|
|
Post by privateatty on May 4, 2009 10:14:25 GMT -5
One of the topics that I think is on most folks minds who are waiting for the 18th or 19th is what are the chances that ODAR and Puzzle Palace will take the time to tailor the home of those potential selectees? Put another way, if I made three big X's next to my home city (that was on the GAL list), do you think that will be noticed and possibly acted upon? I recollect that one of the Members recently posted that he/she was surprised at how many selectees got chosen for their city or very close to it. May seem a bit hopeful or even arrogant, but I can tell you its in my wishes and prayers, and I bet I'm not the Lone Ranger!  |
|
|
|
Post by Legal Beagle on May 4, 2009 10:18:47 GMT -5
I actually added a column - Preferences - and put numbers by a couple of the cities, hoping that someone would notice. I'll let you know if it worked.
|
|
|
|
Post by illuminator on May 4, 2009 11:18:24 GMT -5
Meanwhile, all the little Hulksters who take their vitamins and play by the rules, who did not alter the form, are left without any preference indicated.  |
|
|
|
Post by Orly on May 4, 2009 11:33:12 GMT -5
Meanwhile, all the little Hulksters who take their vitamins and play by the rules, who did not alter the form, are left without any preference indicated. Marking GAL by numbers is potentially a double edged sword. If all goes well ODAR might consider it to be very helpful and take it under due consideration. If it goes neutral they'll just ignore it and do what they want. If it goes very poorly you get dinged for inability to follow instructions. I have no idea what the staff at Puzzle Palace think of it. So I guess the question for the candidate is: "do you feel lucky?" ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Legal Beagle on May 4, 2009 11:43:52 GMT -5
Marking GAL by numbers is potentially a double edged sword. If all goes well ODAR might consider it to be very helpful and take it under due consideration. If it goes neutral they'll just ignore it and do what they want. If it goes very poorly you get dinged for inability to follow instructions. I have no idea what the staff at Puzzle Palace think of it. So I guess the question for the candidate is: "do you feel lucky?" ;D Like I said - I'll let you know if I get an offer, whether or not it is for one of the noted cities, or whether my little tail gets spanked and I am banished to the doghouse. There was nothing in the instructions which said you could NOT do that. Sometimes you have to take some initiative, and one of the questions at the Interview centered around if one had ever bent the rules to accomplish a goal. Too bad I forgot to mention this one little time when I answered. |
|
|
|
Post by okeydokey on May 4, 2009 11:54:31 GMT -5
I have a guess that home-towners will get a little extra boost in the selection process.
In my interview, the HOCALJ said that they really appreciated those who only listed a few places, as those people would likely not want to move after two years.
He said that the whining of people who were unable to move got unbearable after a while.
But, then again, to get the boost, you will have to be in the top three and have a good ODAR interview score.
|
|
mle06
Full Member
Posts: 32 
|
Post by mle06 on May 4, 2009 11:55:53 GMT -5
I actually added a column - Preferences - and put numbers by a couple of the cities, hoping that someone would notice. I'll let you know if it worked. Have heard from what I would consider to be fairly reliable sources in the past, that marking the GAL in any manner other than specifically instructed provides no benefit whatsoever----and could ultimately result almost a negative reaction from the powers that be, who could conclude that: (1) you don't know how, or are unwilling to follow the instructions given, or (2) they could possibly just operate "in oposition" to your listed/marked "preferences" (to the extent that might be possible by all or selection criteria) just to make a point of the importance of following the instructions as they were given---if all others follow the rules, why can't you?---you say you'll go anywhere, but your actions indicate something else potentially. As for me, I don't think trying work around specific instructions in an effort to turn things "my way" and play "mind games" with the powerful ones is a very good idea in a process as important and with as much attention to detail as this process entails.....IMHO, "by the book" in these situations would probably prove to be the best way to go----nowhere was it mentioned that you should indicate or rank GAL preferences---to do so would appear to me to be a potental indication that you are not fully invested in, or really wanting or willing to go to all the places you have marked---which is not a good thing, since each applicant is clearly told to give very careful consideration to their willingness to go to each location before marking that location on the GAL. I'm just saying......I followed the instructions to the letter, and I don't have a single regret for doing that. |
|
|
|
Post by privateatty on May 4, 2009 12:06:50 GMT -5
Meanwhile, all the little Hulksters who take their vitamins and play by the rules, who did not alter the form, are left without any preference indicated. Marking GAL by numbers is potentially a double edged sword. If all goes well ODAR might consider it to be very helpful and take it under due consideration. If it goes neutral they'll just ignore it and do what they want. If it goes very poorly you get dinged for inability to follow instructions. I have no idea what the staff at Puzzle Palace think of it. So I guess the question for the candidate is: "do you feel lucky?" ;D Do I feel lucky? Well...YES! And if we're both in training we can go to Atlantic City for the weekend! |
|
|
|
Post by carjack on May 4, 2009 12:12:34 GMT -5
The question will not be would you like a position in one of these choice locales, but rather would you like a position in X which is the locale for which you were considered. It's not like getting asked would you like to go out to eat and if so where, but rather, would you like to eat at Paul's Possum Palace. You cannot respond, I'd rather eat at the Olive Garden, the good one over by the interstate. At least that's my uninformed interpretation.
