|
offers
Jun 5, 2013 20:30:05 GMT -5
Post by alj on Jun 5, 2013 20:30:05 GMT -5
But at least we will hear something by the end of June... Not unless the Commissioner decides to give the go ahead for hiring new judges. Right now that is looking as if it may not happen. As others have said, it is all budget dependent. The limited amount of money available has to go where it is most needed. She may determine that 20 to 25 judges this fiscal year is not the highest priority.
|
|
|
offers
Jun 6, 2013 8:42:32 GMT -5
Post by hod on Jun 6, 2013 8:42:32 GMT -5
I am positive that they will extend the cert, if for no other reason than to have something in place for hiring should the decision be made to do so. Requesting a new cert off of the old register will only get the same names and take longer. My bet is that this cert will stay alive until the new application process has an actual register from which a cert can be pulled. Money comes and goes in mysterious ways in the government and the best plan is to be ready to jump the minute the green light is given. I am not trying to raise hopes-because I am sure that the agency would prefer to pull a cert off a new register given that there would be so many more selection choices available, but reality dictates what happens. If they can't get the new register and cert and get a greenlight for the current cert, that is more than likely what they will do.
|
|
|
offers
Jun 7, 2013 14:28:08 GMT -5
Post by hal3000 on Jun 7, 2013 14:28:08 GMT -5
not sure I understand. Are you referring to offers from the current cert?
|
|
|
offers
Jun 9, 2013 8:38:48 GMT -5
Post by privateatty on Jun 9, 2013 8:38:48 GMT -5
What I was trying to say, hal, (which I didn't do well) was that alot of interested folks are concerned about the reports of so many qualified applicants being summarily rejected.
I was further speculating that (perhaps) OPM would re-think this new process given that the currentl budget situation MAY preclude SSA from a big hire. Obviously, SSA must try to keep up with attrition.
I have deleted my post because it was confusing. Upon further reflection, I don't think OPM would admit or even report, the numbers of qualified applicants who got rejected. As you know from these pages in the past folks got rejected for failing to put in a bar admission date correctly, etc. Now, the rejections reflected on these pages suggest something different--what exactly I don't know.
|
|
|
offers
Jun 9, 2013 10:11:53 GMT -5
Post by factfinder on Jun 9, 2013 10:11:53 GMT -5
OPM knows they kept the list open too long and received too many applications for an untested system. They figure they will get more than enough well qualified folks out of those who burned through to accomplish what SSA and the other agencies need. Logically, they are correct. They are also thinking practically - there will not be the number of hires there were between 2007 and 2011 (in all likelihood) any time soon.
|
|
|
offers
Jun 9, 2013 15:08:17 GMT -5
Post by marten77 on Jun 9, 2013 15:08:17 GMT -5
OPM knows they kept the list open too long and received too many applications for an untested system. They figure they will get more than enough well qualified folks out of those who burned through to accomplish what SSA and the other agencies need. Logically, they are correct. They are also thinking practically - there will not be the number of hires there were between 2007 and 2011 (in all likelihood) any time soon. I'm curious. There has been much discussion about SSA needing to keep up with attrition and that there is an expected wave (maybe starting out small and becoming larger as time progresses) of retirements beginning in 2014 when the sick time/FERS issue becomes effective. Has anyone heard what the expected attrition rate is projected to be? I realize this is likely adding to more speculation, but I would imagine someone in the SSA higher ups had to put some numbers together since they were apparently the driving force behind updating the Register with expanded GAL's and the new examination process. The average rate of voluntary turnover in the U.S. has been running between roughly 8% to 13% for about the last five years. Of course, that is for the nation as a whole and not for SSA specifically. But assuming the same statistics appled, would it be reasonable to presume that SSA is expecting a greater percentage of voluntary turnover subsequent to 2014? (Hence, the new Register). If so, what percentage were they expecting? 15% to 20% voluntary turnover? That's pure speculation, of course. But that would account for anywhere from 190 to 260 or so new hires. Just musing... Did anyone every hear what SSA was expecting for upcoming attrition in 2014 and beyond?
