|
Post by Gaidin on Jan 12, 2015 15:25:51 GMT -5
I have a small GAL (only 7-8 cities) with a high NOR. I made the first and second certs. Charlottesville is on my GAL but I didn't receive an email. Do you all think this is a good indicator that I've been 3 struck? No. I don't think anyone that was part of the first two certs and has previously interviewed has received an updated list with the new cities. Just give it some time. I think they're just checking the interest of those that have never been to FC to see if additional interviews are necessary. I agree with Hope particularly the last sentence.
|
|
|
Post by mch135 on Jan 12, 2015 15:30:12 GMT -5
No. I don't think anyone that was part of the first two certs and has previously interviewed has received an updated list with the new cities. Just give it some time. I think they're just checking the interest of those that have never been to FC to see if additional interviews are necessary. I agree with Hope particularly the last sentence. Thanks to you both, that makes sense!
|
|
|
Post by sealaw90 on Jan 12, 2015 15:35:04 GMT -5
I have a small GAL (only 7-8 cities) with a high NOR. I made the first and second certs. Charlottesville is on my GAL but I didn't receive an email. Do you all think this is a good indicator that I've been 3 struck? mch - don't change your name to negative nancy so soon!!!
|
|
|
Post by HallmarkFan on Jan 12, 2015 15:42:18 GMT -5
No. I don't think anyone that was part of the first two certs and has previously interviewed has received an updated list with the new cities. Just give it some time. I think they're just checking the interest of those that have never been to FC to see if additional interviews are necessary. I agree with Hope particularly the last sentence. Whew. Ok. Was getting paranoid here.
|
|
|
Post by 71stretch on Jan 12, 2015 15:44:03 GMT -5
I'm still not sure why they aren't sending new city list(s) for people to indicate which cities from these supposed new certs they are still interested in. If you decline a city at that point, no harm, no foul, except it comes off your GAL until and unless there's a refresh of some sort. If they actually offer you a job in a city you haven't had the opportunity to take off your list, declining then has repercussions.
|
|
|
Post by hopefalj on Jan 12, 2015 15:55:57 GMT -5
I'm still not sure why they aren't sending new city list(s) for people to indicate which cities from these supposed new certs they are still interested in. If you decline a city at that point, no harm, no foul, except it comes off your GAL until and unless there's a refresh of some sort. If they actually offer you a job in a city you haven't had the opportunity to take off your list, declining then has repercussions. I don't know. It leads me to believe the current hires are a continuation of the January class with no intention of filling the new cities until after the January interviews. I also think they're handling numerous tasks at once, and sending out updated GALs for ranking is not at the top of their list as they're hiring, making interview arrangements, dealing with retirements, etc. I realize that some folks may prefer one of the new locales over their previous lists and rank their GAL accordingly, but getting your top choice is a long shot at best. I'm also assuming they have found a new and hopefully improved way of doing things in terms of efficiency under the new single city certs.
|
|
|
Post by Gaidin on Jan 12, 2015 15:59:33 GMT -5
I'm still not sure why they aren't sending new city list(s) for people to indicate which cities from these supposed new certs they are still interested in. If you decline a city at that point, no harm, no foul, except it comes off your GAL until and unless there's a refresh of some sort. If they actually offer you a job in a city you haven't had the opportunity to take off your list, declining then has repercussions. My guess is that they haven't fully decided which cities to hire for next. Clearly, the west coast cities that were certed before Christmas are now in play but the other cities are still TBD. They hired for Chattanooga fairly early before Christmas and circled back to pick up Georgia this weekend. I'm not sure what it all means but I think where they were playing chess before they now are playing 3D chess.
