|
Post by decadealj on May 21, 2009 6:52:04 GMT -5
And that is the essence of change. For many years OPM refused to reopen the exam and register contending there were plenty of candidates on the register. Something happened during the Adzell litigation that forced OPM to change the litigation experience qualification and to establish a new register. It also coincided with OPM disbanding the office of administrative law judges.
|
|
|
Post by zero on May 21, 2009 8:42:52 GMT -5
As much as I want to limit my competition, I don’t think it’s going to happen. Look, they’re talking about 250-plus new hires before the end of FY10 and there are roughly 600 people left on the register? There won’t be enough for the wave of 200 without adding a few names under the rule of 3.
|
|
|
Post by pm on May 21, 2009 9:12:51 GMT -5
As much as I want to limit my competition, I don’t think it’s going to happen. Look, they’re talking about 250-plus new hires before the end of FY10 and there are roughly 600 people left on the register? There won’t be enough for the wave of 200 without adding a few names under the rule of 3. There are around 800 on the register. This hire will drop it to 650. The September hire will drop it to 600. Can ODAR hire another 150 out of that 600? You do the math.
|
|
|
Post by jagghagg on May 21, 2009 9:23:33 GMT -5
As PA would say, "Math-schmath." Can ODAR hire another 150 of the ones they want out of what's currently on the Register? Apparently not.
|
|
|
Post by valkyrie on May 21, 2009 9:37:12 GMT -5
I would like to think that the litigation settled some of these issues. Take the SSA scores. They aren't a secret, which means that OPM knows about them, and may very well have agreed to/ approved of them before hand. If that's the case, who says a formula wasn't agreed to beforehand. SSA and OPM likely know the SSA scores of everyone on the cert, of which no more than about 200 will be selected. Maybe they take the average or mean SSA score of the remainder to determine whether the remaining register needs to be refreshed? Just a thought.
|
|
|
Post by privateatty on May 21, 2009 10:18:25 GMT -5
As PA would say, "Math-schmath." Can ODAR hire another 150 of the ones they want out of what's currently on the Register? Apparently not. Eye, and that's the rub, me boy (and girl).
|
|
|
Post by zero on May 21, 2009 11:17:50 GMT -5
As much as I want to limit my competition, I don’t think it’s going to happen. Look, they’re talking about 250-plus new hires before the end of FY10 and there are roughly 600 people left on the register? There won’t be enough for the wave of 200 without adding a few names under the rule of 3. There are around 800 on the register. This hire will drop it to 650. The September hire will drop it to 600. Can ODAR hire another 150 out of that 600? You do the math. 800 sounds high to me by at least 50 or 100. But you may have better information than I do. I got a pretty decent count earlier this year based on the number of WD sessions added to the carryover from last year. If I read the other rumors, there will be another hire this year of around 50. If my schmath is right, this means there will be 750-150-50=550 for a 200+ hire next year. That means the list will come up short by 50 names (200 positions x 3=600) without considering the fudge factor for drop-outs. Now if they run two hires of 100 each next year, there are plenty of names.
|
|
|
Post by chieftain on May 21, 2009 11:29:25 GMT -5
Zero, I think that the hire of 50 in September-October is part of the total hire of 200 planned for FY 2010.
