|
Post by bikingnut on Jul 8, 2015 14:16:31 GMT -5
Could it be the turkeys coming down from the sky in Cincinnati? Extra points for the WKRP reference. "I swear I thought turkeys could fly! I did!"
|
|
|
Post by Ace Midnight on Jul 8, 2015 14:23:09 GMT -5
"As God as my witness - I thought turkeys could fly." The late, great Gordon Jump. RIP Big Guy.
|
|
|
Post by mamaru on Jul 8, 2015 15:00:52 GMT -5
Sealaw, if somehow my throwing out the questions I did offended you, I apologize. I really don't get the rancor of your post. My only purpose was to find out what others were thinking is going to happen in the next few weeks. My target was a discussion of the process, not speculation regarding individual situations and I don't think it deteriorated to a pity party. I appreciated Gaiden's thoughts and think his prom analogy was charming. In fact, I really don't understand how this thread even relates to most of what you just said, with the exception of exhorting us to get on track. I interpret that as an admonishment to leave Cincinnati alone. On that subject, your point is well taken. I am guilty as charged.
|
|
|
Post by sealaw90 on Jul 8, 2015 17:19:32 GMT -5
This was not an attack on you mamaru, just a little release of steam concerning the accuracy of information /WAGs on the board. You've been on this board long enough to know how the process works to get hired but there are a lot of newer folks who are posting and we owe them accurate information. It bothers me when someone says what if x happens, when it doesn't work that way because OPM rules and regs don't allow for it. For example, OPM doesn't go up and down the register because that would be against their own rules. So if you thought I was attacking you then I apologize. But it does no one any good to WAG on things that are inaccurate from the get go.
|
|
|
Post by luckylady2 on Jul 8, 2015 20:31:00 GMT -5
You're right, SeaLaw - I think we were actually talking about ODAR going back up the certs, not OPM going back up the Register, to look at people they've considered previously. Thanks for keeping the lingo straight!
|
|
|
Post by Youngblood Priest on Jul 9, 2015 13:45:06 GMT -5
Oh, and this.... 15. Schedule of next classes of hires for the remainder of the fiscal year: what dates EOD and what dates for training? How long is the current affirmed list valid? When will the next affirmed list requests be sent out in anticipation for the hiring of the new class? 6/29/15 EOD with training to start July 20 08/10/15 EOD with training to start 8/31. 09/07/15 EOD with training to start 9/28. EOD = ? Thanks in advance for explaining; this one is not in the glossary.
|
|
|
Post by gary on Jul 9, 2015 13:47:49 GMT -5
I believe EOD is Entrance on Duty, or the date a newly hired ALJ starts in his/her office.
|
|
|
Post by ALJCandidate on Jul 9, 2015 14:18:44 GMT -5
There are some rumors within the Administration that they are exploring a hiring process similar to how they hire patent ALJ's once the current register expires. Essentially, the thought is to post each position on USAJOBs individually. The thought process is that the current process of using the registery is too costly and takes way too long.
|
|
|
Post by tinman on Jul 9, 2015 14:53:07 GMT -5
There are some rumors within the Administration that they are exploring a hiring process similar to how they hire patent ALJ's once the current register expires. Essentially, the thought is to post each position on USAJOBs individually. The thought process is that the current process of using the registery is too costly and takes way too long. Let's hope that never happens. Despite our bellyaching, our odds of getting hired are relatively good (perhaps 1 in 2 or 3 over a few years for someone with a 75+ NOR and a decent GAL). Imagine competing with 500+ applicants for every position posted on USAJOBS. I work for a federal agency that gets 250-400 applicants for every attorney position posted in crapland and 1000+ for prime locations on the coasts. I suspect that an ALJ posting open to the public would garner at least those numbers despite the more stringent minimum qualifications. I'd rather go through a lengthy process that separates the wheat from the chaff knowing that my odds are decent if I see the process through to the end.
|
|
|
Post by ALJCandidate on Jul 9, 2015 15:18:34 GMT -5
I agree. But from what I heard from an employee within the Administration is that the cost and resources to do the registry just doesn't make sense. The process has worked for other ALJ positions and they will tailor any opening announcement to include pretty strict guidelines to weed out a lot of the applicants at the initial level. He indicated that he thought the Administration was already working with OPM on making this happen sometime next year.
