|
|
Post by spartan5850 on May 13, 2009 8:38:17 GMT -5
Sorry to bother on the Administrative Law Judge forum, but I am looking for a second opinion.
I submitted my application materials in response to a general ad seeking attorney-advisors for the ODAR. I received an e-mail asking if I was interested in a position in Maryland, which I responded positively too. I had a phone interview with SSA and faxed in my declaration for federal employment and proof of bar membership. I haven't heard anything since then. As a result of a different forum, I learned that they called another attorney on MOnday and offered him a position, but I haven't received a rejection letter.
So my question is, given your past experiences, do you think I still have a shot? I would love to work for Social Security, so I am looking for signs of hope here. Thank you all in advance.
|
|
|
|
Post by Propmaster on May 13, 2009 8:42:11 GMT -5
I don't know anything about that office, but many offices are hiring multiples of staff, so maybe you are still being considered.
|
|
|
|
Post by spartan5850 on May 13, 2009 8:49:00 GMT -5
I don't know anything about that office, but many offices are hiring multiples of staff, so maybe you are still being considered. Thank you for the response. The Social Security Administration seems to be one of the beneficiaries of the Stimulus Bill, so they are hiring multiples of staff. The thing that worries me is the fact that they called people for the same position that I applied for. Its a good sign that I haven't been rejected. I am debating on whether I should call just to reiterate my interest. Thank you for your reply. It is much appreciated. |
|
|
|
Post by aaa on May 13, 2009 9:12:24 GMT -5
Did you send a thank you note following the interview? That could be a good idea - when I was in a position to hire attorneys that was always a positive for me. You could indicate your continued interest in a position with the office.
And not to dash any hopes, but in some instances SSA has not been as timely as you would hope in sending out the rejection letters. Far as I know that is an individual office standard. While I made it a priority to do that following the decision, no one told me I had to.
|
|
|
|
Post by spartan5850 on May 13, 2009 9:19:53 GMT -5
Did you send a thank you note following the interview? That could be a good idea - when I was in a position to hire attorneys that was always a positive for me. You could indicate your continued interest in a position with the office. And not to dash any hopes, but in some instances SSA has not been as timely as you would hope in sending out the rejection letters. Far as I know that is an individual office standard. While I made it a priority to do that following the decision, no one told me I had to. I did send a Thank you note, but if I don't hear anything by tomorrow I will just check in via phone. As for the rejection letters, you could be right, but these people have been pretty quick in everything up to this point. So I was just thinking, maybe hoping, that they would just send out a block e-mail once a decision has been made. If worse comes to worse, I can get the bad news on the phone. The thing I am worried about is just being in this limbo, since they are needing a ton of attorneys. I am worried about being in the grey area where I am not the top candidate, but I am not bad enough to be rejected so I am in employment purgatory. |
|
|
|
Post by chieftain on May 13, 2009 9:20:55 GMT -5
If the original ad was for multiple locations, then I think you should still be in the running at least for other locations. I think aaa's suggestion of a follow up thank you note is a good one, and you should emphasize that you remain available for multiple locations.
|
|
|
|
Post by spartan5850 on May 13, 2009 9:25:16 GMT -5
If the original ad was for multiple locations, then I think you should still be in the running at least for other locations. I think aaa's suggestion of a follow up thank you note is a good one, and you should emphasize that you remain available for multiple locations. Thank you for all the responses. The way the ads were put out is on Monster, they put out about 8 ads advertising for the same position. They included the same e-mail address. I applied to all 8 plus the main SSA Headquarters. Different question, is the follow-up phone call a better idea? I am more than glad to work at any location in this country. You want me to serve this position in the Green Zone in Iraq, then I have no problem with that. |
|
|
|
Post by chieftain on May 13, 2009 9:31:30 GMT -5
The call won't hurt. Numerous ALJ candidates have called ODAR HQ for various questions with the hiring process and the staff there has been helpful and professional. I have no reason to believe your experience would be different. Ask direct questions and you will receive direct answers.
|
|
|
|
Post by spartan5850 on May 13, 2009 10:01:39 GMT -5
The call won't hurt. Numerous ALJ candidates have called ODAR HQ for various questions with the hiring process and the staff there has been helpful and professional. I have no reason to believe your experience would be different. Ask direct questions and you will receive direct answers. Just wanted to thank you for your response. I will give it today, then call tomorrow to inquire further for an update. |
|
cbpr
New Member
Posts: 1
|
Post by cbpr on May 13, 2009 10:39:47 GMT -5
I would assume they keep a list and are ready to hire off of it in case funds become available. I am also leaving the agency in July, so you can have my position. Good luck!
