|
|
Post by gary on Aug 6, 2014 21:57:21 GMT -5
So, why are they leaving jobs on the table? Did they find the candidate pool was just too shallow, too outsider, or what? Also, when the process is beginning immediately for a second cert, when is immediately? Immediately post-training? Immediately as in pre-EOFY14? What impact, if any, does the change in FYs have for cert pulls? As such, could they pull the cert and cross FYs with it? My major concern for the Board is the potential brain drain as a result of the first round of hirings. I hope someone around here knows how to run a poll now that Funky will be in FC boot camp. I don't know why they left jobs on the table except to speculate. Maybe some insider will hear a good rumor on that. I believe they could request a second set of certs immediately, as in tomorrow. They may want to wait until OPM has taken the new hires off the register and has noted any applicants SSA is three-striking, so they are not included on the second set of certs. I don't know how long that might take. I think the wisdom of the Board has been that with the two year budget Congress agreed to for SSA they can start the process FY14 with hiring in FY15. I know no reason they can't do this. We've got some pretty sophisticated people who are still on the Board so I have no doubt polls will be run and theories spun as we move forward. |
|
|
|
Post by gary on Aug 6, 2014 22:03:22 GMT -5
I doubt that OPM would give SSA a much larger selection of unique names on the 2d set of certs, taking into account of course the size of that set of certs. I would expect the number of names to be sufficient to 1) hire an ALJ for every position if SSA chooses to; 2) allow SSA to make maximum use of 3-striking if SSA chooses to; and 3) to allow for some "shrinkage", i.e., candidates who aren't interested in the job anymore or at least the locations they would be considered for. There is no reason for OPM to provide more. It will be interesting to see how it works out. We don't know how things have shaken out so far in terms if three striking, whether three names remain for each remaining opening, etc. If they demonstrate a real need for additional names, I could see how they might get more names from OPM or at least have a legitimate argument for more names. Perhaps we'll find out soon. I'm confident SSA will get additional names. I don't think OPM will go back to providing unique names totaling anywhere close to three times the number of vacancies. I think the number of names will be determined on the basis noted in my previous post, and that determination may include a consideration of the number of strikes remaining first certers have been assessed. |
|
|
|
Post by 71stretch on Aug 6, 2014 22:14:22 GMT -5
Given the recent reports and previous speculation, how close to 90 do we think were hired from first cert? The consensus was that there was no way SSA would not hire very close to 90. Is this SSA's way of pushing back on OPM's small cert #s and will result in a much larger "unique name" 2nd cert? Hmmm.... I doubt that OPM would give SSA a much larger selection of unique names on the 2d set of certs, taking into account of course the size of that set of certs. I would expect the number of names to be sufficient to 1) hire an ALJ for every position if SSA chooses to; 2) allow SSA to make maximum use of 3-striking if SSA chooses to; and 3) to allow for some "shrinkage", i.e., candidates who aren't interested in the job anymore or at least the locations they would be considered for. There is no reason for OPM to provide more. I don't think the second set of certs will be much different than the first in terms of duplication of names across certs or the number of names provided for each city. |
|
|
|
Post by wclj on Aug 6, 2014 22:15:10 GMT -5
I suppose my concern is also with the jobs left on the table. Were those of us on the first cert who did not receive an offer so unspectacular that we did not warrant an offer, so that ODAR needs more candidates to fill the openings they still have? Are we, for all intents and purposes, three-struck?
|
|
|
|
Post by gary on Aug 6, 2014 22:26:49 GMT -5
I suppose my concern is also with the jobs left on the table. Were those of us on the first cert who did not receive an offer so unspectacular that we did not warrant an offer, so that ODAR needs more candidates to fill the openings they still have? Are we, for all intents and purposes, three-struck? There may be some like that, though they can only get past people at those locations by hiring and three-striking. More candidates won't help them for those first cert positions, though more locations might. For many of you it may be they couldn't find a way through three-striking and hiring to get past those they didn't want in order to put you into the top 3 for a position on the first set of certs. I suggest something I have trouble practicing myself--patience. |
|
|
|
Post by 71stretch on Aug 7, 2014 0:25:18 GMT -5
I suppose my concern is also with the jobs left on the table. Were those of us on the first cert who did not receive an offer so unspectacular that we did not warrant an offer, so that ODAR needs more candidates to fill the openings they still have? Are we, for all intents and purposes, three-struck? You were not "struck" at all unless you were ever in the top three for consideration for any city whose cert you appeared on. So, not necessarily. It's still a bit mysterious how they worked the lists, but I don't think anyone who doesn't get picked this time around should despair at this point. |
|
|
|
Post by hopeful41 on Aug 7, 2014 8:24:37 GMT -5
Also, we don't know exactly how much short of 90 they came. Consensus here (from memory and not research) was that ODAR would hire between 80-90 according to the sound theory that government agencies don't leave money on the table. It is very possible that they hired 75 instead of 80; I can't imagine that our city poll caught 100% and it registers 68 votes. Query: are their members out there who have a score within the range of scores picked up on the first cert and also have a city that is represented by a 0 on the city poll in their GAL?
