|
Rant
Sept 3, 2015 11:27:23 GMT -5
Post by luckylady2 on Sept 3, 2015 11:27:23 GMT -5
And my understanding was that the August class was only 12 because they were the individuals from the July class that asked for and got an extension on the time to report. ODAR was planning on adding to that class with more offers, but for an unknown reason, was not able to make more offers, then decided to just proceed to train the small group they had.
|
|
|
Post by redryder on Sept 3, 2015 11:29:55 GMT -5
I have to take issue with Papajudge on what happens when you leave the office. The points he made are correct, but I feel like I am a "judge" 24/7 with respect to how I conduct myself. I have tried very hard to avoid any hint of scandalous behavior such as public intoxication. I am careful to chose those people with whom I discuss politics, candidates, or any other hot topic of the day. Gossip is shared only with those in whom I have the utmost faith. And I never, never tell people I am a judge unless they ask. Even then, I usually just tell them I work for Social Security. The lower my profile is, the better I like it. Because your conduct off the clock can come back to bite you. Just read the MSPB decisions involving ALJ conduct. Most of these instances had nothing to do with the job.
This is like eating with the experts when I have a travel docket. Let a rep or a claimant see me eating and drinking with the VE after the hearings. Then I hold that hearing and tell them the VE is "impartial."
As others have said before, you never know when you will run into a claimant who would be more than happy to have an additional reason to complain about that SOB who denied his claim.
No, I never feel like I am not a judge, except in the confines of my home. According to the dog, I am his handmistress whose only duties are to pet, fed and cater to his every whim.
|
|
|
Post by bookman on Sept 3, 2015 11:30:32 GMT -5
I think Prop is wrong about some things but he is definitely giving voice to my fears about my viability on the register. I don't think you can view the list of 18 cities they pay for relo as a determination that they don't like any of the candidates for those cities. I think the relo pay is a response to an inability to get people to stay there. The email says these offices need stability and a constant flow into and out of these offices is probably a huge part of the problem. They can't make a new hire stay but they can keep a transfer there for 2 years. I hope you are right but I think Prop has a point.I have several of these "undesirable" locations on my GAL and I wish to heck that they could just offer me the job and ask me not to request a transfer for 2 years; I would jump at that, but that as I understand it is not possible. I am trying not to be emotional in my reaction to these developments but I need to make logical inference about my likelihood of hiring so that I can make some business decisions about what to do with my existing practice. My best reading at this point is that with them seeking to add 1000 candidates to the pool, and having passed me over for numerous undesirable locations on my GAL, that they are just not that into me, as the saying goes.
|
|
|
Post by owl on Sept 3, 2015 11:44:43 GMT -5
It isn't that they cannot find decent candidates... other factors are in play. People take time to respond, some turn it down, some want deferrments, and a LOT have very limited GALs making it all very difficult to get full classes. Except, they literally said that they can't find decent candidates to hire. I do not agree with this at all. At no time has anyone in management or who has hiring authority said "they can't find decent candidates." I think your extrapolation of this conclusion is flawed. You may "feel" that way, but they have not "literally" said this. They are having a hard time getting an adequate number to fill spots for a variety of reasons already discussed here. But this is putting words in the mouths of those who hire when that is not what they said. Respectfully disagree. You're both right.
I have heard from good sources that ODAR *knows* there are *plenty* of decent candidates on the register, i.e., people who have been rated recommended or highly recommended. They are quite keen to hire these people as fast as possible. So, when looking at the register as a whole, they are not having a problem finding decent (in their eyes) candidates. Point, JudgeRatty.
But I have also heard that there are more than a few who are not recommended. It is comforting to think that that rating is given only very rarely but my intel is that it is not rare - certainly not a majority of interviewees by any means but not just once in a blue moon either. Thus, at this point in the life of the register, for some location certs, the top 3 are all not recommended or are headed by a not-recommended 5- or 10-pointer, blocking the path to many desired candidates with lower NOR scores. Thus, when looking at the various top 3s at this point in the game, they are indeed having a problem finding decent (in their eyes) candidates. The slowness is not due to some epidemic of people not answering their phones or taking 24 hours or whatever. Point, propmaster.
These logjams will eventually break but it may take a combination of GAL expansion (rumored to be coming), new and desirable higher-NOR candidates coming onto certs (always theoretically in process with quarterly retesting, likely to happen in greater numbers after OPM testing this fall concludes), refreshing the register (not on the near horizon), etc.