|
|
|
offers
Jun 10, 2013 9:57:07 GMT -5
Post by zebra51 on Jun 10, 2013 9:57:07 GMT -5
On another thread the following OPM OIG report was posted. oig.ssa.gov/sites/default/files/audit/full/pdf/A-05-12-22144.pdfNot sure how this applies to attrition but the following from the report jumped out at me. "This was based on SSA employing 1,448 of the 1,704 ALJs in the Government as of December 2010." And "Between Fiscal Years (FY) 1998 and 2012, SSA hired approximately 1,230 ALJs" (289 ALJs hired by SSA in 2011 and 2012)
|
|
|
offers
Jun 11, 2013 17:24:18 GMT -5
Post by ALJ Someday Maybe on Jun 11, 2013 17:24:18 GMT -5
The bottom line is that the Commissioner decides. I attended a 90 minute training in Fiscal Law today and found out that no specific amount within SSA's budget is set aside for hiring ALJs unless the Commissioner says so, and the set aside is not set in stone. In other words, if the Commissioner changes her mind, for any reason, that's that. So, the agency still could, but probably won't, hire ALJs from the March 2013 cert. unless the cert. is extended and everyone who must be interviewed is interviewed during the extension period.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
offers
Jun 11, 2013 20:08:09 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Jun 11, 2013 20:08:09 GMT -5
The devil can quote scripture (or in this case the June 3, 2013 AALJ Newsletter) to suit his purpose:
APPOINTMENT OF NEW JUDGES
As reported in an earlier Newsletter, the Agency had hoped to appoint 25-35 new judges from the current OPM register. The Agency advised that it has interviewed all potential candidates and is poised to hire. However, with significant uncertainty regarding our budget for FY 14, there is concern that budget shortfalls, occasioned by sequestration, could place the Agency in a furlough posture next fiscal year. This result obtains since all federal agencies will be subject to an 8 per cent across the board cut from FY 12 spending levels. Of course,a budget agreement by the folks on Capitol Hill could ease that concern considerably. Absent such an agreement,any significant hiring would place an additional burden on our FY 14 sequestration level spending. The AALJ has consistently opposed any hir ing when the Agency is likely to furlough employees. Even though we need additional judges, it is not fair to incumbent judges or newly appointed judges, to bring them on board when the additional costs associated with their appointments would increase the length of a furlough for all current employees.
As much as I dislike being the bearer of bad tidings, it appears no additional interviews will be scheduled. As for any hiring, well, the Agency is "poised" almost upon the knife's edge. Personally, given the union's opposition to hiring, I think the Agency will hire if only out of spite. :-)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
offers
Jun 11, 2013 21:12:05 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Jun 11, 2013 21:12:05 GMT -5
With due respect to the earlier poster, the idea that everyone on a certificate has to interviewed is an urban legend. You can search Title 5 of the U.S.C. or the C.F.R. or OPM's delegated examining unit operating handbook for the legal basis for the alleged requirement" and you will search in vain. Imagine the Agency had but a single ALJ vacancy to fill. Where as here the rule of three operates with its full rigor, the Agency must interview only the top three candidates. Beyond that interviews are superfluous. But, devil, you say, what about category rating? It is entirely permissive and I have seen nothing from OPM to indicate they want to apply it to ALJ hiring. Wasn't OPM thinking of doing away with the rule of three? They were, and they may yet rid themselves of it, but they haven't yet.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
offers
Jun 12, 2013 7:56:44 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2013 7:56:44 GMT -5
I agree with advocatusdiaboli on this one. The interview process does not extend to every person on the list. This is bad for me, as I am on the certificate and have not been to this in person interview. Some insiders I talk to tell me that this list is all wrapped up and they know who is going to get offers, but offers are held up in budget purgatory. I can take solace in my 5 consecutive weeks of vacation I am taking soon at least, knowing that I am not going to training. Good Luck candidates!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
offers
Jun 12, 2013 8:56:31 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2013 8:56:31 GMT -5
I am not entirely sure why they operate using these methods. Odd stuff. My references were called (nearly all of them) perhaps 2 months ago. From what I can discern, SSA does not have to fly everybody in for interview just because they are on the certificate however, if they have no intention on chosing that person ultimately.
|
|
anon2
New Member
Posts: 7
|
offers
Jun 12, 2013 12:19:34 GMT -5
Post by anon2 on Jun 12, 2013 12:19:34 GMT -5
Some insiders I talk to tell me that this list is all wrapped up and they know who is going to get offers, but offers are held up in budget purgatory. hop2it, as I hang on to the roller coaster ride of rumors on this board, I find your post may contain the most hopeful rumor recently posted for the March 2012 Certificate candidates. How would you rate the reliability of the sources for the rumor that the list is "all wrapped up" (subject, of course, to budget purgatory)?
