Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 28, 2015 14:32:12 GMT -5
While Funky authors a very competent detailed legal analysis explaining an obsolete and archaic federal bureaucratic process, my judicial prominence today consists of convincing the countergirl at McDonald's that my ordering a cheeseburger with mustard only means, yes, I still want the cheese............
|
|
|
Post by sealaw90 on May 28, 2015 14:36:26 GMT -5
The other interesting point with the second group is that once they get the chance to take the Phase 2 testing, they will either be part of the (new) higher scoring sub-group, or not. Will they receive a notice of appeal rights at that point? I do not recall if the folks who did not get a dance card to DC got appeal rights or not. This could be a second appeal for those folks whose first appeal led to a granting of Phase 2 testing but somehow 'failed' to move on to DC.
|
|
|
Post by auroraborealis on May 28, 2015 15:38:43 GMT -5
In re-reading parts of this thread I realized nothing about the statement above indicates that notification about appeals will be simultaneous or evenly proximately close in time. I was re-reading the thread because it occurs to me that Hope2B's and Pumpkin's appeals weren't granted they were mooted. OPM decided that everybody above a certain cut off score (which now will include a lower scored subgroup) will be given the opportunity to retest. That isn't granting any appeals that is saying the appeals are moot because circumstances have changed. They may have sent an appeals results email but that is premised on the fact that the appeal is resolved not because they have ruled on the appeal. I think anybody worrying about getting notice that the WD/SI invites have gone out and they missed it again should stay tuned to this channel because I can promise you people will announce it here. Finally, I noticed several people upset that application manager is down and they couldn't monitor the appeals status. What on Earth makes you think they would let you know the status of any appeal until they were ready to send you and email telling you what it is. That is just asking for emails and phone calls about status changes that would only slow the processing of appeals down. I'm going to throw a little fuel on the fire I guess. It is important to note the distinct difference in the two groups that these recent announcements have impacted. One group consists of those that took the step 2 online tests and were previously told they did not place within the "higher scored subgroup" that would be invited to DC. OPM has now stated they intend to lower the bar on that component and thereby let more folks that were previously cut through to the DC testing phase. For that group, and with that action, I agree with Gaidan that OPM has thusly "mooted" any appeals filed by those they ultimately let through with the lowered bar. No adjudication of any specific appeal has or will occur. To my knowledge though, OPM has not yet sent any info to anyone in this group advising them they are now invited to DC. That is still to come. The second group consists of those, like hopetobealj, that passed phase 1 but never logged in to take phase 2 due to some email snafu or technical glitch. These people are not in the same boat as those that took the tests at phase 2 and didnt pass previously. But, they are not either in the same boat as those that were cut at phase 1. OPM has, apparently as a result of an MPSB complaint and ruling, decided to afford those in this situation and opportunity to take the online tests. Some of those folks may never have appealed. Some, like HopetoB did. In that case, it certainly appears to me that their appeal has been granted in light of the fact that one can assume the basis of the appeal was that they never got the link or had some technical glitch for which OPM was at fault. This current action by OPM certainly seems to acknowledge that fault and offer a remedial measure. So, those that took the test and are now possibly getting to move on after lowering the bar....I don't see how that action or group can be seen as being the result of any appeal. Thus, no basis of compalint by anyone upset that their appeal hasnt been handled despite being told all appeals would disposed of at the same time. That second group though....certainly looks to me like their appeals were adjudicated in their favor and they were apprised of those results before everyone else's appeal was decided in contradiction to OPM's stated plan. But, I don't think OPM deciding on a new manner and method of handling appeals, in and of itself, gives rise to any due process complaint. Just my own humble opinion. I assume that the entire group that took the online test but did not score into the "higher scored subgroup" will not be invited to continue on, but rather just that they will lower the score effectively allowing some to move forward that were previously eliminated. That means that there could still be a significant portion of that group who may have appealed, and for which their appeals will not now be deemed moot by OPM's decisions. One could argued that those folks are entitled to a decision on their appeal at the same time, or at least close in time, to the second group that you identified (the email snafu/glitch group). Personally, I think OPM was likely extremely careful about how they crafted the language in the announcement and so frankly with that in mind, I am surprised at the way they are handling the appeals piecemeal (at least that is how it appears based on what we've heard through the grapevine).
