|
Post by judgedreamer on Oct 13, 2015 20:36:07 GMT -5
I got a FOAD letter for the Cert prior to the one I got hired from. Maybe a FOAD letter is a good sign!
|
|
|
Post by Patience on Oct 13, 2015 20:55:04 GMT -5
I'm in the FOAD club as well.
|
|
|
Post by jessejames on Oct 14, 2015 4:54:41 GMT -5
Your handle is appropriate for this situation and the attitude we should all have about this process
|
|
|
Post by aljwishhope on Oct 14, 2015 6:21:41 GMT -5
What does FOAD stand for? My impression from clues on board is that it is a letter sent out to a candidate, who was not selected, once all the positions have been filled for the ALJ spots within their GAL for which they had been on a cert. Thereafter a reevaluation of hiring needs and refreshing of applicant.pool may occur??? GAL expansion may occur??new certs may be created?? The same register will be in play just adding more recent test takers as we all started from the same ALJ exam announcement (plus any vets added in) ??
|
|
|
Post by aljwishhope on Oct 14, 2015 6:26:03 GMT -5
Or do you get FOAD letter from each city you made cert? Does mass mailing of FOAD mean certs are all closed for now - until next round of hiring???
Your info is greatly appreciated.
|
|
|
Post by ba on Oct 14, 2015 6:57:15 GMT -5
What does FOAD stand for? My impression from clues on board is that it is a letter sent out to a candidate, who was not selected, once all the positions have been filled for the ALJ spots within their GAL for which they had been on a cert. Thereafter a reevaluation of hiring needs and refreshing of applicant.pool may occur??? GAL expansion may occur??new certs may be created?? The same register will be in play just adding more recent test takers as we all started from the same ALJ exam announcement (plus any vets added in) ?? I'll give you a hint. The last three letters mean, "off and die." It was a joke by a poster that took on its own life.
|
|
|
Post by cafeta on Oct 14, 2015 7:16:15 GMT -5
What does FOAD stand for? My impression from clues on board is that it is a letter sent out to a candidate, who was not selected, once all the positions have been filled for the ALJ spots within their GAL for which they had been on a cert. Thereafter a reevaluation of hiring needs and refreshing of applicant.pool may occur??? GAL expansion may occur??new certs may be created?? The same register will be in play just adding more recent test takers as we all started from the same ALJ exam announcement (plus any vets added in) ?? I'll give you a hint. The last three letters mean, "off and die." It was a joke by a poster that took on its own life. Another variation you may see is a TBNT letter, or a thanks but no thanks letter.
|
|
|
Post by mamaru on Oct 14, 2015 7:26:14 GMT -5
Your understanding is correct - it means "f*** off and die" but that's tongue in cheek. It simply closes the open certs (all certs you are on). It's routine. Many ALJ's have received one prior to getting "the call." Typically everyone on a set of certs who wasn't hired gets one more or less simultaneously. (There have been exceptions, but we don't need to go there.)
It's a mixed message in a way. Rejection is never fun, but by the time it arrives, you already know you haven't been hired so in a way it's good to know there are more opportunities opening soon, given the need to fill more slots
As for what happens next, the transfer lists are worked to fill whatever existing vacancies SSA hopes to fill. (There's no guarantee that all existing vacancies will be filled. There are limits on the number they can train.) After the transfer list is exhausted, new certs are pulled from the register which consists of individuals who have received NORS from OPM. (This is an over-simplification to some degree, because there seems to be some overlap; however, it's a general idea of how the process works.)
So far, the only people who have been added to the register are vets who have tested and received NORs since the first round. There's speculation as to whether or not people who tested in DC earlier this summer will be scored and added before the next set of certs is pulled. Stay tuned.
OPM could allow for expansion of GAL's or wait until testing is completed and see if that allows for sufficient expansion of the register. There's plenty of discussion/speculation about that on the Board, but nobody knows the answer.
As for a refresh, that seems pretty unlikely anytime soon, given the additional number of people who are testing. But nobody really knows.