Additionally, of course, ODAR could decide to hire some not-recommended higher-NOR scorers to free up immediate paths to greater numbers of recommended lower-NOR scorers, but the slow pace and failure to hit oft-announced hiring targets would seem to be evidence that this is not happening much if at all.
Keep the faith and don't quit your day jobs in the meantime. Good luck all.
|
|
|
Post by gary on Sept 3, 2015 11:51:40 GMT -5
It isn't that they cannot find decent candidates... other factors are in play. People take time to respond, some turn it down, some want deferrments, and a LOT have very limited GALs making it all very difficult to get full classes. I do not agree with this at all. At no time has anyone in management or who has hiring authority said "they can't find decent candidates." I think your extrapolation of this conclusion is flawed. You may "feel" that way, but they have not "literally" said this. They are having a hard time getting an adequate number to fill spots for a variety of reasons already discussed here. But this is putting words in the mouths of those who hire when that is not what they said. Respectfully disagree. You're both right.
I have heard from good sources that ODAR *knows* there are *plenty* of decent candidates on the register, i.e., people who have been rated recommended or highly recommended. They are quite keen to hire these people as fast as possible. So, when looking at the register as a whole, they are not having a problem finding decent (in their eyes) candidates. Point, JudgeRatty.
But I have also heard that there are more than a few who are not recommended. It is comforting to think that that rating is given only very rarely but my intel is that it is not rare - certainly not a majority of interviewees by any means but not just once in a blue moon either. Thus, at this point in the life of the register, for some location certs, the top 3 are all not recommended or are headed by a not-recommended 5- or 10-pointer, blocking the path to many desired candidates with lower NOR scores. Thus, when looking at the various top 3s at this point in the game, they are indeed having a problem finding decent (in their eyes) candidates. The slowness is not due to some epidemic of people not answering their phones or taking 24 hours or whatever. Point, propmaster.
These logjams will eventually break but it may take a combination of GAL expansion (rumored to be coming), new and desirable higher-NOR candidates coming onto certs (always theoretically in process with quarterly retesting, likely to happen in greater numbers after OPM testing this fall concludes), refreshing the register (not on the near horizon), etc.
Additionally, of course, ODAR could decide to hire some not-recommended higher-NOR scorers to free up immediate paths to greater numbers of recommended lower-NOR scorers, but the slow pace and failure to hit oft-announced hiring targets would seem to be evidence that this is not happening much if at all.
Keep the faith and don't quit your day jobs in the meantime. Good luck all.
I'm afraid this post is too balanced and well-reasoned to be in a thread titled "Rant."
|
|
|
Post by zepplin on Sept 3, 2015 11:52:09 GMT -5
Frustrating that a "not recommended" after one interview with two people tanks a good performance throughout the rest of the peocess. Also, does having references called mean anything - would they not be called if you were not recommended? I suspect it doesn't matter, but just asking what others think or know.
|
|
|
Rant
Sept 3, 2015 11:57:34 GMT -5
gary likes this
Post by JudgeRatty on Sept 3, 2015 11:57:34 GMT -5
Frustrating that a "not recommended" after one interview with two people tanks a good performance throughout the rest of the peocess. Also, does having references called mean anything - would they not be called if you were not recommended? I suspect it doesn't matter, but just asking what others think or know. References are called, credit checked, and criminal history checked automatically when you get on a cert for the first time. These are seperate tasks performed by contractors meanwhile ODAR goes through the interview process. This is why things "appear" to be happening all over the place with no rhyme or reason. These tasks have to be done so that once the hiring committee is ready to meet all elements are there to review prospective hires. Many things happening all at the same time.
|
|
|
Rant
Sept 3, 2015 11:57:45 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by zepplin on Sept 3, 2015 11:57:45 GMT -5
Is there an appeal of not recommended? : )
|
|
|
Rant
Sept 3, 2015 11:59:53 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by zepplin on Sept 3, 2015 11:59:53 GMT -5
I understand the contractor's roll. But if for example I already interviewed and possibly got not recommended, why keep calling my references on new certs? Repeated calls with each cert but only one interview.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeRatty on Sept 3, 2015 12:17:02 GMT -5
I understand the contractor's roll. But if for example I already interviewed and possibly got not recommended, why keep calling my references on new certs? Repeated calls with each cert but only one interview. To me, this is evidence that you are not out. Stop trying to read tea leaves and just have some faith. LOL! You only get ONE interview for SSA per register. Period. When enough time has passed, they recontact references again, and when enough time has passed they make you fill out all that paperwork on references again. That can get stale. But only one interview period.
