|
|
Post by justalawyer on May 12, 2010 12:51:37 GMT -5
Has anyone in the history of this racketeered process ever gotten lower than a 50? I'm being serious. Has that ever happened to anyone who went through the entire process? I'm very self-critical, but I really thought I did well on both the WD and the SI, and if my application were deplorable you'd think I would've been among the 1/3 (or whatever fraction it was) of applicants who weren't invited at all. Great question ... I wonder if there's a minimum score (like a 45 or 50 just for making it to the WD/SI). I actually just "appealed" my score and asked for an explanation of the score. It's inconceivable to me that with an additional 3 years of GS14 attorney work with ALJs that my score could actually go down from 2007. Sorry ... if I keep beating a dead horse, but this is just unbelievable. No rhyme or reason indeed. And, you're right - it is a racketeered process.  (Bitter, party of one ...) |
|
|
|
Post by maxlaw on May 12, 2010 12:52:30 GMT -5
Has anyone in the history of this racketeered process ever gotten lower than a 50? ... The old polls show people claiming scores down into the 30s in 2007. |
|
|
|
Post by valkyrie on May 12, 2010 12:54:17 GMT -5
Well, here's another candidate shocked by my score! It is very low -- 57.4. I"ve been litigating in the government (not SSA) for 17 years, have been published writer in professional pubications, good appraisals, law journal in law school. I felt I did ok on the WD and on the SI (to the extent it was possible to tell anything after the strange SI expereince.) So, I am quite surprised and disappointed to have done so poorly. I have read the Board for awhille and realize this is not rare, but still, this experience is very disappointing and so mysterious that I just feel flabbergasted. This certainly is an odd way to select ALJs. Congrats to those who scored well, and for those of us who did not, I'm glad to know I'm not alone is feeling dismayed. Don't forget that some with your level of experience did not even make it to the SI and WD because OPM found that they were "not qualified." |
|
|
|
Post by gw1970 on May 12, 2010 12:54:47 GMT -5
I got a 68.33. I have over 35 years of litigation experience, which includes hundreds of days in administrative litigation and in excess of 90 arguments in the United States Court of Appeals for the various circuits. I don't have SSA experience. The fact that OPM refuses, unlike the previous iteration of the ALJ test, to reveal the scoring formula shows that there are some hidden preferences, in addition to the Vet preference, inherent in the formula. I hope those persons pursuing litigation against OPM are successful. I'm less than 3 years from retirement and, as a GS15-10, earn almost as much if not more than most ALJs so I doubt I'll be selected.
|
|
|
|
Post by MerelyForTheAsking on May 12, 2010 13:00:54 GMT -5
Thanks to maxlaw, justalawyer, and others who responded. I honestly had never heard of anyone getting below a 50 and it looks as though maybe some others got well below 50 in the past. While I realize that there are many qualified attorneys applying, my score was a total shock to me as all of my experience is in defending ALJ decisions in federal district and appellate courts, litigating before third-party administrative tribunals, plus having law journal experience including a published article, highest honors and awards from my Federal Agency, etc. I should have just been "DQ'd" from the beginning if there was something they didn't like in my application.
|
|
|
|
Post by MerelyForTheAsking on May 12, 2010 13:02:58 GMT -5
... one more thought... maybe it's time to stop having non-lawyers employed at one of the worst-rated agencies to work for (year after year) reviewing and scoring our applications? Just a thought.
|
|
|
|
Post by valkyrie on May 12, 2010 13:04:10 GMT -5
I got a 68.33. I have over 35 years of litigation experience, which includes hundreds of days in administrative litigation and in excess of 90 arguments in the United States Court of Appeals for the various circuits. I don't have SSA experience. The fact that OPM refuses, unlike the previous iteration of the ALJ test, to reveal the scoring formula shows that there are some hidden preferences, in addition to the Vet preference, inherent in the formula. I hope those persons pursuing litigation against OPM are successful. I'm less than 3 years from retirement and, as a GS15-10, earn almost as much if not more than most ALJs so I doubt I'll be selected. OPM appears to give a preference to arbitrary and capricious decision making. |
|
|
|
Post by Propmaster on May 12, 2010 13:06:39 GMT -5
Has anyone in the history of this racketeered process ever gotten lower than a 50? I'm being serious. Has that ever happened to anyone who went through the entire process? I'm very self-critical, but I really thought I did well on both the WD and the SI, and if my application were deplorable you'd think I would've been among the 1/3 (or whatever fraction it was) of applicants who weren't invited at all. The theoretical minimum would be about the median AR score with a horrible attempt (say one point each) at the SI and WD. Since we don't know the AR part of the scoring, we can't say. However, i believe that the AR is in the neighborhood of about 40% of the final score (I could be way off). If so, and the scores ranged from , say, 10 to 40 for people minimally qualified, then the theoretical minimum should be about 27. But those people should be unable to use computers usefully enough to find this board. |
|
oldschool
Full Member
Newbie FAQ Contributor
Posts: 101 
|
Post by oldschool on May 12, 2010 13:12:09 GMT -5
There is a lot more to selection than just the raw score. You also have to think about the breadth of your geographic availability. 65 with all of the cities may be more competitive than 75 with a handful of cities, all other things being equal.
