Job Offers

[jagghagg]

I'd love to see, on the Boards, information about job offers as they come in - how they are received, how long you have to respond, where the job is located in comparison to what regions you selected and, of course, what your score was (since you got a job offer!)

[Pixie]

With the participation we have had in posting of the scores, I have no doubt that we will get the same participation when the job offers are made. First, though, will be the interviews, and there will be lot of them.

OCALJ is soliciting judges other than the normal training cadre to participate in the classes that will be starting, probably in March--I have never known a class to start earlier than March. The regular cadre can handle standard size classes. When the classes get above two sections (about thirty per section), additional trainers must be used. So, it looks like we will have large classes this time around. Unfortunately, that's no fun for anyone. The good news is that the classes won't be nearly as large as in 2001. I think there were about 130 in that class, and it was not a good experience for trainers or students.

I realize this post got a bit tangential, but it is related to job offers, with a lot of them coming down the pike, probably in February. All of the angst and anguish experienced so far will pale in comparison to that which about 300* of you will suffer in January and February. Pix.

____
*Although three names will be submitted for each position to be filled, many of those names will be duplicates because of multiple locations selected by the candidates. In the past, scores were given to one decimal point. Even using one decimal point, there were still two or more candidates with the same score. With the system OPM is now using, two decimal points, there should be little or no duplication of scores.

[odarite]

Pix,
I must disagree with your conclusion from the fact that OCALJ is soliciting ALJs for the training cadre that this necessarily means large classes. They also made this solicitation when Judge Washington was CALJ. I think they do it periodically to top off the training cadre because members are unavailable, retired, etc. Naturally, fresh names are helpful if they do run a larger class, but a solicitation for the training cadre does not necessarily mean a large class.

[shadow]

I am very confused with the "rule of 3" as well. . . Can someone explain again.

[privateatty]

shadow:

5 C.F.R. Sec. 332.401, et. seq. I can't explain the Federal Register...

[shadow]

Thanks!

[Pixie]

odarite said:

Pix,
I must disagree with your conclusion from the fact that OCALJ is soliciting ALJs for the training cadre that this necessarily means large classes. They also made this solicitation when Judge Washington was CALJ. I think they do it periodically to top off the training cadre because members are unavailable, retired, etc. Naturally, fresh names are helpful if they do run a larger class, but a solicitation for the training cadre does not necessarily mean a large class.

I hope you are right so the class sizes will be manageable. Although I don't remember any solicitations for trainers since the big class in 2001, which would include Judge Washington's tenure. I know there was a solicitation for mentors just before the last class, but that didn't include trainers, as there were enough in the cadre to cover the training for that class.

Normally vacancies in the training cadre are filled through back door channels in the glass palace. Applications are rarely solicited. As I said, I only know of one other time that OCJ has made a solicitation at large. But perhaps my memory is faulty. Pix.

[Pixie]

justfoundthisboard said:

Pixie,
We know from the Baltimore Sun article that "over 600" are on the register and you state that 300 will be interviewed. Do they interview you once and then they decide where to place you? How can the "Rule of 3" work with that? I'm confused (again).

When the register is complete, and SSA requests a certificate of eligibles for certain locations, OPM will determine the top three grades on the register for the requested locations and send those names to SSA. SSA will select from those names or return the certificate to OPM with no selection being made--"non selection." If a veteran has the top score, then that person should be selected, absent a good reason to not make the selection. If the veteran has the second highest score then he should be selected over the person with the lowest score if the top score is not selected.

The top three candidates on the certificate for each location will be offered an opportunity for an interview in Falls Church. SSA normally picks up the tab for expenses for this interview. So, if someone gets an interview, the chances are no better than one in three that an offer will be made. Pix.

[odarite]

pixie said:

I don't remember any solicitations for trainers since the big class in 2001, which would include Judge Washington's tenure. I know there was a solicitation for mentors just before the last class, but that didn't include trainers, as there were enough in the cadre to cover the training for that class.

Normally vacancies in the training cadre are filled through back door channels in the glass palace. Applications are rarely solicited. As I said, I only know of one other time that OCJ has made a solicitation at large. But perhaps my memory is faulty. Pix.

The reason I know this is because I just found my application for the training cadre from the last solicitation - and there has been just one other than the current one since 2001. I do agree with your comment about the selection process for the cadre, however, solicitation or not. And you are right about the mentor cadre. I don't recall if there has been a new solicitation for that, however.

