|
|
Post by Pixie on Jun 28, 2016 17:11:37 GMT -5
Have any of you new members asking about how long something takes read the "Unofficial ALJ Timeline Thread" which is a sticky? We sticky these things for a reason. Have you read any of the information contained in the stickies? Pixie.
|
|
misha
Full Member
Posts: 64 
|
Post by misha on Jun 28, 2016 17:31:28 GMT -5
I will look into it, Pixie. However, I was a bit confused on whether the timeline information in the main section pertained to the DC testing, or the SJT testing. I know that the SJT is a more recent component in the process. But I will check out the sticky stuff and see if it clarifies the type of testing referenced. It is probably more than clear and I just have not found it or read it yet. As one law professor once told me, "usually when students don't understand the case assigned for that day, it's because they haven't READ IT."
|
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Jun 28, 2016 17:36:08 GMT -5
I was hired on the first cert of the new register.
From best recollection, went something like this:
Applied March 13
Online component May 13
Invite to DC July 13
DC testing September 13
NOR March 14
Certed April 14
Interviewed May 14
Offered June or July 14
Started end of August 14
So, 16 to 17 months from soup to "wait, I wanted this? Nuts."
I'd hazard a guess that none of you new applicants will have it happen any faster. I had hoped opm would have it together better for you, and you might actually get an NOR sooner after your DC testing, but considering they are already later than that schedule I guess not.
My best guess is the highest scoring of you thru the testing process are still 13 to 15 months from being sworn in.
Just a swag of course.
Funk
|
|
|
|
Post by Pixie on Jun 28, 2016 20:12:05 GMT -5
I will look into it, Pixie. However, I was a bit confused on whether the timeline information in the main section pertained to the DC testing, or the SJT testing. I know that the SJT is a more recent component in the process. But I will check out the sticky stuff and see if it clarifies the type of testing referenced. It is probably more than clear and I just have not found it or read it yet. As one law professor once told me, "usually when students don't understand the case assigned for that day, it's because they haven't READ IT." I'm not getting on to you, Misha. You are not much different from others in your class. I am just pointing out there is a wealth of information that has been largely ignored by this class of new members. I mean when well over 1/2 of your class doesn't even type a reason for wanting to join the board in the white box, how closely are they reading the instructions? The instructions for joining this board are somewhat simpler than the instructions for the ALJ exam. I don't normally post messages sent to me privately, but this one is too good to pass up. This is the reason he gave for wanting to join the board: I've recently completed the online stage of the ALJ testing. I know the odds are long and the wait time is even longer, so I would like to read the board and participate in polls to help with the data gathering for this process. I will NOT discuss Application Manager or create duplicate threads -- because I can read.
This from our newest member, shelldon, and he wasn't even a member when he wrote this. He will quickly go to the top 3 of his class. Cmon shelldon, don't let me down. The whole board is watching you now! As a longtime teacher, mentor and instructor, I thrive on seeing people succeed. It is one of my many joys in life. Pixie |
|
|
|
Post by montyburns on Jun 28, 2016 20:12:24 GMT -5
When looking at timelines, y'all need to make sure you are looking at the correct one. Some persons sat on the sideline for about 1.5 years until OPM decided they needed to invite more to the DC party. In the meantime, those that made the cut after the online component had already proceeded through the DC phase and were either cut or placed on the register. So, the relevant timeline for us right now is the timeline followed by those that proceeded through each stage without waiting for OPM to double back. That is the timeline that phoenixrisingALJ referenced in her post. This raises the most interesting unanswered question: will OPM use the 2013 or 2015 cut off scores for this round? I can see arguments either way, though I think they'll use the 2013 scores if for no other reason than logistics/manpower. All WAGs welcome! |
|
|
|
Post by Pixie on Jun 28, 2016 20:17:01 GMT -5
When looking at timelines, y'all need to make sure you are looking at the correct one. Some persons sat on the sideline for about 1.5 years until OPM decided they needed to invite more to the DC party. In the meantime, those that made the cut after the online component had already proceeded through the DC phase and were either cut or placed on the register. So, the relevant timeline for us right now is the timeline followed by those that proceeded through each stage without waiting for OPM to double back. That is the timeline that phoenixrisingALJ referenced in her post. This raises the most interesting unanswered question: will OPM use the 2013 or 2015 cut off scores for this round? I can see arguments either way, though I think they'll use the 2013 scores if for no other reason than logistics/manpower. All WAGs welcome! I think it is more dependent on the number of applicants they wish to move forward than it is the score. The score is ancillary and just happens based on the number of bodies they need. Pixie. |
|
|
|
Post by pumpkin on Jun 28, 2016 20:25:02 GMT -5
J. pumpkin what has happened to your sense of adventure? It is much more exciting to wait until the last day, or even the last few hours of the last day. Plus, if they don't wait until the last day, that won't eliminate some competition for our old friend Gary.