|
|
|
Post by Gaidin on Jan 12, 2015 16:02:05 GMT -5
I'm still not sure why they aren't sending new city list(s) for people to indicate which cities from these supposed new certs they are still interested in. If you decline a city at that point, no harm, no foul, except it comes off your GAL until and unless there's a refresh of some sort. If they actually offer you a job in a city you haven't had the opportunity to take off your list, declining then has repercussions. I don't know. It leads me to believe the current hires are a continuation of the January class with no intention of filling the new cities until after the January interviews. I also think they're handling numerous tasks at once, and sending out updated GALs for ranking is not at the top of their list as they're hiring, making interview arrangements, dealing with retirements, etc. I realize that some folks may prefer one of the new locales over their previous lists and rank their GAL accordingly, but getting your top choice is a long shot at best. I'm also assuming they have found a new and hopefully improved way of doing things in terms of efficiency under the new single city certs. I think they still will allow folks rerank cities once they decide to actually hire for a new city. Mostly, I believe that is true because they have to let you decide to keep it or strike it before they can make offers. I just believe that they can do that after they decide which cities to hire in.
|
|
|
Post by moopigsdad on Jan 12, 2015 16:11:04 GMT -5
Gaidin I think you are right about a new GAL list coming out soon. Perhaps, later this week or perhaps next week.
|
|
|
Post by hopefalj on Jan 12, 2015 16:16:02 GMT -5
I agree, gaidin. What I meant was that if you ranked your GAL for the second cert but would have put Charlottesville or Oak Park as your #1 if allowed, you're going to be out of luck if they hire you in the coming weeks.* I think they haven't sent out new GALs for a third set of certs because they're still hiring from the second certs. * as out of luck as getting the job can be anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Gaidin on Jan 12, 2015 16:20:55 GMT -5
I agree, gaidin. What I meant was that if you ranked your GAL for the second cert but would have put Charlottesville or Oak Park as your #1 if allowed, you're going to be out of luck if they hire you in the coming weeks.* I think they haven't sent out new GALs for a third set of certs because they're still hiring from the second certs. * as out of luck as getting the job can be anyway. Man, I hope my luck gets this bad.
|
|
|
Post by 71stretch on Jan 12, 2015 16:54:10 GMT -5
I'm still not sure why they aren't sending new city list(s) for people to indicate which cities from these supposed new certs they are still interested in. If you decline a city at that point, no harm, no foul, except it comes off your GAL until and unless there's a refresh of some sort. If they actually offer you a job in a city you haven't had the opportunity to take off your list, declining then has repercussions. My guess is that they haven't fully decided which cities to hire for next. Clearly, the west coast cities that were certed before Christmas are now in play but the other cities are still TBD. They hired for Chattanooga fairly early before Christmas and circled back to pick up Georgia this weekend. I'm not sure what it all means but I think where they were playing chess before they now are playing 3D chess. Perhaps I missed something. How do we know the west coast cities are "clearly in play" now?
|
|
|
Post by Gaidin on Jan 12, 2015 17:13:07 GMT -5
My guess is that they haven't fully decided which cities to hire for next. Clearly, the west coast cities that were certed before Christmas are now in play but the other cities are still TBD. They hired for Chattanooga fairly early before Christmas and circled back to pick up Georgia this weekend. I'm not sure what it all means but I think where they were playing chess before they now are playing 3D chess. Perhaps I missed something. How do we know the west coast cities are "clearly in play" now? We know that they are finally interviewing people for those cities. I am working off of that to say they are in play. I guess that is an assumption I should not make.
|
|
|
Post by 71stretch on Jan 12, 2015 20:20:25 GMT -5
Perhaps I missed something. How do we know the west coast cities are "clearly in play" now? We know that they are finally interviewing people for those cities. I am working off of that to say they are in play. I guess that is an assumption I should not make. And how do we know they are interviewing people for those cities with the intent to HIRE for those cities? Sorry, again, if I missed something, but people with those cities on their certs that interviewed in Ncv and Dec were also "interviewed for those cities", whether they have hired from the certs for those cities or not.
|
|
|
Post by gary on Jan 12, 2015 20:37:44 GMT -5
I was interviewed in December for a city our intel shows they did not hire in. They interviewed for this same city before the first two hiring classes and apparently did not hire in it then either. I wouldn't be surprised at the same thing happening with other cities as they continue the Great Hire of FY2015.