|
|
|
Post by ibnlurkin on May 28, 2015 15:56:12 GMT -5
I'm going to throw a little fuel on the fire I guess. It is important to note the distinct difference in the two groups that these recent announcements have impacted. One group consists of those that took the step 2 online tests and were previously told they did not place within the "higher scored subgroup" that would be invited to DC. OPM has now stated they intend to lower the bar on that component and thereby let more folks that were previously cut through to the DC testing phase. For that group, and with that action, I agree with Gaidan that OPM has thusly "mooted" any appeals filed by those they ultimately let through with the lowered bar. No adjudication of any specific appeal has or will occur. To my knowledge though, OPM has not yet sent any info to anyone in this group advising them they are now invited to DC. That is still to come. The second group consists of those, like hopetobealj, that passed phase 1 but never logged in to take phase 2 due to some email snafu or technical glitch. These people are not in the same boat as those that took the tests at phase 2 and didnt pass previously. But, they are not either in the same boat as those that were cut at phase 1. OPM has, apparently as a result of an MPSB complaint and ruling, decided to afford those in this situation and opportunity to take the online tests. Some of those folks may never have appealed. Some, like HopetoB did. In that case, it certainly appears to me that their appeal has been granted in light of the fact that one can assume the basis of the appeal was that they never got the link or had some technical glitch for which OPM was at fault. This current action by OPM certainly seems to acknowledge that fault and offer a remedial measure. So, those that took the test and are now possibly getting to move on after lowering the bar....I don't see how that action or group can be seen as being the result of any appeal. Thus, no basis of compalint by anyone upset that their appeal hasnt been handled despite being told all appeals would disposed of at the same time. That second group though....certainly looks to me like their appeals were adjudicated in their favor and they were apprised of those results before everyone else's appeal was decided in contradiction to OPM's stated plan. But, I don't think OPM deciding on a new manner and method of handling appeals, in and of itself, gives rise to any due process complaint. Just my own humble opinion. I assume that the entire group that took the online test but did not score into the "higher scored subgroup" will not be invited to continue on, but rather just that they will lower the score effectively allowing some to move forward that were previously eliminated. That means that there could still be a significant portion of that group who may have appealed, and for which their appeals will not now be deemed moot by OPM's decisions. One could argued that those folks are entitled to a decision on their appeal at the same time, or at least close in time, to the second group that you identified (the email snafu/glitch group). Personally, I think OPM was likely extremely careful about how they crafted the language in the announcement and so frankly with that in mind, I am surprised at the way they are handling the appeals piecemeal (at least that is how it appears based on what we've heard through the grapevine).
|
|
|
Post by ibnlurkin on May 28, 2015 16:05:31 GMT -5
I don't know Aurora...I'm thinking either NOT careful or not careful enough. If the language quoted above is correct....they're talking plural appeals and applicants but singular decision. Isn't this inconsistent unless some type of universal , singular decision was anticipated ??
Does it matter who gets notified when except to the extent OPM would want whole batches of similar appeals to ripen for further litigation at the same time for practical purposes ?
Hmmmm
|
|
|
Post by ibnlurkin on May 28, 2015 16:08:16 GMT -5
Substitute "each" for "all" or just delete "all" entirely and we're not having this conversation.
But of course you guys all know this !!
|
|
|
Post by daisyjane on May 28, 2015 16:21:06 GMT -5
I completed the online tests; received notification from OPM my results were not in a subgroup high enough to proceed to DC; but did not file an appeal. I am certainly hoping I will not be excluded from eligibility under this lower threshold because I did not file an appeal, i.e., that only those who filed appeals will be considered.
|
|
|
Post by auroraborealis on May 28, 2015 16:37:57 GMT -5
I don't know Aurora...I'm thinking either NOT careful or not careful enough. If the language quoted above is correct....they're talking plural appeals and applicants but singular decision. Isn't this inconsistent unless some type of universal , singular decision was anticipated ?? Does it matter who gets notified when except to the extent OPM would want whole batches of similar appeals to ripen for further litigation at the same time for practical purposes ? Hmmmm I read it as plural appeals/applicants, but single notification (i.e. simultaneous). Isn't being a lawyer fun?!!!