|
|
|
Post by zero on May 21, 2009 12:21:50 GMT -5
Ah, yes. Now that I read this post carefully, I see that the 200 does include what may happen this September. Good catch chief. To continue with the reports from the NOSSCR Conference, here are the points that Charles Hall has just posted that he picked up from Social Security Commissioner Michael Astrue's speech: • 157 new Administrative Law Judges (ALJs) are bing hired this month -- in the next week or so. • Another 208 ALJs are to be hired before the end of the next fiscal year (September 30, 2010), with perhaps 55 of those to be hired in September of this year (which would still be in this fiscal year). • Finding enough office space for additional ALJs is a problem which could hold back some hiring. • Social Security is now aiming for 1,400 to 1,450 ALJs total. • Social Security now has goal of an average ratio of 4.5 staff to each ALJ. • Astrue expects to open 14 additional hearing offices in FY 2010. Posted By Social Security News to Social Security News at 5/14/2009 12:35:00 PM
|
|
|
Post by nonamouse on May 21, 2009 13:44:51 GMT -5
But there is always the possibility that OPM may open the corral gate to let a few more in... I'm going with carjack and pm. While we know ODAR wants to let in some favorite sons and daughters, I don't think they will get that chance. If ODAR had people who they wanted to hire, those people would have already applied and received a score if they were invited to test. Asking OPM to reopen the register to new applicants would hinder reaching someone with a low score, not help them. Therefore, your statement is the exact opposite of what people in ODAR would want if they were trying to reach a specific insider with a low score. Additionally, if someone from ODAR really wanted to be an ALJ and had sufficient years in practice and the right skills to get onto the register with a reachable score, they already applied in 2007 or 2008. Asking OPM to accept more applicants is more likely to benefit people outside of the government who either were not paying attention the past 2 years or who recently decided that they would like to be an ALJ.
|
|
|
Post by nonamouse on May 21, 2009 13:57:24 GMT -5
THEY NEED TO GET ON WITH THESE HIRES BEFORE WORRYING ABOUT A NEW CERT OR SUBSEQUENT WAVES!!!!!! Actually advanced planning is essential in determining where the agency will have needs in the future with regards to staffing all positions, not merely ALJs. You may not care now if the agency plans enough support staff and gets them hired and trained to support the additional ALJ hires, but you will care a lot if you become an ALJ in an understaffed office where you cannot get enough files that are ready for you to review prior to scheduling or where you have no writers to get your decisions ready. One of my personal favorites is when they send an ALJ to an office that does not have the physical space to house them and they get to spend many months using a file or storage room for their "office." There is also that pesky little thing called the budget that requires agencies to project their monetary needs well into the future. The wait for those in the hunt this round of hiring may seem endless, but it will be moving to the next phase in a couple of weeks. Go have a nice holiday weekend and enjoy the relative calm before the real frenzy begins for those selected of trying to change one's entire life around in about 2 weeks. Trust me on this. If selected you will wish that you had taken advantage of this time to rest, recharge and spend time with family and friends before the chaos began.
|
|
|
Post by Legal Beagle on May 21, 2009 16:33:27 GMT -5
I was referring to asking for a new cert for more ALJ hires - not support staff. I don't think they have certs for support staff hiring, do they? In any event, that is all we are discussing on this Board.
|
|
|
Post by pm on May 21, 2009 18:32:42 GMT -5
I would like to think that the litigation settled some of these issues. Take the SSA scores. They aren't a secret, which means that OPM knows about them, and may very well have agreed to/ approved of them before hand. If that's the case, who says a formula wasn't agreed to beforehand. SSA and OPM likely know the SSA scores of everyone on the cert, of which no more than about 200 will be selected. Maybe they take the average or mean SSA score of the remainder to determine whether the remaining register needs to be refreshed? Just a thought. There are two reasons OPM accepted more candidates for inclusion in the last reopening. One reason is so that they wouldn't have to reopen before the register expires.
|
|
|
Post by pm on May 21, 2009 18:33:31 GMT -5
There are around 800 on the register. This hire will drop it to 650. The September hire will drop it to 600. Can ODAR hire another 150 out of that 600? You do the math. 800 sounds high to me by at least 50 or 100. But you may have better information than I do. I got a pretty decent count earlier this year based on the number of WD sessions added to the carryover from last year. If I read the other rumors, there will be another hire this year of around 50. If my schmath is right, this means there will be 750-150-50=550 for a 200+ hire next year. That means the list will come up short by 50 names (200 positions x 3=600) without considering the fudge factor for drop-outs. Now if they run two hires of 100 each next year, there are plenty of names. The 50 is for next fiscal year. The total for next fiscal year is 200.
