|
Post by sandiferhands (old) on Aug 21, 2014 9:26:24 GMT -5
FYI: This statement still can be read to mean a large hire at the end of this calendar year. "There will be additional judges appointed late this calendar year (100-130 judges) as well as next year, however these will be smaller classes." (calendar year 2015, being the "smaller classes"). Meaning smaller, more targeted certs in calendar year 2015 Clever. I didn't read it that way, and my gut is telling me that's not the right way to read it, but you're right, it's a possible interpretation. Thanks for the sunshine, tr33, but I have to reluctantly agree with robs. "Let's eat, grandma!" "Let's eat grandma!"
|
|
|
Post by futuressaalj on Aug 21, 2014 9:56:39 GMT -5
The Rule of 3 is not a change in the hiring process. That has always been the procedure. No agency has to hire one of the top three, but it has to be able to defend its decision to pass them over. But there is a new wrinkle in the process that could be resulting in major slowdowns. If you read the MSPB decision in the O'Leary case, you will see that one of his assertions is that the same person/decision-maker did not consider him three times for a position in the same round of hiring. The decision suggests that the Chief ALJ had delegated some of the hiring authority to others to assist in the process--which makes some sense given the sheer number of candidates involved. However O'Leary raised legitimate issues regarding the application of the 3 strikes provision. If ODAR can only have one person making the decision on who gets the offer, that person has to be vetted on each and every applicant,and prepare any justifications for passing over candidates. Redryder, I read the O'Leary case and am attaching it but am not following your post. The decision essentially said that OPM did not have significant involvement in the hiring practice that SSA instituted. I did find other decisions which indicate that O'Leary has been trying to become an ALJ since 1990 and has not had any success. So if you are passed over because you did not have a decent interview, the best thing to do is to move on and continue to live your life and seek other opportunities--in my opinion. Attachments:O'leary case.pdf (46.33 KB)
|
|
|
Post by Missundaztood on Aug 21, 2014 10:17:29 GMT -5
Future, IMHO most of us bomb interviews at some point. I know that I recently tanked a non-ALJ interview. It happens. And if I bombed the SSA interview, maybe it isn't meant to be this round. But doesn't mean I shouldn't keep trying, even if it is the next register. I appreciate the board members who have shared that they have been on multiple certs and even registers before getting hired. It seems that you can really improve by going through the process again. In the meantime, I agree that it doesn't make sense to put all eggs in the SSA ALJ basket. (Yes and at some point one might want to reevaluate, say after nearly 25 years of trying unsuccessfully.)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2014 18:18:57 GMT -5
Those that believe hiring 70 of an intended 90, considering it's the 1st cert, is anything other than SSA screaming to OPM that they don't like their hiring process, is in deep denial. The strict concept of having to hire the top 3 in any theoretical testing process is intellectually embarrassing. Logic says anyone on the register, after significant vetting, is worthy of an offer. Anyone! SAA believes exactly that and the new process results in more challenges to reach that commonsense reality. I welcome anyone to poke the beehive... I think Funky and others have beat this dead horse enough, but IMHO, SSA is simply adjusting to OPM's strict adherence to the law. I heard so much about insiders vs. outsiders and on and on and on... ODAR has no problem with hiring any of the top three... "vet or not a vet", if they got passed the interview. The LAW requires ODAR to hire one of the top three if they are recommended for the position. Hence the reason for the whole process of testing over a 8 month period. Scores do matter, but the interview is the key.
I believed I did poorly on both OMHA and ODAR interviews, but that was not the case as I got offers from both, but ODAR was the only choice for me and my family.
Anyone on the register is worthy of an offer, I have said that before and also stated in my own "tiger" way that any Attorney that makes it on the register can do the job (outsider v. insider stuff). I will prove that very point over the next 20 years as an ALJ with ODAR. As I stated in my interview, I know nothing about Social Security except my own SSA number, but I will be a good ALJ, not the best, but not the worse either and I will do the case load and follow the law. And have fun along the way!! I think SSA has no problem with the new process, they are simply taking it slowly to get where they want to be in the hiring process.