|
|
|
Post by keepsake on May 28, 2015 17:15:41 GMT -5
In thinking about this in light of everyone's comments, I for one have not paid sufficient attention to soemthing Zebra51 said way back on page 7 of this thread - MSPB issued a decision in Zane v. OPM that dealt specifically with this issue of email notification to go to stage 2 and almost certainly led to the current re-invitation to everyone who was deemed preliminary qualified at stage 1 but did not partake in stage 2 - whether those folks appealed or not. This leaves me feeling like further stage 1 appeal determinations/notifications or whatever you want to call them are not likely to be forthcoming immimently, which is too bad. The radio silence on this is telling - one would have thought given the timing on the email to Hope2b that other stage 1 appealers with different issues would have heard by now but I am now thinking that no such determinations have been or will be made on this timeframe.
Oh - and forgot to thank Funky - for raising this MSPB opinion in his recent thoughts on this. Made me go back and look at the actual MSPB decision again.
|
|
|
Post by gary on May 29, 2015 7:18:15 GMT -5
Heard that there is going to be a posting on USA jobs soon. Would this simplify/drastically reduce the number of appeals with people choosing to reapply vs wait for an appeal decision? That is new info. Would you be able to tell us: 1. What the posting would be for? 2. And how you came to hear of it? Thanks for sharing the intel.
|
|
|
Post by hapi2balj on May 29, 2015 7:36:06 GMT -5
You nailed it. Got that right! Seriously, it's hard when you are not in the front car. Those who were chosen at the onset, in the first class, they had it easy so to speak. They only waited from March 2013 to August 2014. Not so bad. But everyone who waits beyond that has to have a bit of a longevity gut. And then there are those who are in the pool of "and oh by the way" we have shifted the 2nd level tier to a new threshold, and guess what... you are still in the game! Yeah, those folks are in for an even longer wait but hey, at least there is a CHANCE again. Then, add to that the folks that have appeals pending with zero word, nothing to compare it to since this is all a new game to us and add in their frustration. Yep... the whole thing reeks of "patience" and we all get sick to death of hearing all that. But just think .... those people who are waiting for a disability decision wait too. And this is nothing. At least we all have jobs, and we are just looking for a better opportunity. It's all about the view. Forgive me if I've missed other mention of this, but are there really those who started this process in March 2013 and were hired in August 2014? If that's the case, it's amazing (and frustrating) considering some of the other 'marathon' stories shared here. It also gives hope that the process doesn't always have to be years because frankly, for me at least age continues to advance!
|
|
|
Post by gary on May 29, 2015 7:42:43 GMT -5
You nailed it. Got that right! Seriously, it's hard when you are not in the front car. Those who were chosen at the onset, in the first class, they had it easy so to speak. They only waited from March 2013 to August 2014. Not so bad. But everyone who waits beyond that has to have a bit of a longevity gut. And then there are those who are in the pool of "and oh by the way" we have shifted the 2nd level tier to a new threshold, and guess what... you are still in the game! Yeah, those folks are in for an even longer wait but hey, at least there is a CHANCE again. Then, add to that the folks that have appeals pending with zero word, nothing to compare it to since this is all a new game to us and add in their frustration. Yep... the whole thing reeks of "patience" and we all get sick to death of hearing all that. But just think .... those people who are waiting for a disability decision wait too. And this is nothing. At least we all have jobs, and we are just looking for a better opportunity. It's all about the view. Forgive me if I've missed other mention of this, but are there really those who started this process in March 2013 and were hired in August 2014? If that's the case, it's amazing (and frustrating) considering some of the other 'marathon' stories shared here. It also gives hope that the process doesn't always have to be years because frankly, for me at least age continues to advance! Everybody on the current register started the process March 2013. The first two classes hired from the current register started as ALJs in August and September 2014.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeRatty on May 29, 2015 7:48:28 GMT -5
Everybody on the current register started the process March 2013. The first two classes hired from the current register started as ALJs in August and September 2014. There are at least 20 threads on all these start dates with a variety of polls to match.