Having been through this process a number of times until I was selected during the last go round, my impression is that a score of around 60 will get you onto the cert. Then it is up to you to do well at your interview and give the agency a reason to try to reach you. Some low scorers will not be reachable regardless of how well they may have aced the interview. So to echo what others have posted, don't get too hung up on either a very high or a very low score. And there will additional, albeit smaller, hires in the coming years.
There is also the question of whether this register will be scrapped in October, in which case many of you can chalk up this experience as practice and have another go at it.
|
|
|
|
Post by 71stretch on May 12, 2010 13:17:50 GMT -5
I notice that the register expires in October 2010, but read somewhere else, don't remember where, that OPM can extend it. Anyone have any insight into whether they are likely to do that, have done it before, etc.
I was hoping for a better score, but after finding this board, I feel a bit better about it. Sort of reminds me when I went to an event at the law school the year before I started, and we were advised by students already there to start thinking of grades in the 70's as good grades.
Here, I scored a 66, I have 20 years experience as a state ALJ, other private practice and hearing officer experience.
|
|
|
|
Post by happyhawaiian on May 12, 2010 13:22:58 GMT -5
Just checked, got a 71
|
|
|
|
Post by sarahb4550212 on May 12, 2010 13:29:06 GMT -5
:got a score of 54
|
|
|
|
Post by carden on May 12, 2010 13:38:22 GMT -5
I have 2 questions:
1. On the NOR just above the rating (score) it says Grade (mine says 03), does anyone know what this means?
2. How exactly do you appeal your score? Will OPM send another email with instructions?
Thank you for your help.
|
|
|
|
Post by Well on May 12, 2010 13:46:10 GMT -5
I have 2 questions: 1. On the NOR just above the rating (score) it says Grade (mine says 03), does anyone know what this means? Thank you for your help. Pay grade of the position you applied for AL_3 |
|
|
|
Post by chinook on May 12, 2010 13:53:45 GMT -5
I went up 22 points from the first exam so I am pleased. I have decided to not appeal even though my computer froze on the WD (I learned a long time ago, never appeal a win). However, I have a very limited GAL so I am not out getting measured for a robe. Remember this is just one step in the process. If you got a score, you have a chance at getting an interview. If you get an interview you have a chance at getting a job offer. If you don't get an offer you can do this all over again the next time.
|
|
|
|
Post by valkyrie on May 12, 2010 14:02:30 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by novacats on May 12, 2010 14:12:28 GMT -5
Did anyone have a SI with one ALJ and one OPM (i.e., two people) and have to sign a waiver to proceed? Like I really had a choice? I had used three days of annual leave and spent $1200. I really hope that SI had nothing to do with my 63 NOR. Pretty low.
|
|
|
|
Post by maxlaw on May 12, 2010 14:25:19 GMT -5
Did anyone have a SI with one ALJ and one OPM (i.e., two people) and have to sign a waiver to proceed? Like I really had a choice? I had used three days of annual leave and spent $1200. I really hope that SI had nothing to do with my 63 NOR. Pretty low. I did, and everyone who interviewed on my day was in the same boat. I was the last one to go, and everyone was asked to sign a waiver. Everyone agreed to do so. That was not unexpected, there are previous posts on the board regarding the practice. Private attorneys willing to participate in the process seem to difficult to come by; who can blame them? And while you may consider your score low, many with your score and lower have made a cert. If you have a wide GAL, it's way too early to disengage. |
|
|
|
Post by tricia on May 12, 2010 14:27:14 GMT -5
In case people have stopped looking in their inboxes, we just got two more emails: Understanding your score - nothing we didn't know; and Supplemental - includes appeal info.
|
|
|
|
Post by bowser on May 12, 2010 14:33:42 GMT -5
Supplemental - includes appeal info. I'm not planning on appealing, but I LOVE the idea that you are supposed to provide "a brief explanation of why you believe that your rating was assigned in error" when you really have no idea why you received the score you did! I figure you've gotta keep a sense of humor about this. If you wrote this as fiction, no one would believe it!  |
|
(Bitter, party of one ...)