|
|
|
|
Post by zero on May 4, 2009 14:36:44 GMT -5
I just woke up from a one month snooze, what's the "puzzle palace?"
|
|
|
|
Post by privateatty on May 4, 2009 14:56:28 GMT -5
I just woke up from a one month snooze, what's the "puzzle palace?" Zero! My man! I thought we had lost you! "Puzzle Palace" is Pixie's moniker for Falls Church a.k.a. ODAR CALJ, et. al. Did you sleep well? I trust no nightmares... |
|
|
|
Post by alj on May 4, 2009 20:56:38 GMT -5
Listing your preferred locations isn't going to help.
|
|
|
|
Post by pm on May 4, 2009 23:39:34 GMT -5
One of the topics that I think is on most folks minds who are waiting for the 18th or 19th is what are the chances that ODAR and Puzzle Palace will take the time to tailor the home of those potential selectees? Put another way, if I made three big X's next to my home city (that was on the GAL list), do you think that will be noticed and possibly acted upon? I recollect that one of the Members recently posted that he/she was surprised at how many selectees got chosen for their city or very close to it. May seem a bit hopeful or even arrogant, but I can tell you its in my wishes and prayers, and I bet I'm not the Lone Ranger! ;) They know exactly where you want to be and that is any one of the cities you listed. That was the point of OPM requiring you to list them and ODAR asking you to reconfirm. If you didn't want to be in any of those cities, you should have removed them. So no, they aren't going to spend even one second worrying about which cities you want the most. Many of the people who got the cities they wanted last year either had very few choices or they were well liked where they wanted to be and someone probably put in a good word for them. But rest assured the desires of the candidates were not a factor. The 3 big X's on your list were at best a waste of your time. At worst, placing 3 X's in front of one city gave ODAR the message that you were not truly interested in the other cities on the list, and would be trying to transfer to XXX the first chance you got. |
|
|
|
Post by pm on May 4, 2009 23:50:59 GMT -5
I actually added a column - Preferences - and put numbers by a couple of the cities, hoping that someone would notice. I'll let you know if it worked. This was discussed last year. It's highly unlikely to help and very well may hurt. Here's the message ODAR gets from adding a column: This person doesn't understand what to do. or This person won't follow the rules. ODAR generally has little interest in hiring either of those people. If ODAR had wanted your prefernces, they would have asked for them. The other problem is that by rating some cities highly, you have given ODAR the message that you are not interested in the other cities and would try for a transfer if offered a lesser city. So they will probably factor that in. Failing to follow the rules at any time during this process is a really bad idea. It doesn't mean you can't be hired but you probably slipped down a few notches and eliminated a few cities. You seem like a nice person and would probably make a good judge so I hope you didn't just take yourself completely out of the running. |
|
|
|
Post by pm on May 4, 2009 23:51:39 GMT -5
I actually added a column - Preferences - and put numbers by a couple of the cities, hoping that someone would notice. I'll let you know if it worked. Have heard from what I would consider to be fairly reliable sources in the past, that marking the GAL in any manner other than specifically instructed provides no benefit whatsoever----and could ultimately result almost a negative reaction from the powers that be, who could conclude that: (1) you don't know how, or are unwilling to follow the instructions given, or (2) they could possibly just operate "in oposition" to your listed/marked "preferences" (to the extent that might be possible by all or selection criteria) just to make a point of the importance of following the instructions as they were given---if all others follow the rules, why can't you?