Hope that helps.
|
|
|
Post by gary on Oct 14, 2015 7:31:41 GMT -5
Mamaru has covered the subject excellently. I would only add that there was at least one report from someone who won an appeal and was added to the register. There are likely a few more in that boat, but not many.
|
|
|
Post by legalchick on Oct 14, 2015 7:44:15 GMT -5
Got mine too. But hey, the Dodgers won, so who can complain?
|
|
|
Post by Mocha5 on Oct 14, 2015 9:01:36 GMT -5
Got mine too. But hey, the Dodgers won, so who can complain? The Dodgers winning (along with the Utley non-slide in game 2) is just about my top cause for complaint right now. Let's Go Mets!
|
|
|
Post by ba on Oct 14, 2015 9:10:41 GMT -5
Got mine too. But hey, the Dodgers won, so who can complain? Cardinal and Mets fans.
|
|
|
Post by Propmaster on Oct 14, 2015 9:29:25 GMT -5
Wondering if it's coincidental that this follows on the heels of the contract......I'm sure they're expecting the announcement to simplify matters considerably What contract? I might find out from the several threads I have not yet read, but why risk it?Also, I got mine, too. EDIT: Found it, never mind. Interesting info.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2015 9:42:01 GMT -5
I don't know if this will make anyone feel better or not, but the AALJ newsletter from this morning said the following...
"While the Agency intended to hire 75-80 new judges for September, they were only able to hire 38 because not enough names were provided by OPM. OPM’s decision to restrict testing has reduced the size of the register (the agency does not know how many names are left on the register). OPM needs to reopen the register and get more people on the list. OPM is reportedly contacting candidates who were rejected due to low scores and telling them they can advance in the process of being selected."
"…reported on future ALJ hiring plans: 200 for 2015; 250 to 300 for 2016; 250 for 2017; 175 for 2018. This will be contingent upon OPM reopening the register and our agency having the budget to do the hiring. The agency faces a logistical mountain to climb to train this many judges."
|
|
|
Post by mamaru on Oct 14, 2015 9:48:54 GMT -5
Those folks are in the process of testing right now, robg.
|
|
|
Post by lizdarcy on Oct 14, 2015 11:40:20 GMT -5
Got mine too. But hey, the Dodgers won, so who can complain? ME! I CAN COMPLAIN!
WE WANT UT-LEY! (we want him out for the rest of the season)
|
|
|
Post by robespierre on Oct 14, 2015 13:34:59 GMT -5
Got mine too. But hey, the Dodgers won, so who can complain? Me! Mets!
|
|
|
Post by privateatty on Oct 14, 2015 15:23:44 GMT -5
I don't know if this will make anyone feel better or not, but the AALJ newsletter from this morning said the following... "While the Agency intended to hire 75-80 new judges for September, they were only able to hire 38 because not enough names were provided by OPM. OPM’s decision to restrict testing has reduced the size of the register (the agency does not know how many names are left on the register). OPM needs to reopen the register and get more people on the list. OPM is reportedly contacting candidates who were rejected due to low scores and telling them they can advance in the process of being selected." "…reported on future ALJ hiring plans: 200 for 2015; 250 to 300 for 2016; 250 for 2017; 175 for 2018. This will be contingent upon OPM reopening the register and our agency having the budget to do the hiring. The agency faces a logistical mountain to climb to train this many judges." So they couldn't hire the 75 because "not enough names were provided by OPM."? I dunno, I have to say at first glance that I'm not buying this. Were there that many GAL specific candidates such that they couldn't hire in crapland? Until I see concrete evidence to the contrary (and that will not happen anytime soon unless one of our trusted posters raises her or his right hand), I will postulate that a more likely scenario is that the three names for the cities provided did not ring bells at Puzzle Palace. IOW, unlike the old days when the list was four pages with all the cities on it, this new hiring format imposed on Puzzle Palace by OPM does not allow them to cherry pick those whom they really want. Ergo, we get lean hires. Puzzle Palace is always willing to blame OPM. I'd love to hear OPM's side of the story, but again, that won't happen anytime soon.
|
|
|
Post by latecomer on Oct 14, 2015 15:28:26 GMT -5
Always judge the believability of the message (no more than 38) by factoring in the messenger (AALJ).
|
|
|
Post by privateatty on Oct 14, 2015 15:43:02 GMT -5
|
|