|
|
Post by bobsmith on Sept 13, 2020 18:34:02 GMT -5
|
|
lospettro
New Member
When you need the ghost.
Posts: 12
|
Post by lospettro on Sept 14, 2020 7:08:44 GMT -5
I just saw this posting as well. This looks interesting and I'm strongly considering applying. Are there discussion board members with experience either appearing before an NTSB ALJ or being an NTSB ALJ who can share some details/insights? |
|
|
|
Post by Burt Macklin on Sept 14, 2020 9:08:46 GMT -5
“ Candidates must hold an Administrative Law Judge Position at the AL-3 level or higher in the Federal Service or be eligible for reinstatement to an Administrative Law Judge Position based upon prior experience as an Administrative Law Judge.”
|
|
|
|
Post by jimmyjiggles on Sept 14, 2020 9:31:36 GMT -5
One nice thing about this position:
"Remote Telework Conditions:
This position is eligible for remote telework if you are located in close proximity to a major airport."
|
|
|
|
Post by nylawyer on Sept 14, 2020 14:09:12 GMT -5
All I saw was that you had to live on the West Coast (or at least "the ideal candidate" does.
Oh, and that the job entails reviewing pilot error and malfeasance, and requires you to travel by air. Because I'm sure I won't spend the whole flight wondering about all the things I learn at work. (I had a friend who was handling liability for elevator accidents, suffice to say he switched to using the stairs).
|
|
|
|
Post by Burt Macklin on Sept 14, 2020 17:32:28 GMT -5
Can anyone explain this to me:
"Current federal Administrative Law Judges (ALJ) serving in the competitive or excepted service. The candidate selected for this position will be in the excepted service unless the candidate is currently an ALJ in the competitive service. In that situation, per OPM guidance, the candidate will remain in the competitive service."
Everyone else in a competitive service position that takes a promotion or new ALJ job has had to convert to excepted. I'm not aware of any change in OPM policy - any of you able to unpack this?
|
|
|
|
Post by ssaogc on Sept 14, 2020 18:42:49 GMT -5
Can anyone explain this to me: "Current federal Administrative Law Judges (ALJ) serving in the competitive or excepted service. The candidate selected for this position will be in the excepted service unless the candidate is currently an ALJ in the competitive service. In that situation, per OPM guidance, the candidate will remain in the competitive service." Everyone else in a competitive service position that takes a promotion or new ALJ job has had to convert to excepted. I'm not aware of any change in OPM policy - any of you able to unpack this? |
|
|
|
Post by Loopstok on Sept 14, 2020 20:07:17 GMT -5
This sounds like fascinating work and I'd love to do it. However, a few points.
The NTSB public website shows only four current ALJs, all male; three listed out of DC and the fourth out of Denver.
The Chief ALJ has a pilot's license. Of the three remaining ALJs, one is former Air Force JAG, a second worked and flew on helicopters in the Navy before going to law school and also serving in Air Force JAG, and the third was a Colonel in the US Army Reserves and holds a commercial pilot's license.
I, on the other hand, read Michael Crichton's novel Airframe, have flown coach on hundreds of flights, and my favorite joke is:
"What do we want?"
"More low-flying aircraft!"
"When do we want them?"
"Nyyyyowwww!"
So, um... I am not fit to shine the current NTSB ALJs' shoes. Good luck to all of you who apply. I imagine this is tremendously rewarding and important work, but I feel like it requires more life experience and hours in the air than I will ever possess, ever.
|
|
|
|
Post by aljudgmental on Sept 15, 2020 8:29:35 GMT -5
This sounds like fascinating work and I'd love to do it. However, a few points.
The NTSB public website shows only four current ALJs, all male; three listed out of DC and the fourth out of Denver.
The Chief ALJ has a pilot's license. Of the three remaining ALJs, one is former Air Force JAG, a second worked and flew on helicopters in the Navy before going to law school and also serving in Air Force JAG, and the third was a Colonel in the US Army Reserves and holds a commercial pilot's license.
I, on the other hand, read Michael Crichton's novel Airframe, have flown coach on hundreds of flights, and my favorite joke is:
"What do we want?"
"More low-flying aircraft!"
"When do we want them?"
"Nyyyyowwww!"
So, um... I am not fit to shine the current NTSB ALJs' shoes. Good luck to all of you who apply. I imagine this is tremendously rewarding and important work, but I feel like it requires more life experience and hours in the air than I will ever possess, ever.
