or that some 65s won't make the cert for Puerto Rico (if there is one). Or that 65s won't make future certs. I just don't see an appreciable number of them making Cert #2.
|
|
|
|
Post by robespierre on Jun 13, 2014 13:44:52 GMT -5
Let's look at the timeline. Certs were requested in April. Notifications went out May 2. Interviews were first two weeks of June. During that period there were apparently supplemental certs for some cities and a whole new cert request for Morgantown. Those new certs apparently netted the same names as the first as i have seen no reports of someone not on the first now making morgantown for instance. Funky - I don't want to say your analysis isn't reasonable, because it is. Just based on our experiences with the process thus far - that seems somewhat optimistic - although I agree that the time-consuming part of the process is in the past - certain things just take a certain amount of time. For the second certers (1Aers?) - whether I'm in that number or not, I hope you're correct. Agree. Funky and others are making great points about timing, but nevertheless, with everything that has to be done (wrapping up Cert #1...pulling Cert #2...interviews...references...working transfer lists...offers...etc.), I have trouble seeing second certers reporting to work in 2014. I think the Sklar comment about hiring by the end of the year may have been more aspirational than a real forecast. Or maybe "hiring" can be interpreted to mean OFFERS by the end of the year, with report dates early next. I could see that. |
|
|
|
Post by boblaw on Jun 13, 2014 14:04:00 GMT -5
Ok. Just to keep the creative juices flowing, particularly for us waiting for another chance to prove we are worthy - what's the case for or against a "refresh " in Oct 2014?
|
|
|
|
Post by futuressaalj on Jun 13, 2014 14:17:22 GMT -5
Ok. Just to keep the creative juices flowing, particularly for us waiting for another chance to prove we are worthy - what's the case for or against a "refresh " in Oct 2014? Bob, Way too soon for one. I believe the last ones have resulted when they had worked through most of the register and were seeing the same folks on certificates which in turn led SSA to ask for a refresh to add new bodies. They have looked at the first 180 or so people on the register thus far and with the new process they might only get to see at most half the register to hire 200 folks. |
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Jun 13, 2014 14:49:25 GMT -5
Funky - I don't want to say your analysis isn't reasonable, because it is. Just based on our experiences with the process thus far - that seems somewhat optimistic - although I agree that the time-consuming part of the process is in the past - certain things just take a certain amount of time. For the second certers (1Aers?) - whether I'm in that number or not, I hope you're correct. Agree. Funky and others are making great points about timing, but nevertheless, with everything that has to be done (wrapping up Cert #1...pulling Cert #2...interviews...references...working transfer lists...offers...etc.), I have trouble seeing second certers reporting to work in 2014. I think the Sklar comment about hiring by the end of the year may have been more aspirational than a real forecast. Or maybe "hiring" can be interpreted to mean OFFERS by the end of the year, with report dates early next. I could see that. Agreed. That's why my WAG was offers go out the week after Thanksgiving and the first group reports in January. |
|
|
|
Post by BagLady on Jun 13, 2014 14:52:27 GMT -5
Ok. Just to keep the creative juices flowing, particularly for us waiting for another chance to prove we are worthy - what's the case for or against a "refresh " in Oct 2014? This register is active until December 2015; wouldn't that be the earliest date for a refresh? |
|
cat
Member
Fog comes in on little cat feet . . . .
Posts: 28 
|
Post by cat on Jun 13, 2014 14:59:56 GMT -5
Agree that we are still in the speculative phase to determine when the second, third etc. certs come out and the impact on the first certers who will be selected. FWTW, my philosophy is to be thankful if I get the job, even in East Crapland, and figure I won't see the light of day for the first 12 months anyway b/c I'll be honing my decision-writing skills. Besides, time with your spouse/significant other can be highly overrated and Ben and Jerry's is (are?) a good companion for those late nights.
|
|
|
|
Post by BagLady on Jun 13, 2014 15:02:15 GMT -5
Historically speaking (FWIW), they've shown they can make it happen. Let's hope it holds true this year for all who find themselves on the register after round one.