IMHO, tiger
Good luck to all!
|
|
|
Post by moopigsdad on Aug 21, 2014 19:23:21 GMT -5
Twenty years plus Tiger, you must be staying until you are past 80 years of age? Just do the position proud (as I know you can and will) as you are the only real person the claimant will ever see to try to prove his/her side of the case through both documents and testimony. Good luck Tiger!
|
|
|
Post by Missundaztood on Aug 21, 2014 20:28:48 GMT -5
Those that believe hiring 70 of an intended 90, considering it's the 1st cert, is anything other than SSA screaming to OPM that they don't like their hiring process, is in deep denial. The strict concept of having to hire the top 3 in any theoretical testing process is intellectually embarrassing. Logic says anyone on the register, after significant vetting, is worthy of an offer. Anyone! SAA believes exactly that and the new process results in more challenges to reach that commonsense reality. I welcome anyone to poke the beehive... I think Funky and others have beat this dead horse enough, but IMHO, SSA is simply adjusting to OPM's strict adherence to the law. I heard so much about insiders vs. outsiders and on and on and on... ODAR has no problem with hiring any of the top three... "vet or not a vet", if they got passed the interview. The LAW requires ODAR to hire one of the top three if they are recommended for the position. Hence the reason for the whole process of testing over a 8 month period. Scores do matter, but the interview is the key.
I believed I did poorly on both OMHA and ODAR interviews, but that was not the case as I got offers from both, but ODAR was the only choice for me and my family.
Anyone on the register is worthy of an offer, I have said that before and also stated in my own "tiger" way that any Attorney that makes it on the register can do the job (outsider v. insider stuff). I will prove that very point over the next 20 years as an ALJ with ODAR. As I stated in my interview, I know nothing about Social Security except my own SSA number, but I will be a good ALJ, not the best, but not the worse either and I will do the case load and follow the law. And have fun along the way!! I think SSA has no problem with the new process, they are simply taking it slowly to get where they want to be in the hiring process.
IMHO, tiger
Good luck to all!
Go get 'em, tiger!
|
|
merry
New Member
Posts: 10
|
Post by merry on Aug 22, 2014 13:21:31 GMT -5
I agree that most people bomb interviews at some time. Many times, it's an exercise in saving yourself from a place you don't want to be. However, it's disconcerting to me that OPM gives you a score so you know how you did, but SSA doesn't. You could have done great on everything, but said one thing at the SSA interview and there you are, two years with the fear of the unknown hanging over you and no offer.
|
|
|
Post by orchid on Aug 25, 2014 13:34:44 GMT -5
Any new theories, WAGs, or gossip on the second cert to digest this Monday?
|
|
|
Post by sealaw90 on Aug 25, 2014 14:17:36 GMT -5
My WAG is that the transfer lists will be worked after Labor Day in earnest and notifications for the second cert come out at the end of September or first week in October.
|
|
|
Post by anotherfed on Aug 25, 2014 16:55:32 GMT -5
I agree that most people bomb interviews at some time. Many times, it's an exercise in saving yourself from a place you don't want to be. However, it's disconcerting to me that OPM gives you a score so you know how you did, but SSA doesn't. You could have done great on everything, but said one thing at the SSA interview and there you are, two years with the fear of the unknown hanging over you and no offer. Since when does OPM give you a score? Only after you FOIA them...
|
|
|
Post by 71stretch on Aug 25, 2014 17:44:30 GMT -5
I agree that most people bomb interviews at some time. Many times, it's an exercise in saving yourself from a place you don't want to be. However, it's disconcerting to me that OPM gives you a score so you know how you did, but SSA doesn't. You could have done great on everything, but said one thing at the SSA interview and there you are, two years with the fear of the unknown hanging over you and no offer. Since when does OPM give you a score? Only after you FOIA them... OPM gives you the NOR, which is a score. No, they don't give you the underlying numbers in the process. I don't think you'd get those even with a FOIA request. SSA gives you nothing, except that it has been reported here that the interviewers will tell you, if you ask, whether you are recommended or not.
|
|
|
Post by orchid on Aug 25, 2014 18:59:26 GMT -5
Since when does OPM give you a score? Only after you FOIA them... OPM gives you the NOR, which is a score. No, they don't give you the underlying numbers in the process. I don't think you'd get those even with a FOIA request. SSA gives you nothing, except that it has been reported here that the interviewers will tell you, if you ask, whether you are recommended or not. Is asking your interviewers wise?