|
|
|
offers
Jun 12, 2013 12:31:28 GMT -5
Post by 71stretch on Jun 12, 2013 12:31:28 GMT -5
Some insiders I talk to tell me that this list is all wrapped up and they know who is going to get offers, but offers are held up in budget purgatory. hop2it, as I hang on to the roller coaster ride of rumors on this board, I find your post may contain the most hopeful rumor recently posted for the March 2012 Certificate candidates. How would you rate the reliability of the sources for the rumor that the list is "all wrapped up" (subject, of course, to budget purgatory)? The above post from advocatusdiaboli quoting the AALJ newsletter said basically the same thing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
offers
Jun 12, 2013 12:52:14 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2013 12:52:14 GMT -5
Good afternoon. I have been wrong before on these things. Such as nearly 1 month ago I was told that somebody off this certificate had an offer in hand, meaning they were appointed as a new ALJ. That turned out to be wrong, and it was actually a situation where a current ALJ was given option a transfer.
That being said, I do think that this information is correct. The part about not having to interview every candidate is higher probability. As for the list being compiled, I think that is quite likely also. I believe it enough that I am no longer thinking that I am going to be selected. I had no interview, and I really do think that SSA/ or OCALJ has the names of candidates that they will make offers to; and these offers will be made once the budget opens up. I was holding off on making vacation plans for August and September 2013. Now, with the belief that I am out of luck on this ALJ front again, I can make my vacation plans and have done so. No need to postpone my vacation, as I am not going to ALJ training!
One of these people I spoke with told me in confidence "I did not tell you this, and I will deny that I did....."
|
|
|
offers
Jun 12, 2013 13:43:53 GMT -5
Post by hod on Jun 12, 2013 13:43:53 GMT -5
Judge Bice just announced that the hiring authority has not been received but that all systems are go to hire and that they hope to be able to do so before the end of fiscal. She specifically mentioned that there were about 25 candidates that are on the cert but have not been interviewed, and she said that there was no intention to interview these candidate UNTIL hiring authority is received. So I think that if they get a green light, those of you waiting for the interview will get your opportunity. It would not be reasonable to place a candidate on a cert and then not consider that candidate at all. There was no mention of extending the cert-so either that is a non-issue (easy to do) or they think that approval may come soon. Just a guess as is everything else.
|
|
cmet8
Full Member
Posts: 39
|
Post by cmet8 on Jun 12, 2013 14:25:36 GMT -5
Thanks for the update, hod
|
|
|
offers
Jun 12, 2013 19:00:37 GMT -5
Post by MerelyForTheAsking on Jun 12, 2013 19:00:37 GMT -5
Nothing anyone is saying on here is making any sense. "The interviews are all wrapped up?" No kidding, because most of the 200-plus people on the current cert. were interviewed previously. The agency continues to get far more than a 3-1 ratio of candidates from its certs. (they must be saying "we might hire 100 people so let's get 300"). As for the budget, if that is an issue to hire 25-35 ALJs now, there will be NO HIRES off the new idiotic register that's being created (which will contain a lot of applicants will be from the old register, who've already gone through the system). Additionally, I don't understand why anyone is wasting time talking about the new process since that will have ZERO hires if we can't even get any off the current register from this year's budget. The agency will have LESS money next FY.
|
|
|
offers
Jun 12, 2013 19:44:06 GMT -5
Post by easystreet on Jun 12, 2013 19:44:06 GMT -5
Given the nature of the budgetary process, it is possible that there will be discretionary money available toward the end of the fiscal year (9/30) which will enable the agency to hire. Toward that end, the agency will first have everything in place (references checked, etc.) to enable the hiring to proceed quickly. They will interview approximately the 25 folks(as noted by hod above)who have not yet had interviews and have ALJs ready for that purpose. So let's all hope that we can enjoy the summer and resume the wait in a couple of months.
|
|
|
offers
Jun 12, 2013 23:02:13 GMT -5
Post by bartleby on Jun 12, 2013 23:02:13 GMT -5
According to my sources we are down 80 or so ALJ's right now. Even if we hire 30 soon, by this time next year we will be down somewhere between 150-200. They really will have a hard time justifying to anybody why they have that many vacant offices. Congress is very sensitive to the backlog and they will find someway to respond and get the hiring done. It's just a matter of time. We are still allowed overtime for the staff, but I understand that will be ending soon.. Re-alignment?? The whole purpose of ODAR is to support the ALJs, but that is forgotten occasionally..
|
|