[judicature]

Similar posts on old board from 8/2007 -

Aug 20, 2007, 1:53pm, powerties wrote:
So does anyone have any insight on how this will play out? For instance, if SSA decides to hire 125 bodies, will OPM for all intents and purposes simply send over a list 375 folks who by and large each checked "all" duty stations? Or will OPM simultaneously send over 125 different lists of 3 people? Or will OPM send over ranked 1 and 2 and 3 for, say, a DC job. Then when number 2 is picked, will they send over a list comprised of ranked 1 and 3 and 4. Then when number 4 is picked, will they send over a list comprised of ranked 1 and 3 and 5, and so on?

vet replied: "They send over a big list to cover all contingencies. SSA then goes into a dark room. Dry ice is dropped in water and the room fills with a vapor. Lisa and Franco do a mystical dance over hot coals. Then they begin figuring out how to get to the ones that they want to hire. If you are third on the list as far as score goes for your number one city, and you are the son of a Supreme Court Justice, they will find cities for the 2 above you one way or another and then be able to offer you the city of your dreams just so they can say something at a D.C. party. If you are Joe S$9& the average lawyer, you will have to see what shakes out. The order that SSA chooses to fill the cities is within their prerogative. They can't pass over certain vets so those guys are golden. The key is to send them elsewhere to keep the desirable spots for the insiders. It is a game of permutations and impossiblity complicated strategems. Buy the book - the federal alj handbook. It might give you a clue."

In the Bookdocks also posted the following: "SSA is usually the only agency hiring a large group of ALJs at a given time. I think Medicare hired around 35 in 2005, but that is the most I have ever heard of outside of SSA. I understand that SSA tries to place each ALJ candidate in a city location where he or she is willing to go, with 2 other candidates listed against them. The 3 candidates are all placed in that location based on how well they compete with their score against the others. For instance, highly desirable places like New York City, Boston, Washington D.C., Fort Lauderdale, and Tampa will usually have candidates with very high scores competing for an available slot. You need to remember that SSA must first accommodate internal transfer requests (at the employee's expense) before placing any new ALJs in a field office. I expect SSA also liberally uses the so called "rule of three" to place some potential candidates they don't want to hire in cities where their OPM final rating isn't nearly as competitive. SSA wouldn't have a final agency interview if they simply applied the OPM ratings in a mechanical fashion to reach pre-determined results. There will obviously be some candidates interviewed the agency will want to desperately pick up if at all possible. It's the American way. If people don't like the OPM process try getting a job in private practice where it's almost always based on connections and who you know. The OPM ALJ hiring process may be seriously flawed but at least the premise contemplates a merit based hiring decision."

Further clarifying posts:

powerties posted: "Do those of you who have been around a while think, for instance, that if OPM sent over a list of 375 and if, for instance, two people (one ranked #50 and one ranked #250) were interested in Backwater, North Montana and no place else, the slate of 3 for Backwater would be crafted to take that into account and include those two? Or, if #250 actually lived in Backwater, that this would impact the choice?"

guest246 replied: "I think that the only way those two individuals interested in Back Water North Montana get on the list guaranteed is if they are two of the top three to express an interest there. If anything, living in Backwater will cut against, as OPM seems to take a perverse joy in sending people across country when they would rather be elsewhere.

Lets say the top 25 all say "anywhere." It is a mystery to me (I hope others more wise can explain) how they determine where those people are referred to. I have heard that during the SSA interview, the panel will ask what their top three choices are, but that does not explain OPMs referrel system.

But I don't think OPM is thoughtful enough to say "OH! Number 50 just wants to go to one place, let's be sure to put them on that list." They are more concerned about getting the three highest ranking candidates referred per office, rather than take an overall view of the list."

[aljsouth]

justfoundthisboard said:

Thanks, Pixie. So if you select ("all") (which I did not) and you have a high score, does your name go on every certificate for every vacancy until you are selected? So SSA doesn't get a list of 450 names? They get 150 certificates with 3 names on each, many of them multiple listings?

Assume Candidate A has the hightest score of all candidates. Assume A has marked all. Then A's name should appear on all site lists sent from OPM to SSA. Of course A can be selected only once and it appears that SSA has unfettered discretion in picking the site for A since A has agreed to all. No preferences are allowed to be expressed.

As to how SSA decides the site matchups, who knows? You stand a better chance with more site selections especially more unpopular sites.

[Pixie]

justfoundthisboard said:

Thanks, Pixie. So if you select ("all") (which I did not) and you have a high score, does your name go on every certificate for every vacancy until you are selected? So SSA doesn't get a list of 450 names? They get 150 certificates with 3 names on each, many of them multiple listings?

SSA will get a certificate with the top three candidates for each location. Many candidates will have expressed an interest in multiple locations. If their scores are high enough, they will appear as candidates for multiple locations. So, if 150 judges are to be hired, there probably won't be 450 names on the certificate, because many of the same names will appear for different locations.