BTW, You haven't been too alert recently. Friday night I went to a dinner party. Saturday we cooked out with local friends. And last night we went to dinner with friends from California. The board was totally unmonitored for hours at a time each night, and you didn't even notice. You caused no mischief in my absence. Maybe the responsibility of being a judge is catching up with you? Perhaps that is good as this latest group of kittens is proving to be more difficult to herd than the ones in the past. I do have hope for them, though. I think they will come around just as the others have . . . I hope. Pixie.
[/quote]
You caught me - trying to move the ALPOs to UNWR and the EDITs to SIGN :-). There seems to be an inversely proportional relationship between my mischief making and the length of my DART report
|
|
|
|
Post by retpamdj on Jun 28, 2016 20:56:55 GMT -5
Seems as if the elders this time around are rahter snarky. Welcome to the game newbies...not all of the retreads from tests past are mean spirited.
|
|
|
|
Post by shelldon on Jun 28, 2016 21:57:31 GMT -5
Whelp, here I am. Brand spankin' new to this board. Been lurking around since February-ish I would guess. I have been completely "winging" most of the application process. I'm a private practice attorney whose litigation schedule is kharmicly throwing a pile of hearings at me both during the original application window and now during the online component.
I mostly check in here from time to time when my Google searches bring me on in or when I use the (*gasp*) search function to find the answers to my specific questions.
I've been "winging it" because I've had jobs where I emulated what I thought the powers that be wanted me to be. In doing so, I was playing a role every day -- lying to myself, my employer, and my clients. The lack of genuine-ness was worn on my face like a horrible adolescent attempt at a moustache. As a result, I could not imagine a more terrifying experience than being sworn in as a judge knowing that the position was obtained through deceit, gaming the assessments, or lying about who I really am.
So, knowing all of that, I'm simply curious whether the government wants a person like me to work for it.
*****
Two truths and one lie about online component:
(1) SJ test. I wanted to change a couple responses after the fact, but am glad that option was taken away from us.
(2) Writing sample. I decided that it was a test to see how much one could type in 35 minutes (a productivity test) so I just went bananas typing nonsense words. Curious as to what the typical word count is for that essay.
(3) Experience assessment. If you did the application initially with any effort, this should be fairly straightforward.
|
|
|
|
Post by phoenixrisingALJ on Jun 28, 2016 22:39:35 GMT -5
shelldon - Welcome to the zoo. You will find snark, humor and fellow wallowers of misery. Also great advice and the occasional gem of information. Don't expect to change your day job anytime soon is the general bottom line. Take it all with a grain of salt - I take mine on the rim of my Margarita glass. Settle in for the wait for stage 3. My WAG is 2-3 months. So enjoy the rest of your summer. Reality is we have no freaking clue... we will get it when OPM is done grading the writing sample and scoring the SJT and picking through our EA. Cue Doris Day singing....
|
|
|
|
Post by SpotTheDalmatian on Jun 28, 2016 22:52:20 GMT -5
Hello y'all. Been lurking here for a while (was referred by a current ALJ!) and I just finished the online component. It...wasn't that bad. So now I'm wondering what I missed, and now that I'm in the "beating myself up through second-guessing" stage I should probably just go to bed already. Good luck all. Shelldon, my essay was about 260 words...whether that's typical, I don't know.  |
|
|
|
Post by ds3272 on Jun 28, 2016 23:12:20 GMT -5
Hello y'all. Been lurking here for a while (was referred by a current ALJ!) and I just finished the online component. It...wasn't that bad. So now I'm wondering what I missed, and now that I'm in the "beating myself up through second-guessing" stage I should probably just go to bed already. Good luck all. Shelldon, my essay was about 260 words...whether that's typical, I don't know. This was my experience precisely, except that I think mine was 340-360 words. First-time applicant, first-time poster, encouraged to join (and apply) by a current ALJ. Thank you to the many excellent veterans of the process who make this community possible. I managed to fill out a complete and correct application to join this board on my first try, so I'm feeling brave enough to write this one post. And vote in polls. Now I will go back into my hole for a while. |
|
|
|
Post by Pixie on Jun 29, 2016 0:21:51 GMT -5
Seems as if the elders this time around are rahter snarky. Welcome to the game newbies...not all of the retreads from tests past are mean spirited. Sorry, but I haven't noticed "snarky." Nor have I noticed "mean spirited." Perhaps you can give us some specific examples? Oh, BTW, welcome to the board. Pixie |
|
|
|
Post by bayou on Jun 29, 2016 7:07:16 GMT -5
Have any of you new members asking about how long something takes read the "Unofficial ALJ Timeline Thread" which is a sticky? We sticky these things for a reason. Have you read any of the information contained in the stickies? Pixie. To be honest though Pixie, that thread is dated and contains a lot of information that isn't directly relevant to the currently used process. The data from the 2013 class is shoehorned into a format that is based on the old process and not the current process.