|
|
|
Post by ibnlurkin on May 29, 2015 9:27:26 GMT -5
Heard that there is going to be a posting on USA jobs soon. Would this simplify/drastically reduce the number of appeals with people choosing to reapply vs wait for an appeal decision? That is new info. Would you be able to tell us: 1. What the posting would be for? 2. And how you came to hear of it? Thanks for sharing the intel. I'v been pretty positive thus far..... but the Stage 1 action.... the radio silence .... a new posting ? Starting to feel like we're riding the crazy train...and it may be about to jump the tracks
|
|
donk
Full Member
Posts: 42
|
Post by donk on May 29, 2015 9:40:24 GMT -5
If they post the job again, thus making all of us re-test, I will appeal THAT decision! Ridiculous.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeRatty on May 29, 2015 10:09:40 GMT -5
There is NO EVIDENCE that there is a new application process! Seriously people. One of the reasons the news that started this thread is getting all tangled is that ALJs who do NOT follow the board closely or at all, got the email asking for volunteers for the Structured Interview for the fall. That news is getting translated into something that is not happening. In the past, needing SI volunteers (sitting ALJs from various agencies) always meant a refresh or a new register. THAT IS NOT what is happening here. This is a brand new event that has never happened because this step 2 cut off issue never existed on prior registers. The addition of the EA/SJT is brand new for this register (application process starting March 2013). People, this register is brand new and hiring only started in August 2014. They are "supplementing" it with more people being allowed to proceed to the next step because they want more names due to increased needs. It is nothing more than that. End rant.
|
|
|
Post by sealaw90 on May 29, 2015 10:15:38 GMT -5
Love the rant sratty. I wanted to do that when this crazy idea popped up on this thread. However, that's why I liked Donk's response - you better believe I'd be screaming 'WTF' if we had to start testing over when they haven't exhausted this register!!!
|
|
|
Post by Gaidin on May 29, 2015 10:16:40 GMT -5
There is NO EVIDENCE that there is a new application process! Seriously people. One of the reasons the news that started this thread is getting all tangled is that ALJs who do NOT follow the board closely or at all, got the email asking for volunteers for the Structured Interview for the fall. That news is getting translated into something that is not happening. In the past, needing SI volunteers (sitting ALJs from various agencies) always meant a refresh or a new register. THAT IS NOT what is happening here. This is a brand new event that has never happened because this step 2 cut off issue never existed on prior registers. The addition of the EA/SJT is brand new for this register (application process starting March 2013). People, this register is brand new and hiring only started in August 2014. They are "supplementing" it with more people being allowed to proceed to the next step because they want more names due to increased needs. It is nothing more than that. End rant. Because I could only like this once above.
|
|
|
Post by gary on May 29, 2015 10:19:34 GMT -5
There is NO EVIDENCE that there is a new application process! Seriously people. One of the reasons the news that started this thread is getting all tangled is that ALJs who do NOT follow the board closely or at all, got the email asking for volunteers for the Structured Interview for the fall. That news is getting translated into something that is not happening. In the past, needing SI volunteers (sitting ALJs from various agencies) always meant a refresh or a new register. THAT IS NOT what is happening here. This is a brand new event that has never happened because this step 2 cut off issue never existed on prior registers. The addition of the EA/SJT is brand new for this register (application process starting March 2013). People, this register is brand new and hiring only started in August 2014. They are "supplementing" it with more people being allowed to proceed to the next step because they want more names due to increased needs. It is nothing more than that. End rant. Amen.
|
|
|
Post by ibnlurkin on May 29, 2015 10:23:46 GMT -5
There is NO EVIDENCE that there is a new application process! Seriously people. One of the reasons the news that started this thread is getting all tangled is that ALJs who do NOT follow the board closely or at all, got the email asking for volunteers for the Structured Interview for the fall. That news is getting translated into something that is not happening. In the past, needing SI volunteers (sitting ALJs from various agencies) always meant a refresh or a new register. THAT IS NOT what is happening here. This is a brand new event that has never happened because this step 2 cut off issue never existed on prior registers. The addition of the EA/SJT is brand new for this register (application process starting March 2013). People, this register is brand new and hiring only started in August 2014. They are "supplementing" it with more people being allowed to proceed to the next step because they want more names due to increased needs. It is nothing more than that. End rant. Thanks SR for slapping me back into my usual state of composure ! lol
|
|