|
|
|
|
Post by wclj on Aug 7, 2014 8:38:50 GMT -5
Also, we don't know exactly how much short of 90 they came. Consensus here (from memory and not research) was that ODAR would hire between 80-90 according to the sound theory that government agencies don't leave money on the table. It is very possible that they hired 75 instead of 80; I can't imagine that our city poll caught 100% and it registers 68 votes. Query: are their members out there who have a score within the range of scores picked up on the first cert and also have a city that is represented by a 0 on the city poll in their GAL? Yes, mine. I have a score where there were offers made to people with lower scores and 2 of the cities on my list currently register 0 on the poll. Thus, leading to my feeling of impending doom.... |
|
|
|
Post by Gaidin on Aug 7, 2014 8:58:20 GMT -5
Also, we don't know exactly how much short of 90 they came. Consensus here (from memory and not research) was that ODAR would hire between 80-90 according to the sound theory that government agencies don't leave money on the table. It is very possible that they hired 75 instead of 80; I can't imagine that our city poll caught 100% and it registers 68 votes. Query: are their members out there who have a score within the range of scores picked up on the first cert and also have a city that is represented by a 0 on the city poll in their GAL? Yes, mine. I have a score where there were offers made to people with lower scores and 2 of the cities on my list currently register 0 on the poll. Thus, leading to my feeling of impending doom.... I don't think a 0 on the poll is a death knell. They simply may have chosen for a variety of reasons not to fill that city at this time. O53 is right you can only get 3 struck if you are one of the top 3 for any given position. If you didn't make it into one of the top 3 then you weren't given bona fide consideration. Only after we have a good census of the classes at FC will we even know how accurate the polling was. I imagine there will be a working of the transfer list soon and then they will start letting us know whether we make the next cert. |
|
|
|
Post by hopefalj on Aug 7, 2014 9:01:14 GMT -5
Also, we don't know exactly how much short of 90 they came. Consensus here (from memory and not research) was that ODAR would hire between 80-90 according to the sound theory that government agencies don't leave money on the table. It is very possible that they hired 75 instead of 80; I can't imagine that our city poll caught 100% and it registers 68 votes. Query: are their members out there who have a score within the range of scores picked up on the first cert and also have a city that is represented by a 0 on the city poll in their GAL? Yes, mine. I have a score where there were offers made to people with lower scores and 2 of the cities on my list currently register 0 on the poll. Thus, leading to my feeling of impending doom.... It's entirely possible that there are no longer openings in those offices. It's possible that super high scoring non-members were hired for those locales. It's entirely possible that they are waiting to hire you for those offices on the next cert due to the timing not being quite right in those offices right now. There are several possible reasons that are not necessarily harbingers of doom. Something that needs to be restated, and it is easier said than done. Please try not to take this process personally. If things do not work out for anyone on this board, it is not a statement on your qualifications, your ability as a lawyer, or how you would fare as a judge. |
|
|
|
Post by hopeful41 on Aug 7, 2014 9:07:35 GMT -5
Yes, mine. I have a score where there were offers made to people with lower scores and 2 of the cities on my list currently register 0 on the poll. Thus, leading to my feeling of impending doom.... It's entirely possible that there are no longer openings in those offices. It's possible that super high scoring non-members were hired for those locales. It's entirely possible that they are waiting to hire you for those offices on the next cert due to the timing not being quite right in those offices right now. There are several possible reasons that are not necessarily harbingers of doom. Something that needs to be restated, and it is easier said than done. Please try not to take this process personally. If things do not work out for anyone on this board, it is not a statement on your qualifications, your ability as a lawyer, or how you would fare as a judge. Agreed! I'm just spitballing here but I can easily see a couple of one-hire cities being missed by our pole. Consequently, it is possible that, due to limited GALs, individuals turning down offers (either for personal reasons or because they accepted OMHA positions), and other considerations (like transfers), they were not able to hire a full compliment of 90 this go-round AND didn't 3-strike many, if any. |
|
|
|
Post by 71stretch on Aug 7, 2014 9:09:29 GMT -5
SSA/ODAR has to specifically ask for three struck applicants to be left off the certs. It won't happen automatically. And, while this is of course pure speculation, it may be too early for them to make that kind of blanket request. We don't know how many of those that were struck were struck just to get to someone they wanted more. I don't think three struck folks are "cluttering things up" so much right now, especially under OPM's new system, that they need to be taken off the certs.