|
|
|
Post by Propmaster on Sept 3, 2015 13:46:38 GMT -5
I like Owl's post. I would like it to be true. But I was in a small cubicle (something of a euphemism) and remembered the following, which I think speaks (in bold) to the issue. It does not say that the complications of hiring make things slow or that candidates don't reply fast enough. It is not consistent with a finding that the register is chock full of people they want. I should have cited this earlier, as well, but I just remembered it, sorry. And I acknowledge that this is a recollected transcript of an unscripted presentation and is not sworn testimony; neither is it "proof" for my suspicion/position. I merely cite it as notable on the issue. Greetings all! Today was the last full day of training for our class. Tomorrow is graduation day!
Today Judge Bice and Judge Allen came to our training class to speak about many things, including info about the current hiring. Now, before anyone gasps, I did ask for permission to post, so everything I say is out in the open and nothing is top secret. LOL! --edit--
They WANT, and are "trying" (heavy emphasis on "trying" here and I promised Judge Allen I would emphasize this) to get a GAL expansion. Judge Bice specifically addressed this after the question was asked. The register is apparently running so low that they will likely only hire about 50 for the starting group on September 21st. This is not the predicted 75-90. This is not as good as I hoped to report.
--edit--
Good luck everyone!
|
|
|
Post by JudgeRatty on Sept 3, 2015 13:55:30 GMT -5
I like Owl's post. I would like it to be true. But I was in a small cubicle (something of a euphemism) and remembered the following, which I think speaks (in bold) to the issue. It does not say that the complications of hiring make things slow or that candidates don't reply fast enough. It is not consistent with a finding that the register is chock full of people they want. I should have cited this earlier, as well, but I just remembered it, sorry. And I acknowledge that this is a recollected transcript of an unscripted presentation and is not sworn testimony; neither is it "proof" for my suspicion/position. I merely cite it as notable on the issue. Greetings all! Today was the last full day of training for our class. Tomorrow is graduation day!
Today Judge Bice and Judge Allen came to our training class to speak about many things, including info about the current hiring. Now, before anyone gasps, I did ask for permission to post, so everything I say is out in the open and nothing is top secret. LOL! --edit--
They WANT, and are "trying" (heavy emphasis on "trying" here and I promised Judge Allen I would emphasize this) to get a GAL expansion. Judge Bice specifically addressed this after the question was asked. The register is apparently running so low that they will likely only hire about 50 for the starting group on September 21st. This is not the predicted 75-90. This is not as good as I hoped to report.
--edit--
Good luck everyone! Considering that I was the one who posted that, and that I was actually there to hear them speak (along with the other 44 people in the class plus trainers), I can tell you that you are reading into this way too much. It's all I am going to say about it. If you want to be negative, go ahead. But at NO time did anyone say that folks are not "decent candidates" and I did not say that either.
|
|
|
Rant
Sept 3, 2015 14:01:14 GMT -5
Post by Propmaster on Sept 3, 2015 14:01:14 GMT -5
I like Owl's post. I would like it to be true. But I was in a small cubicle (something of a euphemism) and remembered the following, which I think speaks (in bold) to the issue. It does not say that the complications of hiring make things slow or that candidates don't reply fast enough. It is not consistent with a finding that the register is chock full of people they want. I should have cited this earlier, as well, but I just remembered it, sorry. And I acknowledge that this is a recollected transcript of an unscripted presentation and is not sworn testimony; neither is it "proof" for my suspicion/position. I merely cite it as notable on the issue. Considering that I was the one who posted that, and that I was actually there to hear them speak (along with the other 44 people in the class plus trainers), I can tell you that you are reading into this way too much. It's all I am going to say about it. If you want to be negative, go ahead. But at NO time did anyone say that folks are not "decent candidates" and I did not say that either. Unlike Wikipedia, I accept primary source information. Owl presented a reasonable scenario, and your impression of your quoted statement can be made consistent with the scenario. I can see why I had it in my head, but I retract my characterization of the situation in light of this additional clarification of something i think I had stored a certain way in my subconscious. I do, in fact, want to be negative, because for whatever reason, it makes me feel better (or makes me feel less?) in this situation, yet I am striving (and moreso today) not to infect and spread misery. I apologize for coming across as argumentative by being so argumentative Sigh. I will try harder.