One of my favorite movies is Airplane. That said, I'm a shoe-in. |
|
|
|
Post by Burt Macklin on Sept 15, 2020 10:01:29 GMT -5
Can anyone explain this to me: "Current federal Administrative Law Judges (ALJ) serving in the competitive or excepted service. The candidate selected for this position will be in the excepted service unless the candidate is currently an ALJ in the competitive service. In that situation, per OPM guidance, the candidate will remain in the competitive service." Everyone else in a competitive service position that takes a promotion or new ALJ job has had to convert to excepted. I'm not aware of any change in OPM policy - any of you able to unpack this?
Yeah, I was tracking on all that as the existing OPM policy. I may just have my wires crossed but what the NTSB advertisement says in respect to existing competitive service ALJs get to remain competitive service if they leave their current agency for NTSB seems at odds with what the OPM policy is saying. When I left SSA for OMHA last year I was forced to covert from competitive to excepted.
|
|
|
|
Post by nylawyer on Sept 15, 2020 11:49:23 GMT -5
Pretty sure it's shoo in. Comes from horse racing, meaning a fixed race.
|
|
|
|
Post by aljudgmental on Sept 15, 2020 12:25:45 GMT -5
Pretty sure it's shoo in. Comes from horse racing, meaning a fixed race. I was going off of the prior post's reference to "shoes," but if it makes you feel good to correct grammar and mistakes on the web, please continue. |
|
|
|
Post by foghorn on Sept 15, 2020 15:22:09 GMT -5
Hey, the scary part is figuring if your aviator shades are as authentic as their aviator shades.
Then there's the clipped tonalities you'd have to use in conversation.
|
|
|
|
Post by patiently on Sept 15, 2020 15:26:08 GMT -5
On a somewhat related note, anyone know why the Dept. of Education posting for Chief ALJ ended up being cancelled? Just asking...for a friend.
|
|
|
|
Post by nylawyer on Sept 15, 2020 17:50:45 GMT -5
Pretty sure it's shoo in. Comes from horse racing, meaning a fixed race. I was going off of the prior post's reference to "shoes," but if it makes you feel good to correct grammar and mistakes on the web, please continue. Can't correct grammar or spelling, I'm too inept at both. But horse racing lingo? I'm in. |
|
|
|
Post by shoocat on Sept 15, 2020 22:30:02 GMT -5
For those who are SSA ALJs, who do we provide opinions/decisions we "authored?"
|
|
|
|
Post by SPN Lifer on Sept 16, 2020 0:35:26 GMT -5
I am not fit to shine the current NTSB ALJs' shoes. Good luck to all of you who apply. I imagine this is tremendously rewarding and important work, but I feel like it requires more life experience and hours in the air than I will ever possess, ever. One of my favorite movies is Airplane. That said, I'm a shoe-in. Pretty sure it's shoo in. Comes from horse racing, meaning a fixed race. I was going off of the prior post's reference to "shoes," but if it makes you feel good to correct grammar and mistakes on the web, please continue. Can't correct grammar or spelling, I'm too inept at both. But horse racing lingo? I'm in. For those who are SSA ALJs, who [sic] do we provide opinions/decisions we "authored?" Shoo, cat! Or, shoocat, please clarify the question. 🙂 Your inspired user name and question provide an excellent opportunity for many of us to learn something. grammarist.com/spelling/shoo-in/ |
|
|
|
Post by Pixie on Sept 16, 2020 6:32:39 GMT -5
For those who are SSA ALJs, who do we provide opinions/decisions we "authored?" I, too, am baffled by this post. Perhaps Shoo Cat can clarify? Pixie |
|
|
|
Post by shoocat on Sept 16, 2020 17:08:30 GMT -5
For those who are SSA ALJs, who do we provide opinions/decisions we "authored?" I, too, am baffled by this post. Perhaps Shoo Cat can clarify? Pixie On the shoo part I just always spelled it that way understanding it came from shooing flies away, like shoo fly pie. As to the other, I don't know if I really consider myself to have authored my decisions. I just edit them really even if they go out over my signature. That is just my feeling. Others might disagree with me and think there isn't even a question to answer. PS That was also supposed to be "how," not "who." |
|
|
|
Post by patiently on Sept 17, 2020 9:24:43 GMT -5
In terms of producing a writing sample, it seems like you would have to make up a fictitious case and draft the decision yourself. Redacting one you've written yourself based on an actual Claimant would be too risky. The training sharepoint sites still have all those dreaded "fake" files (based on real ones I know, but redacted to Agency satisfaction) we worked with (i.e. "David David"). I would ask management if you could use one of those to draft a sample of your work.
|
|