|
|
tr33
Full Member
Posts: 37 
|
Post by tr33 on Aug 7, 2014 9:10:20 GMT -5
Hypothetical: 3 people are in the top three for a city. ODAR doesn't want any of them. They then don't fill that city vacancy. Does this count as a strike for all three candidates b/c all were considered for an open position and didn't get hired?
|
|
|
|
Post by Missundaztood on Aug 7, 2014 9:12:11 GMT -5
It is hard to explain to friends and family that despite having authority, money, interviewing, and conducting background checks that SSA decided not to hire near the full 90 (a whole training class less). It was always possible, but it just doesn't seem logical with the heavy case load the agency faces and so many candidates willing and able to step in. But I am not the one who has to answer any questions about this decision. It reminds me of the military. Take the most logical conclusion and do the opposite. And hurry up and wait.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gaidin on Aug 7, 2014 9:15:39 GMT -5
Someone with familiarity with the transfer rules help me out. If an ALJ accepts a transfer how long do they have to actually transfer?
Could ODAR have requested for a city that someone was transferring out of but the transfer is going to take longer than anticipated?
|
|
|
|
Post by anotherfed on Aug 7, 2014 9:35:24 GMT -5
For cities showing 0 hires on our poll -- check the transfer list. There's a reason why the Crapland cities are the most prevalent on the certs. For example, take San Diego, CA. There's a transfer list 18 people long for San Diego. Not surprisingly, there was no cert for San Diego. I do not believe that SSA would leave approved FTEs on the table at the end of a fiscal year -- that would be crazy in government-land. I think they hired closer to 90 than to 70. If I may paraphrase earlier posters, we have incomplete data, so don't make assumptions.
|
|
|
|
Post by gary on Aug 7, 2014 9:47:08 GMT -5
Hypothetical: 3 people are in the top three for a city. ODAR doesn't want any of them. They then don't fill that city vacancy. Does this count as a strike for all three candidates b/c all were considered for an open position and didn't get hired? None of the three gets a strike in this situation. |
|
|
|
Post by sandiferhands (old) on Aug 7, 2014 9:50:52 GMT -5
Hypothetical: 3 people are in the top three for a city. ODAR doesn't want any of them. They then don't fill that city vacancy. Does this count as a strike for all three candidates b/c all were considered for an open position and didn't get hired? Excellent question. Any (non WAG) answers? If ODAR is bound to consider the three top scores on the cert for the city, and then doesn't want to hire any of those three, pulling a second cert is unlikely to solve the problem. The certs are pulled by score, so the new scores are likely to be lower still than those 3. Is ODAR's choice then to either (1) strike one or more of those candidates, or (2) brand one or more of them unqualified, in order to remove them from consideration? What are ODAR's options for removing a logjam at the top of a (non-vet) cert for a given city? |
|
|
|
Post by hopefalj on Aug 7, 2014 9:58:02 GMT -5
SSA/ODAR has to specifically ask for three struck applicants to be left off the certs. It won't happen automatically. And, while this is of course pure speculation, it may be too early for them to make that kind of blanket request. We don't know how many of those that were struck were struck just to get to someone they wanted more. I don't think three struck folks are "cluttering things up" so much right now, especially under OPM's new system, that they need to be taken off the certs. Has three striking ever been based on need? For every name that can be removed from a city, SSA gets to see a new name they couldn't see previously. |
|
|
|
Post by gary on Aug 7, 2014 10:01:01 GMT -5
Hypothetical: 3 people are in the top three for a city. ODAR doesn't want any of them. They then don't fill that city vacancy. Does this count as a strike for all three candidates b/c all were considered for an open position and didn't get hired? Excellent question. Any (non WAG) answers? If ODAR is bound to consider the three top scores on the cert for the city, and then doesn't want to hire any of those three, pulling a second cert is unlikely to solve the problem. The certs are pulled by score, so the new scores are likely to be lower still than those 3. Is ODAR's choice then to either (1) strike one or more of those candidates, or (2) brand one or more of them unqualified, in order to remove them from consideration? What are ODAR's options for removing a logjam at the top of a (non-vet) cert for a given city? SSA can take other cities in which one or more of the candidates they don't want is in the top three and amass three strikes on one or more of them before coming back to hire in the city with the logjam. Then they can bypass the three-struck candidate(s) and move down the list for that city to one or more other candidates to make up the new top three. |
|