|
|
|
Post by sealaw90 on Sept 3, 2015 14:22:49 GMT -5
Considering that I was the one who posted that, and that I was actually there to hear them speak (along with the other 44 people in the class plus trainers), I can tell you that you are reading into this way too much. It's all I am going to say about it. If you want to be negative, go ahead. But at NO time did anyone say that folks are not "decent candidates" and I did not say that either. Unlike Wikipedia, I accept primary source information. Owl presented a reasonable scenario, and your impression of your quoted statement can be made consistent with the scenario. I can see why I had it in my head, but I retract my characterization of the situation in light of this additional clarification of something i think I had stored a certain way in my subconscious. I do, in fact, want to be negative, because for whatever reason, it makes me feel better (or makes me feel less?) in this situation, yet I am striving (and moreso today) not to infect and spread misery. I apologize for coming across as argumentative by being so argumentative Sigh. I will try harder. Wait a cotton-pickin' minute prop, are you saying your entire rant for today was a waste? Haha, this certainly was more fun than staring at my phone that doesn't ring!
|
|
|
Rant
Sept 3, 2015 14:25:05 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by phoenixrakkasan on Sept 3, 2015 14:25:05 GMT -5
Too many minds!
|
|
|
Rant
Sept 3, 2015 14:27:20 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by sealaw90 on Sept 3, 2015 14:27:20 GMT -5
It isn't that they cannot find decent candidates... other factors are in play. People take time to respond, some turn it down, some want deferrments, and a LOT have very limited GALs making it all very difficult to get full classes. I do not agree with this at all. At no time has anyone in management or who has hiring authority said "they can't find decent candidates." I think your extrapolation of this conclusion is flawed. You may "feel" that way, but they have not "literally" said this. They are having a hard time getting an adequate number to fill spots for a variety of reasons already discussed here. But this is putting words in the mouths of those who hire when that is not what they said. Respectfully disagree. You're both right.
I have heard from good sources that ODAR *knows* there are *plenty* of decent candidates on the register, i.e., people who have been rated recommended or highly recommended. They are quite keen to hire these people as fast as possible. So, when looking at the register as a whole, they are not having a problem finding decent (in their eyes) candidates. Point, JudgeRatty.
But I have also heard that there are more than a few who are not recommended. It is comforting to think that that rating is given only very rarely but my intel is that it is not rare - certainly not a majority of interviewees by any means but not just once in a blue moon either. Thus, at this point in the life of the register, for some location certs, the top 3 are all not recommended or are headed by a not-recommended 5- or 10-pointer, blocking the path to many desired candidates with lower NOR scores. Thus, when looking at the various top 3s at this point in the game, they are indeed having a problem finding decent (in their eyes) candidates. The slowness is not due to some epidemic of people not answering their phones or taking 24 hours or whatever. Point, propmaster.
These logjams will eventually break but it may take a combination of GAL expansion (rumored to be coming), new and desirable higher-NOR candidates coming onto certs (always theoretically in process with quarterly retesting, likely to happen in greater numbers after OPM testing this fall concludes), refreshing the register (not on the near horizon), etc.
Additionally, of course, ODAR could decide to hire some not-recommended higher-NOR scorers to free up immediate paths to greater numbers of recommended lower-NOR scorers, but the slow pace and failure to hit oft-announced hiring targets would seem to be evidence that this is not happening much if at all.
Keep the faith and don't quit your day jobs in the meantime. Good luck all.
Owl, awesome explanation. I seem to recall a time on the old register that ODAR asked OPM to no longer send over the " three struck " folks so that they were then able to reach recommended candidates. Couldn't ODAR do that now, assuming they are seeing large groups of cities that have multiple 'not recommended ' next to their name? Does anyone else remember that discussion on this board?
|
|
|
Post by bartleby on Sept 3, 2015 14:39:50 GMT -5
Being the harbinger of doom and gloom, let me just say that there are more than just a few "not recommended". Just look at the number that have gone through the process in the past several years. Thousands have been on certs and hundreds hired.. With that, have a great weekend.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Rant
Sept 3, 2015 14:53:56 GMT -5
crab likes this
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2015 14:53:56 GMT -5
"References are called, credit checked, and criminal history checked automatically when you get on a cert for the first time"
Sometimes.