|
|
|
Post by 71stretch on Aug 25, 2014 22:42:40 GMT -5
OPM gives you the NOR, which is a score. No, they don't give you the underlying numbers in the process. I don't think you'd get those even with a FOIA request. SSA gives you nothing, except that it has been reported here that the interviewers will tell you, if you ask, whether you are recommended or not. Is asking your interviewers wise? I'm not commenting on whether it's wise or not. I remember at least one poster saying he felt comfortable enough after his interview to ask.
|
|
|
Post by Missundaztood on Aug 26, 2014 15:18:38 GMT -5
I recall that as well, obs' 53. I tried to search for the post without luck. Blame the app. I recall the poster writing that he asked how he did at the end and the interviewers telling him that he hadn't messed up yet, was still in the hunt, or something similar leading to the conclusion that he didn't get a NR but references needed to be considered and they didn't know about those. He did get an offer. I personally did not see the post until after my interview but I wish I had thought to ask. I would have. It isn't a typical interview question but this isn't a typical process.
|
|
|
Post by Gaidin on Aug 26, 2014 16:29:05 GMT -5
I recall that as well, obs' 53. I tried to search for the post without luck. Blame the app. I recall the poster writing that he asked how he did at the end and the interviewers telling him that he hadn't messed up yet, was still in the hunt, or something similar leading to the conclusion that he didn't get a NR but references needed to be considered and they didn't know about those. He did get an offer. I personally did not see the post until after my interview but I wish I had thought to ask. I would have. It isn't a typical interview question but this isn't a typical process. I don't know that I would ask but at the same time they either have you rated as NR by that point pr they don't.
|
|
|
Post by Gaidin on Aug 26, 2014 16:35:28 GMT -5
My WAG is that the transfer lists will be worked after Labor Day in earnest and notifications for the second cert come out at the end of September or first week in October. I think the notifications are more likely at the end of September than early October but I have been wrong every time I predicted anything time wise. It occurred to me this am that whether they hire all 130 in one cert or over the course of 2 or more they have to do it before October 1, 2015, (edited from July) or they risk losing the funding to hire. I know the horse has been beaten pretty badly on this but the current funding was through the end of fiscal 14/15. If we think the atmosphere of cooperation in DC is bad now the idea of both houses being aligned against a lame duck president doesn't make me think anything meaningful gets done for fiscal 15/16. While the agency may wish it had "better" candidates they want/need the ALJs whether they are preferred candidates or not and I just can't see how they can chance not getting to hire for 2 years+. I actually think more than 130 is possible but thats my optimistic nature.
|
|
|
Post by Missundaztood on Aug 26, 2014 16:48:47 GMT -5
Just a kind reminder that you might want to check usajobs and/or application manager and make sure your best contact info is there, then add ssa.gov to your safe email list for that/those account(s).
|
|
|
Post by hopefalj on Aug 26, 2014 17:17:58 GMT -5
My WAG is that the transfer lists will be worked after Labor Day in earnest and notifications for the second cert come out at the end of September or first week in October. I think the notifications are more likely at the end of September than early October but I have been wrong every time I predicted anything time wise. It occurred to me this am that whether they hire all 130 in one cert or over the course of 2 or more they have to do it before July 1, 2015, or they risk losing the funding to hire. I know the horse has been beaten pretty badly on this but the current funding was through the end of fiscal 14/15. If we think the atmosphere of cooperation in DC is bad now the idea of both houses being aligned against a lame duck president doesn't make me think anything meaningful gets done for fiscal 15/16. While the agency may wish it had "better" candidates they want/need the ALJs whether they are preferred candidates or not and I just can't see how they can chance not getting to hire for 2 years+. I actually think more than 130 is possible but thats my optimistic nature. Why July 1st? They can have a start date that begins with the last pay period of FY 2015, much like they did with the class in 2013. Are you talking about a specific part of the process? Even still, it would depend on the size of that cert.
|
|
|
Post by Gaidin on Aug 26, 2014 18:47:52 GMT -5
Sorry.... I had the wrong.g start date for the fiscal year in my head. I apologize for the confusion and will edit the original post. Again my apologies to much going on today.
|
|
|
Post by Missundaztood on Aug 26, 2014 18:51:18 GMT -5
Sorry.... I had the wrong.g start date for the fiscal year in my head. I apologize for the confusion and will edit the original post. Again my apologies to much going on today. Oh sure, G. Next thing you will be posting in German...
|
|