|
|
|
|
Post by spartan5850 on May 13, 2009 10:53:42 GMT -5
I would assume they keep a list and are ready to hire off of it in case funds become available. I am also leaving the agency in July, so you can have my position. Good luck! Thanks for the info. I would gladly take your position if that was a possibility. |
|
|
|
Post by spartan5850 on May 13, 2009 12:22:21 GMT -5
I just called and it seems the decisionmaker is on vacation which would explain the lack of contact. Thanks all for your advice. I may be on here again next week seeking out more of your wisdom.
|
|
|
|
Post by morgullord on May 14, 2009 9:02:23 GMT -5
It is my understanding that attorney-advisors (and other staff) hired by SSA with Economic Stimulus money must be in place NLT June 30, 2009.
|
|
|
|
Post by Legal Beagle on May 14, 2009 9:03:47 GMT -5
It is my understanding that attorney-advisors (and other staff) hired by SSA with Economic Stimulus money must be in place NLT June 30, 2009. What about the new ALJs added with Stiumulus money? Same thing? |
|
|
|
Post by morgullord on May 14, 2009 9:07:36 GMT -5
It is my understanding that no judges are funded directly by Stimulus money. The Stimulus money for hiring staff enabled SSA to re-allocated appropriated funds from other areas.
|
|
|
|
Post by Legal Beagle on May 14, 2009 9:24:34 GMT -5
It is my understanding that no judges are funded directly by Stimulus money. The Stimulus money for hiring staff enabled SSA to re-allocated appropriated funds from other areas. From the other thread: Speaking before the House Ways and Means Subcommittee on Social Security on April 28, 2009, SSA's Deputy Commissioner for Budget, Finance and Management, Mary Glenn-Croft, stated as follows: "Of more than 7,000 new hires that we are making this fiscal year, the Recovery Act funding will allow us to hire more than 2,000 Federal employees and the States to hire additional disability examiners. Specifically, in the near term: * * * • Our hearings offices will hire 550 new employees and 35 additional administrative law judges." |
|
|
|
Post by ssaer on May 14, 2009 10:35:53 GMT -5
From the other thread: Speaking before the House Ways and Means Subcommittee on Social Security on April 28, 2009, SSA's Deputy Commissioner for Budget, Finance and Management, Mary Glenn-Croft, stated as follows: "Of more than 7,000 new hires that we are making this fiscal year, the Recovery Act funding will allow us to hire more than 2,000 Federal employees and the States to hire additional disability examiners. Specifically, in the near term: * * * • Our hearings offices will hire 550 new employees and 35 additional administrative law judges." If morgullord is correct in his statement that "attorney-advisors (and other staff) hired by SSA with Economic Stimulus money must be in place NLT June 30, 2009," we may see a hiring in excess of 157 in the current round. |
|
|
|
Post by morgullord on May 14, 2009 10:39:20 GMT -5
What Mary Glenn-Croft said and what I said are not inconsistent. With no disrespect intended, LB, I do not have the time or the inclination to explain the nuances of federal fiscal law but, generally speaking, an agency's budget is appropriated by Congress. An agency budget is usually in at least two parts--operations and personnel (for our purposes here). Depending upon the appropriation, an agency usually has discretion in shifting funds from one part to another. The further down in the budget one goes, the greater the discretion on the part of the Agency. SSA had obviously intended to increase by at least 35 FTEs (full time equivalants or, one air-breathing carbon-based organic data unit for 2080 hours per year). It shifted those funds (more or less, actually somewhat more) to the line item for ALJs and backfilled with Stimulus money. Stimulus money is the enabler, not the direct source.
|
|
|
|
Post by morgullord on May 14, 2009 10:42:14 GMT -5
No judges will be hired with Stimulus money; SSA does not want to be saddled with such a time constraint regarding the hiring of judges.
I grant that there is the possibility that 35 of those to report on June 22 could be hired using direct Stimulus money but I don't see that as a practical matter. Too many things can go wrong and money not used by 6/30 is gone. SSA will not take that risk.
|
|
|
|
Post by Legal Beagle on May 14, 2009 12:07:02 GMT -5
No disrespect taken ML. Most of us in the private sector have no clue about this alien language, so we have to rely upon y'all governeers to help 'splain it, and we do appreciate it. I just wish the politicos who spout all these pronouncements knew as much as you do - then we would not be confused.
|
|