|
|
|
Post by pm on May 21, 2009 18:35:12 GMT -5
I'm going with carjack and pm. While we know ODAR wants to let in some favorite sons and daughters, I don't think they will get that chance. If ODAR had people who they wanted to hire, those people would have already applied and received a score if they were invited to test. Asking OPM to reopen the register to new applicants would hinder reaching someone with a low score, not help them. Therefore, your statement is the exact opposite of what people in ODAR would want if they were trying to reach a specific insider with a low score. Additionally, if someone from ODAR really wanted to be an ALJ and had sufficient years in practice and the right skills to get onto the register with a reachable score, they already applied in 2007 or 2008. Asking OPM to accept more applicants is more likely to benefit people outside of the government who either were not paying attention the past 2 years or who recently decided that they would like to be an ALJ. Exactly! Nice analysis. I'm not sure there are that many ODAR favored insiders waiting for another reopening to get on the register. They are all on the regsiter right now. Reopening just sinks them deeper.
|
|
|
Post by barkley on May 22, 2009 6:28:18 GMT -5
If ODAR had people who they wanted to hire, those people would have already applied and received a score if they were invited to test. Asking OPM to reopen the register to new applicants would hinder reaching someone with a low score, not help them. Therefore, your statement is the exact opposite of what people in ODAR would want if they were trying to reach a specific insider with a low score. Additionally, if someone from ODAR really wanted to be an ALJ and had sufficient years in practice and the right skills to get onto the register with a reachable score, they already applied in 2007 or 2008. Asking OPM to accept more applicants is more likely to benefit people outside of the government who either were not paying attention the past 2 years or who recently decided that they would like to be an ALJ. Exactly! Nice analysis. I'm not sure there are that many ODAR favored insiders waiting for another reopening to get on the register. They are all on the regsiter right now. Reopening just sinks them deeper. Not necessarily. I bet you would find some individuals currently on the list who would looooooove it if OPM reopened - those who were put on the registry in 2007 and not selected would have the opportunity to submit a new package. It would be interesting to know how many got higher scores the second time around. I know my application sure improved.
|
|
|
Post by valkyrie on May 22, 2009 6:44:35 GMT -5
"Not necessarily. I bet you would find some individuals currently on the list who would looooooove it if OPM reopened - those who were put on the registry in 2007 and not selected would have the opportunity to submit a new package. It would be interesting to know how many got higher scores the second time around. I know my application sure improved."
If I recall correctly, anyone on the OPM register can retake any part of the scoring aspects, app, interview, or written, one year later. Anyone on the inside should know that, and if they had a score below 60 should have taken advantage of it this time around with the new people.
|
|
|
Post by barkley on May 22, 2009 7:39:31 GMT -5
I think they had to wait a year before they could retake or reapply. The new registry opening occurred just before the year was up.
|
|
|
Post by belgrade on May 22, 2009 8:07:08 GMT -5
The October 2007 National Roster ALJ candidates were not allowed to re-take anything this time around, when the OPM reopened the examination. The only thing they could do, if they opted for it, of course, was to update the geographic list of locations (by adding or subtracting). There was no reapplying of any sort. Whether that would change by the expiration of the roster in 2010 and/or whether it is a good idea to reapply if a chance is offered is not mine to comment. I think, however, that there is no guarantee whatsoever that reapplying, if allowed, would mean a better score. But if the score is in the 30s or 40s then hardly one can do worse second time around. Another facotr that candidates should consider is expense of re-taking the ALJ examination (assuming one passes the initial stage of online submission of the application) - money is not reimbursed and it can easily happen that it was spent one more time for nothing.
|
|
|
Post by notherapp on May 22, 2009 8:18:35 GMT -5
Today, Valkyrie wrote:
"If I recall correctly, anyone on the OPM register can retake any part of the scoring aspects, app, interview, or written, one year later. Anyone on the inside should know that, and if they had a score below 60 should have taken advantage of it this time around with the new people."
That was incorrect, as a follow-up poster wrote. There is a one year bar, and the new posting was just under that blackout period. In fact, someone in just that position DID apply and received a summary rejection on the basis that a year had not passed. What is unfortunate is that, not only might scores improve merely because re-applicants know the ropes (similar to taking the SAT again), but it has been almost two years since the first process and a number of people have additional experience relevant to the position which will not factor in their score.
|
|