Second certificate 2/9/2011
Second cert offers 5/6/2011 (approx 117 hires)
Third certificate 6/14/2011
Third cert offers 7/18/2011 (approx 30 hires)
Fourth certificate 8/18/2011
Fourth cert offers 9/30/2011 (approx. 19 hires)
Fifth certificate 2/7/2012
Fifth cert offers 4/19/2012 (approx. 80 hires)
Sixth certificate 7/5/2012
|
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Jun 13, 2014 15:11:17 GMT -5
Ok. Just to keep the creative juices flowing, particularly for us waiting for another chance to prove we are worthy - what's the case for or against a "refresh " in Oct 2014? This register is active until December 2015; wouldn't that be the earliest date for a refresh? i think ssa could ask for one before then, but likely wont for a good long time. refreshes are apparently an area of tension between ssa and opm. Ssa may feel they have looked at everyone and cherry picked who they want and needa refresh but opm isnt going to do it if they still have the ability to provide enough candidates for each hiring slot in accordance with the regs. the best example is the last hire off the old reg. Ssa wanted a new reg but opm argued there were still plenty of candidates on the old reg and even took the unprecedented step of allowing a gal expansion to prove their point. plus, the #s dont evidence the need for a refresh anytime soon. If they plan to hire a total of 200 over this fiscal and next (or even the 240 some have mentioned or up to 300) the numbers on this reg (speculated to be around 900) are plenty with no refresh needed. My best guess is they hire the 200 by the end of the calendar year. Maybe a "smaller, more targeted" hire of 40 or 50 in a 3rd and possibly 4th cert mid to late 2015. Then i would bet the register is extended in December 2015 and that might include a chance to update your gal and maybe even a refresh. Just a guess |
|
|
|
Post by sealaw90 on Jun 13, 2014 15:23:12 GMT -5
Robes,
What I did is I went back to the detailed poll for the NOR scores and added up all the votes from 74 - 88/89, plus added half of the folks who voted a 73. It comes to approximately 110 folks. I did not add folks in the 90s, quite frankly because I think you could count them on one hand, so I do not believe there are that many who make a statistical difference to our general population of candidates. In otherwords, I do not think that 1/3 of the folks who scored over a 90 voted - I think it's more like 75% or more. whatever, I discounted them.
Anyway, assuming that 110 represents a third of the candidates with scores between 73.41 and 89 - you get 330. 168+ folks have made it to this first round of interviews, plus a few folks who interviewed for OMHA and not SSA. That's about half of the pool in that range. Ninety will get hired by SSA. We need to subtract 3-struck/NR folks as well as OMHA hires, which probably leaves 38 folks who get a second chance on the next certs.
Now I believe that many, many, many good folks on the register only asked for their local ODAR, plus an ODAR that's about 2 hours away. OPM's ability to provide adequate certs for SSA to hire another 100 ALJs, in various yet-to-be-named cities means that the folks remaining above 73.41 will most likely not be able to fill out the certs. A portion of these folks may make the next cert, but only if their city is selected. I also assume that the next cert will have more folks on it than this first cert of 168.
If you add the votes who scored between 65 - 72, plus add half of the 73 scores, it comes very close to the 110 above the cut. Once again, there's a pool of 330 candidates. So, I was thinking that in order to really make an aggressive hire by the end of the year, then OPM may have to dip down low - as low as 65 for certain cities. What I was not saying is anyone who scores a 65 is a shoe in, but more of a possibility if you are the only one wh wants East Crapland...or San Juan.. or some other hard to fill spot.
Not sure I really explained myself. Keep the conversation going though - my math usually sucks and I'm an eternal optimist. Sorry, but I have to file a Motion before close of business so I can annoy my opponent - TTFN
|
|
|
|
Post by boblaw on Jun 13, 2014 15:52:15 GMT -5
I'm an outsider but have followed this board faithfully since March 2013. And I know this is a numbers game and I don't know the actual numbers. But, to float my boat I consider the following for an early refresh. The final cut was apparently much deeper than expected. The first cert as I gather did not have 3 candidates for each available position, suggesting perhaps a smaller pool than usual. The timeline posted elsewhere shows: Exam open 5/4/07; Refresh exam open 7/30/08; and, Exam refresh open 11/9/09. So, sink my boat or help me float it.
|
|
|
|
Post by BagLady on Jun 13, 2014 16:03:38 GMT -5
The first certs did have 3 candidates for each available position. They had to.
|
|
|
|
Post by anotherfed on Jun 13, 2014 18:10:51 GMT -5
Sealaw - A 65 score would put the applicant in the bottom 10% of the register. So I'm surprised to hear you say that that kind of score would get him/her onto the next cert, even with the "right cities." I mean, this is a new register. And Cert #1 is only going to eliminate ~90 hirees and a modest number of 3-strikers. Seems like it's too early to plumb the bottom of the register. Can you elaborate on your math? I'm not saying that not a single 65 will make the next cert. Or that some 65s won't make the cert for Puerto Rico (if there is one). Or that 65s won't make future certs. I just don't see an appreciable number of them making Cert #2. How do you figure that a 65 is in the bottom 10% of the register? I think the ratings are on a normal curve -- notice that with 168 candidates, the lowest rating that still qualified was 73. There are probably more candidates with 65s than with 85s. Or, if you think a 65 is in the bottom 10%, it must be a REALLY small register. The bottom line is that we just don't have enough information to evaluate the quality of a rating, other than "higher than" or "lower than." |
|
|
|
Post by anotherfed on Jun 13, 2014 18:14:23 GMT -5
What if SSA does rolling certs? That way, they add new people as needed and bypass the transfer list. As we have seen, they already added another cert for Morgantown. What if we have a new cert every week ... Omg, pass the Prozac. It's going to be a bumpy summer!  |
|
|
|
Post by westernalj on Jun 13, 2014 18:47:34 GMT -5
They can't add a new ALJ to an office without first working the transfer list, regardless.
|
|
|
|
Post by anotherfed on Jun 13, 2014 20:24:31 GMT -5
They can't add a new ALJ to an office without first working the transfer list, regardless. They didn't for Morgantown. |
|