After the certificate has been received by SSA, the game of musical chairs begins. First the candidates desirable to the agency will be identified. Next will be the process to get those candidates into a location they are eligible for. If no veteran is ahead of them for a particular location, and no other desirable is on the certificate for that location, it is relatively easy to place them. If a veteran is ahead of them, then the veteran can be offered a position in a location where no desirable candidate is eligible to be placed. It is quite complex, as you can imagine.

The larger the certificate, the more flexibility the agency has, and the more complex the procedure. Pix.

[hooligan]

pixie said:

SSA will get a certificate with the top three candidates for each location. Many candidates will have expressed an interest in multiple locations. If their scores are high enough, they will appear as candidates for multiple locations. So, if 150 judges are to be hired, there probably won't be 450 names on the certificate, because many of the same names will appear for different locations.

One reason SSA hires multiple judges at one time is so that they have an opportunity to dig deeper into the list. They do not get separate certificates for each location. The way it has been explained to me is that the selectors get a random list of office openings. They start with City A and look for the top three scores selecting that city. Then they move on to City B. Because many of the top scores can be considered for more than one location, all of the names on the certificate may not actually be considered for any location, but that does not mean that the certificate will be smaller. Also, there may not be enough candidates willing to go to City Z and they may need to dig very deep into the list to find three.

Three times the number of openings is a rough estimate that usually is reliable for SSA certificates. I was also certified for an opening at FERC before I got the call from SSA. The certificate OPM provided to FERC had 30 names for one opening.

[counselor95]

Pixie,
What happens if all the people on the certificate for one location are selected for other locations? It seems as if that might happen, maybe halfway through the process. Does OPM furnish another certificate for the locations which have no remaining candidates?

[Pixie]

counselor95 said:

Pixie,
What happens if all the people on the certificate for one location are selected for other locations? It seems as if that might happen, maybe halfway through the process. Does OPM furnish another certificate for the locations which have no remaining candidates?

To give you a direct answer: I don't know. I imagine that another certificate of eligibles for that location could be requested, although there would be some $$ cost to the requesting agency. Don't think that would be necessary, though. But not having been involved in ALJ hiring, I can't give you a definitive answer. I have been involved in hiring, requesting OPM certificates, dealing with the rule of three and veteran's points, but not on a national level. The mechanics are somewhat different with multiple locations involved. Maybe someone else on the board has experience with that situation. Pix.

[newguy]

Hi. Does anyone kow anything about the 7 judges that are supposed to start the National Hearing Center iin Dc to do video hearings? Have judges been selected and/or offers made?

[aljsouth]

newguy said:

Hi. Does anyone kow anything about the 7 judges that are supposed to start the National Hearing Center iin Dc to do video hearings? Have judges been selected and/or offers made?

Rumor is that the selections have been made and include some medicare judge transfers. Agency seems to want to get this officially off the ground this calendar year. Of course, officially is different from actually having a staffed and equiped office.

[anotheroldtimer]

There is another element to the rule of three. I have been a trainer for the last several classes. In one class, there were 5 judges sent to a particular office and four to another. Obviously, they were trying to reach a certain person.

Solicitations for interviewing judges went out with instructions to be available in January and the first week in Feb. Also requests for volunteers to be trainers, with no dates given.

As the training of aljs has been slowly moving from OCALJ to the Office of Training, there has been a tendency to get rid of the old training cadre that had been doing it for many years. In the last class, weekly cadre leaders were encouraged to remove at least one of their members and obtain another one through OCALJ.

Not sure how this will work now, since the current chief judge is going to try and be more involved than Judge Washington was.

[odarite]

anotheroldtimer said:

There is another element to the rule of three. I have been a trainer for the last several classes. In one class, there were 5 judges sent to a particular office and four to another. Obviously, they were trying to reach a certain person.

Now that is a post hoc ergo propter hoc argument. I have seen lists of the vacant offices in one region with a high backlog, and there are some offices with 4 or 5 vacancies. They may well get all those slots filled because the need is there. In one particular case I remember, they did this for one office several times because they just can't keep judges there. Reaching a particular person had nothing to do with it.

[anotheroldtimer]

post hoc ergo propter hoc, indeed

the validity of my statement lies not in the causality presented by the chronology but in the underlying knowledge of which I was privy. It was my fault in not sharing my sources. However, I cannot. much of what is posted here is the result of connections, rumor, speculation, inside knowledge or just plain wishful thinking. I shared my insight for what it is worth. To characterize it as a fallacy is logically correct, but may or may not diminish its worth.