I do believe he was credible and this would make sense with the current register expiring.
|
|
|
Post by 71stretch on Jul 9, 2015 16:10:19 GMT -5
I agree. But from what I heard from an employee within the Administration is that the cost and resources to do the registry just doesn't make sense. The process has worked for other ALJ positions and they will tailor any opening announcement to include pretty strict guidelines to weed out a lot of the applicants at the initial level. He indicated that he thought the Administration was already working with OPM on making this happen sometime next year. I do believe he was credible and this would make sense with the current register expiring. A separate job announcement for each ALJ position within ODAR, with no register? I am very skeptical about that. Such a process would work for those agencies who don't hire very many, but I'm not picturing it here. I'm predicting an extension of the register.
|
|
|
Post by saaao on Jul 9, 2015 16:23:09 GMT -5
I agree. But from what I heard from an employee within the Administration is that the cost and resources to do the registry just doesn't make sense. The process has worked for other ALJ positions and they will tailor any opening announcement to include pretty strict guidelines to weed out a lot of the applicants at the initial level. He indicated that he thought the Administration was already working with OPM on making this happen sometime next year. I do believe he was credible and this would make sense with the current register expiring. A separate job announcement for each ALJ position within ODAR, with no register? I am very skeptical about that. Such a process would work for those agencies who don't hire very many, but I'm not picturing it here. I'm predicting an extension of the register. I could see this happening after the Agency hits it's hiring goals. Once they switch from a massive build up to hiring for attrition, this kind of regime would make a lot more sense.
|
|
|
Post by ALJCandidate on Jul 9, 2015 16:33:34 GMT -5
I agree. I do not know the timeline for them switching. He did mention he thought things were already being discussed and he thought probably sometime next year. I am just a messenger that heard a rumor from a credible source.
|
|
|
Post by luckylady2 on Jul 9, 2015 17:22:28 GMT -5
Yeah but - There is an "expiration date" for the Register, but it is pretty sure that the current Register will be extended. It is too new to be exhausted, new members are coming on through grants of appeals, 10-pt vet hiring, and now the additional testing to be held in late summer. Even if OPM works out new regs to replace the current process codified at 5 CFR, it will have to go through the whole promulgation process, which will take a fair amount of time. AND SSA is trying to add somewhere in the range of 250-500 ALJ's in the next 3 fiscal years; other agencies are also interested in keeping the current Register alive because this is the first Register since the moratorium for the Adzell litigation. None of these agencies would be happy with having to wait for a new process.
|
|
|
Post by luckylady2 on Jul 9, 2015 17:28:01 GMT -5
Oh and BTW - 9/7 has been mentioned as the report-for-duty-at-the-local-office date for that class, but it is Labor Day, so I would imagine it would actually be 9/8.
|
|
|
Post by sealaw90 on Jul 9, 2015 17:28:45 GMT -5
Hmm, I dunno. The only ALJ hiring I see on USAJobs are for current or former ALJs, not for folks on the register.
|
|
|
Post by sealaw90 on Jul 9, 2015 17:37:24 GMT -5
Yeah but - There is an "expiration date" for the Register, but it is pretty sure that the current Register will be extended. It is too new to be exhausted, new members are coming on through grants of appeals, 10-pt vet hiring, and now the additional testing to be held in late summer. Even if OPM works out new regs to replace the current process codified at 5 CFR, it will have to go through the whole promulgation process, which will take a fair amount of time. AND SSA is trying to add somewhere in the range of 250-500 ALJ's in the next 3 fiscal years; other agencies are also interested in keeping the current Register alive because this is the first Register since the moratorium for the Adzell litigation. None of these agencies would be happy with having to wait for a new process. Excellent post! For those of us who have ever been involved in a legislative change proposal, this is a process that could take a few years to fully achieve. I'm not buying this, not to disparage any source. BTW, how will SSA handle veteran preference issues.
|
|
|
Post by saaao on Jul 9, 2015 17:41:24 GMT -5
I don't know how many layers this went through before getting to Andrew's source, but it could represent a plan to transition to an AJ system in the long term. If so they Agency will have to go to congress to get it to happen. Given the problems this hire up has experienced I could see the will being there to go through with the pain of making it happen. Otherwise I don't see how this would work, as sitting ALJ's are more likely to be looking to leave the agency rather than join, and I cannot see OPM allowing SSA to advertise candidates on the register to apply directly to SSA rather then being referred by OPM through the certificate process.
As for Veterans' Preference I am sure AJ's would be classified 0905 excepted service employees. Veteran status can be considered a positive thing but would not likely represent any concrete advantage in hiring.
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Jul 9, 2015 18:33:54 GMT -5
We received a forwarded email solicitation for alj positions with CFPB today (or yesterday, in any event, I saw it today). I looked it up at www.consumerfinance.gov/jobs/detail/administrative-law-judge/Appears to be not hiring from the register but not sure (from my quick glance) that it's only open to existing aljs. Seems more broad then that. Located in DC.
|
|
|
Post by hopefalj on Jul 9, 2015 18:50:18 GMT -5
We received a forwarded email solicitation for alj positions with CFPB today (or yesterday, in any event, I saw it today). I looked it up at www.consumerfinance.gov/jobs/detail/administrative-law-judge/Appears to be not hiring from the register but not sure (from my quick glance) that it's only open to existing aljs. Seems more broad then that. Located in DC. From the USA Jobs posting of the position linked from the CFPB posting.... "WHO MAY APPLY: Applications will only be accepted from current or former Federal Administrative law Judges who meet applicable requirements under 5 CFR part 930, Subpart B." It's a little odd that the CFPB website doesn't include this rather important qualification.
|
|