|
|
|
Post by hopefalj on Jan 12, 2015 20:48:11 GMT -5
We know that they are finally interviewing people for those cities. I am working off of that to say they are in play. I guess that is an assumption I should not make. And how do we know they are interviewing people for those cities with the intent to HIRE for those cities? Sorry, again, if I missed something, but people with those cities on their certs that interviewed in Ncv and Dec were also "interviewed for those cities", whether they have hired from the certs for those cities or not. Subject to being completely wrong, I believe people that solely had California cities on their GAL were not interviewed in November/December because those cities were not going to be filled at that time. Same went for Salt Lake City, McAlester, and a few other cities. I agree that SSA isn't necessarily going to hire for any of those cities, but if folks with a California-only GAL are now getting interviewed next week, at least it's a possibility (unlike November/December).
|
|
|
Post by Gaidin on Jan 12, 2015 21:25:04 GMT -5
And how do we know they are interviewing people for those cities with the intent to HIRE for those cities? Sorry, again, if I missed something, but people with those cities on their certs that interviewed in Ncv and Dec were also "interviewed for those cities", whether they have hired from the certs for those cities or not. Subject to being completely wrong, I believe people that solely had California cities on their GAL were not interviewed in November/December because those cities were not going to be filled at that time. Same went for Salt Lake City, McAlester, and a few other cities. I agree that SSA isn't necessarily going to hire for any of those cities, but if folks with a California-only GAL are now getting interviewed next week, at least it's a possibility (unlike November/December). Basically, what Hope said. I contend that they could not hire for those cities because they had not interviewed a sufficient number of reachable candidates until these upcoming interviews are completed. I can't really see flying people in who have such geographically narrow GALs without the intent to hire. I guess like everything else in this process there are surprises outliers. The thing is even if the money is of no concern the time is. They only have so many interview days and interviewers and they clearly want to hire aggressively this year. If at least some of those cities aren't going to be filled why waste the time?
|
|
|
Post by cheesy on Jan 12, 2015 21:59:46 GMT -5
Has anybody else received word on Charlottesville or any other new cities? Curious what scores have been hit on the Charlottesville cert.
|
|
|
Post by 71stretch on Jan 12, 2015 23:22:55 GMT -5
And how do we know they are interviewing people for those cities with the intent to HIRE for those cities? Sorry, again, if I missed something, but people with those cities on their certs that interviewed in Ncv and Dec were also "interviewed for those cities", whether they have hired from the certs for those cities or not. Subject to being completely wrong, I believe people that solely had California cities on their GAL were not interviewed in November/December because those cities were not going to be filled at that time. Same went for Salt Lake City, McAlester, and a few other cities. I agree that SSA isn't necessarily going to hire for any of those cities, but if folks with a California-only GAL are now getting interviewed next week, at least it's a possibility (unlike November/December). I had ONLY the western cities remaining on my GAL, and was interviewed in Nov/Dec. I don't recall for sure now, but I think we had the intel that the western cities were out of play before I interviewed. Historically, they've interviewed people that were listed on a cert without regard to which cities were actually going to get filled. I don't think that has changed much.
|
|
|
Post by saaao on Jan 13, 2015 5:48:22 GMT -5
Subject to being completely wrong, I believe people that solely had California cities on their GAL were not interviewed in November/December because those cities were not going to be filled at that time. Same went for Salt Lake City, McAlester, and a few other cities. I agree that SSA isn't necessarily going to hire for any of those cities, but if folks with a California-only GAL are now getting interviewed next week, at least it's a possibility (unlike November/December). I had ONLY the western cities remaining on my GAL, and was interviewed in Nov/Dec. I don't recall for sure now, but I think we had the intel that the western cities were out of play before I interviewed. Historically, they've interviewed people that were listed on a cert without regard to which cities were actually going to get filled. I don't think that has changed much. FWIW back when the November Certs were released I was told the California offices had been told to expect new hires for the first time in forever. I heard that from a friend who is in management in a California office. Combine that news with the new system where cities with an active Cert are closed to transfer and I think that hiring for the Western cities is being seriously considered, or at least was being seriously considered when interviews were scheduled. Even with SSA liking to look at lots of people, if they aren't hiring California interviewing all those people with a California only GAL would be a massive waste of time and locking down those offices to transfers would cause unnecessary havoc in productivity because of attrition. While some cities on the Certs might not get hires, I don't think they are pulling any cities with the intention of leaving them unfilled.
|
|