---you say you'll go anywhere, but your actions indicate something else potentially. As for me, I don't think trying work around specific instructions in an effort to turn things "my way" and play "mind games" with the powerful ones is a very good idea in a process as important and with as much attention to detail as this process entails.....IMHO, "by the book" in these situations would probably prove to be the best way to go----nowhere was it mentioned that you should indicate or rank GAL preferences---to do so would appear to me to be a potental indication that you are not fully invested in, or really wanting or willing to go to all the places you have marked---which is not a good thing, since each applicant is clearly told to give very careful consideration to their willingness to go to each location before marking that location on the GAL. I'm just saying......I followed the instructions to the letter, and I don't have a single regret for doing that. Very well said and all very true |
|
|
|
Post by tallgreenfrog on May 4, 2009 23:55:44 GMT -5
I have a friend who numbered his list, and he had a high OPM score (83). He ended up with one of his lowest choices, and he chose numerous locations. Also hired at that location in his same class is a person with a low score (low 60s) who chose only that location bc its driving distance from that person's home. It certainly could be a coincidence, and from what I was told at my interview, it probably was.
I asked in my ODAR interview whether it would be prudent to state a preference, after stating my willingness to go anywhere. I was told it probably would not help but it would not hurt, either or words to that effect, plus other information not pertinent to this discussion. I did not number my original list because the instructions did not so direct.
|
|
|
|
Post by pm on May 5, 2009 0:04:26 GMT -5
The problem with asking questions of many of the interviewers is that most are not directly involved in the hiring process so they are only giving their impression. It can hurt to list preferences if one of the individuals doing the hiring is annoyed by it. And it always raises issues about your committment to a city that is low on your preferences. Having a high score may insulate someone from these issues but those with middle or lower scores don't need to be minimizing their chances.
|
|
|
|
Post by tallgreenfrog on May 5, 2009 0:27:37 GMT -5
I am not sure if it says anything about a person's committment. In order for that assumption to be correct, you would have remove all other variables. If somebody lists just two cities, Superfuntown and Pastnowhere, he or she probably prefers one of the two cities. And that doesnt necessarily mean that he or she would not be a committed ODAR employee at his or her lessor choice. Nor does it mean that the person is flaky or indecisive.
It just may mean, all other things being equal, that he or she would rather live in Pastnowhere.
|
|
|
|
Post by morgullord on May 5, 2009 6:37:03 GMT -5
Having previously worked in a place that openly proclaimed about itself: "It's not the End of the World, but you can see it from here", Pastnowhere sounds exciting...
|
|
|
|
Post by jagghagg on May 5, 2009 6:47:39 GMT -5
From a discussion about the Transfer List on the WWW: Then again, if people understood that the GAL was intended to be a reflection of where they want to be employed, maybe they would complete the form to be a reflection of where they want to be employed. In most other environments, if someone applies for a job in Seattle, they understand they will work in Seattle. The logic of applying for a job in Seattle when one wants to live in Miami is stunning.It is terrific if someone wants to be an ALJ so badly that they are willing to go anywhere to become one. But if real life dictates an interest in a limited geographical area, why fight it? In another mind-boggling instance of agreement between PM and myself, the highlighted line is one of the most concise statements applicable to this discussion I've ever seen. A long, long time ago ( and far away), someone told me that the location invariably took a backseat to the job. If you are not happy in your work, you will not be happy in your location. It is as simple as that. And it proved to be absolutely true over a 21 year military career. Hence, if you feel you will be happy being an ALJ wherever you may land, then you should open yourself to the complete GAL. If, on the other hand, you have constraints of any sort which make you (want, long, need) to be in a certain location, then - in the future - restrict yourself to those places. Otherwise you are setting yourself up for a great deal of frustration. |
|