That being said, if you are asking about the timeline and haven't read the sticky thread that is about the timeline, your point is well made.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gaidin on Jun 29, 2016 7:59:37 GMT -5
Have any of you new members asking about how long something takes read the "Unofficial ALJ Timeline Thread" which is a sticky? We sticky these things for a reason. Have you read any of the information contained in the stickies? Pixie. To be honest though Pixie, that thread is dated and contains a lot of information that isn't directly relevant to the currently used process. The data from the 2013 class is shoehorned into a format that is based on the old process and not the current process.
That being said, if you are asking about the timeline and haven't read the sticky thread that is about the timeline, your point is well made.
It probably is time to put together a new timeline. I just wonder who is going to step up to the plate and do it. |
|
|
|
Post by jbm0265 on Jun 29, 2016 9:49:55 GMT -5
Gaidin, thank you so much for starting this thread. I've lurked, tried to read and understand what others have posted, used the search function when I have a question and now... it's in. I know it's out of my hands at this point and can only hope it's sufficient. If not, I gave it my best. Good luck to all. Now it's time for me to stop obsessing and enjoy the summer.
|
|
|
|
Post by bac on Jun 29, 2016 10:02:28 GMT -5
Hard not to obsess. I was in the "lower scoring subgroup " (like a moorlock?)
And the only non obsession was the 2 years without knowledge!
|
|
|
|
Post by Pixie on Jun 29, 2016 10:06:34 GMT -5
Gaidin, thank you so much for starting this thread. I've lurked, tried to read and understand what others have posted, used the search function when I have a question and now... it's in. I know it's out of my hands at this point and can only hope it's sufficient. If not, I gave it my best. Good luck to all. Now it's time for me to stop obsessing and enjoy the summer. And thank you for doing what any new member to a forum should do. There is a wealth of information in the stickies. Yes, some of it is dated, as bayou stated, but there is a bunch of useful info there. It will answer questions you didn't even know you had. Pixie. |
|
|
|
Post by monday on Jun 29, 2016 10:44:05 GMT -5
I finished my test and wound up with plenty of time leftover on both timed sections. I'm having bad flashbacks to law school exams and feeling like I missed something. Anyway, glad it's over. I'm still thinking it's a bit ridiculous to have questions about what to do with opposing attorneys when the job I'm applying for doesn't involve more than one attorney at a time, but oh well.
The experience assessment was more aggravating than I expected - I can barely remember what percentage of what duties I did over a decade ago.
|
|
|
|
Post by phoenixrisingALJ on Jun 29, 2016 11:50:56 GMT -5
I finished my test and wound up with plenty of time leftover on both timed sections. I'm having bad flashbacks to law school exams and feeling like I missed something. Anyway, glad it's over. I'm still thinking it's a bit ridiculous to have questions about what to do with opposing attorneys when the job I'm applying for doesn't involve more than one attorney at a time, but oh well. The experience assessment was more aggravating than I expected - I can barely remember what percentage of what duties I did over a decade ago. Remember that you are applying to get a list of OPM approved candidates (as qualified) for ALJ positions - while the majority of these slots are SSA(ODAR/OMHA) there are other agencies that have ALJs and those do have a process in place that has multiple players with counsel. Dept of Labor for example has ALJs that hear Black Lung (BLBA), Longshore and harbor workers compensation act claims (LHWCA), Defense Base Act comp claims, Davis Bacon claims, then there is the independent MSHA board - The Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission - (FMSHRC) is an independent adjudicative agency that provides administrative trial and appellate review of legal disputes arising under the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act (Mine Act). There is the Administrative Review Board (ARB), the Occupational Health and Safety Review Commission - which is an independent federal agency, providing administrative trial and appellate review, created to decide contests of citations or penalties resulting from OSHA inspections. All tend to list openings asking for experienced ALJs although I believe in the past they have also asked for an OPM cert. Lately I have seen most of the postings for these jobs are looking for ALJs with a few years of experience - and where do most ALJs get experience - before SSA and OMHA - so yes control of a court room and experience with an adversarial process is helpful and is something OPM should be screening for - shoot given the volume of applicants - why shouldn't they try to find the most qualified possible? |
|