Mine were not checked until months after I was already on board and already hearing cases. This is not uncommon.
|
|
|
Rant
Sept 3, 2015 14:54:32 GMT -5
via mobile
gary likes this
Post by sealaw90 on Sept 3, 2015 14:54:32 GMT -5
It isn't that they cannot find decent candidates... other factors are in play. People take time to respond, some turn it down, some want deferrments, and a LOT have very limited GALs making it all very difficult to get full classes. I do not agree with this at all. At no time has anyone in management or who has hiring authority said "they can't find decent candidates." I think your extrapolation of this conclusion is flawed. You may "feel" that way, but they have not "literally" said this. They are having a hard time getting an adequate number to fill spots for a variety of reasons already discussed here. But this is putting words in the mouths of those who hire when that is not what they said. Respectfully disagree. You're both right.
I have heard from good sources that ODAR *knows* there are *plenty* of decent candidates on the register, i.e., people who have been rated recommended or highly recommended. They are quite keen to hire these people as fast as possible. So, when looking at the register as a whole, they are not having a problem finding decent (in their eyes) candidates. Point, JudgeRatty.
But I have also heard that there are more than a few who are not recommended. It is comforting to think that that rating is given only very rarely but my intel is that it is not rare - certainly not a majority of interviewees by any means but not just once in a blue moon either. Thus, at this point in the life of the register, for some location certs, the top 3 are all not recommended or are headed by a not-recommended 5- or 10-pointer, blocking the path to many desired candidates with lower NOR scores. Thus, when looking at the various top 3s at this point in the game, they are indeed having a problem finding decent (in their eyes) candidates. The slowness is not due to some epidemic of people not answering their phones or taking 24 hours or whatever. Point, propmaster.
These logjams will eventually break but it may take a combination of GAL expansion (rumored to be coming), new and desirable higher-NOR candidates coming onto certs (always theoretically in process with quarterly retesting, likely to happen in greater numbers after OPM testing this fall concludes), refreshing the register (not on the near horizon), etc.
Additionally, of course, ODAR could decide to hire some not-recommended higher-NOR scorers to free up immediate paths to greater numbers of recommended lower-NOR scorers, but the slow pace and failure to hit oft-announced hiring targets would seem to be evidence that this is not happening much if at all.
Keep the faith and don't quit your day jobs in the meantime. Good luck all.
Owl, awesome explanation. I seem to recall a time on the old register that ODAR asked OPM to no longer send over the " three struck " folks so that they were then able to reach recommended candidates. Couldn't ODAR do that now, assuming they are seeing large groups of cities that have multiple 'not recommended ' next to their name? Does anyone else remember that discussion on this board?
|
|
|
Rant
Sept 3, 2015 14:57:30 GMT -5
gary likes this
Post by saaao on Sept 3, 2015 14:57:30 GMT -5
You're both right.
I have heard from good sources that ODAR *knows* there are *plenty* of decent candidates on the register, i.e., people who have been rated recommended or highly recommended. They are quite keen to hire these people as fast as possible. So, when looking at the register as a whole, they are not having a problem finding decent (in their eyes) candidates. Point, JudgeRatty.
But I have also heard that there are more than a few who are not recommended. It is comforting to think that that rating is given only very rarely but my intel is that it is not rare - certainly not a majority of interviewees by any means but not just once in a blue moon either. Thus, at this point in the life of the register, for some location certs, the top 3 are all not recommended or are headed by a not-recommended 5- or 10-pointer, blocking the path to many desired candidates with lower NOR scores. Thus, when looking at the various top 3s at this point in the game, they are indeed having a problem finding decent (in their eyes) candidates. The slowness is not due to some epidemic of people not answering their phones or taking 24 hours or whatever. Point, propmaster.
These logjams will eventually break but it may take a combination of GAL expansion (rumored to be coming), new and desirable higher-NOR candidates coming onto certs (always theoretically in process with quarterly retesting, likely to happen in greater numbers after OPM testing this fall concludes), refreshing the register (not on the near horizon), etc.
Additionally, of course, ODAR could decide to hire some not-recommended higher-NOR scorers to free up immediate paths to greater numbers of recommended lower-NOR scorers, but the slow pace and failure to hit oft-announced hiring targets would seem to be evidence that this is not happening much if at all.
Keep the faith and don't quit your day jobs in the meantime. Good luck all.
Owl, awesome explanation. I seem to recall a time on the old register that ODAR asked OPM to no longer send over the " three struck " folks so that they were then able to reach recommended candidates. Couldn't ODAR do that now, assuming they are seeing large groups of cities that have multiple 'not recommended ' next to their name? Does anyone else remember that discussion on this board? Well supposedly the thrice considered are not a factor to begin with. SSA doesn't have to consider them unless they want to.
|
|