|
Post by JudgeRatty on May 16, 2015 8:51:27 GMT -5
Pixie, perhaps it would be beneficial, both to old timers and newbies, to add the following to the intro rules of the forum: if a poster uses a "winky emoticon" the post is intended to be a joke, satire, sarcasm, etc, and not to be taken seriously. People who are easily offended should not join this forum, and might want to seriously consider a career change -- how can you practice law if you take everything personally? You may also want to reconsider becoming an ALJ -- since people will criticize you, both publicly and in private. True! And not to mention, all the ALJ stats are posted publicly along with little love notes (or hates) for each ALJ. A thick skin is a must have trait for this biz, as well a good sense of humor.
|
|
|
Post by Missundaztood on May 16, 2015 8:51:37 GMT -5
Plannin' on gettin' my offer b4 this goes down. Just sayin'. Well stated Miss, well stated. I hope to be in the same boat as you, if you will have me. Of course, mpd, I want to take all of my board friends with me. I hear there is a big boat with lots of vacancies and then more boats to follow!
|
|
|
Post by hopingforalj on May 16, 2015 9:20:39 GMT -5
This is some good news, thanks to all who contribute to this board, sometimes hope is a good thing.
|
|
|
Post by daisyjane on May 16, 2015 11:05:07 GMT -5
I am a little confused as to the applicants who will benefit from this. I took the initial online SJT, writing sample and experience assessment. OPM then notified me my score was not among the higher scored subgroup of applicants so I could not proceed further. This was a disappointment after having gone to D.C. for the WD and Interview back in 2008. Although I later received information from OPM about how to file an appeal, I chose not to do so for personal reasons at the time. Even though I did not submit an appeal, do you think I fall into the group of applicants who will benefit from this and be notified by OPM? Should I now inform OPM of my interest in this new opportunity?
|
|
|
Post by gary on May 16, 2015 11:08:28 GMT -5
I am a little confused as to the applicants who will benefit from this. I took the initial online SJT, writing sample and experience assessment. OPM then notified me my score was not among the higher scored subgroup of applicants so I could not proceed further. This was a disappointment after having gone to D.C. for the WD and Interview back in 2008. Although I later received information from OPM about how to file an appeal, I chose not to do so for personal reasons at the time. Even though I did not submit an appeal, do you think I fall into the group of applicants who will benefit from this and be notified by OPM? Should I now inform OPM of my interest in this new opportunity? You may. I think OPM will set a new, lower, cutoff score for the online component. If your online component score is above the new cutoff, you will be invited to test in DC. I don't think you will need to do anything to notify OPM of your interest unless, and until, you get an email from OPM. Just watch the email address you gave them and monitor your Spam folder closely just in case.
|
|
|
Post by daisyjane on May 16, 2015 11:10:13 GMT -5
This is the best news I have heard in a long time!
|
|
|
Post by westernalj on May 16, 2015 11:18:58 GMT -5
I haven't posted in a while, but I was hired in one of the rounds off this register. This lowering of the cut off score reminds me of when OPM refreshed a prior register. Didn't they let new applicants take the test and then integrate their scores with the scores of people already on the register? This is a different variation in that OPM isn't starting from the beginning, but isn't this similar?
|
|
|
Post by gary on May 16, 2015 11:24:54 GMT -5
I haven't posted in a while, but I was hired in one of the rounds off this register. This lowering of the cut off score reminds me of when OPM refreshed a prior register. Didn't they let new applicants take the test and then integrate their scores with the scores of people already on the register? This is a different variation in that OPM isn't starting from the beginning, but isn't this similar? Good to hear from you again. It looks similar to me. But also different. It does not allow new applications and does not open up the GALs of people on the Register for modification.
|
|
|
Post by gary on May 16, 2015 11:25:43 GMT -5
This is the best news I have heard in a long time! One other thing to monitor would be Application Manager which should be accessible to you via your USA Jobs account. You will want to watch for any new correspondence there as a backup to watching your email and Spam folder.
|
|
|
Post by ibnlurkin on May 16, 2015 11:32:48 GMT -5
Wow its almost like OPM realized we were running out of things to talk about ! : A few thoughts from the cobwebs of my mind
1. The size of register discussion directly correlates and is proof of the great intel, stats, analysis, thinking etc available on this
board ..Thanks again to all !
2. The phrase "preliminarily qualified" suggests to me that the first component was always (or retroactively ??) intended to manage the numbers on the front end... a funnel and nothing more. Personally.....i never viewed it as having any great heft or any degree of acuity in screening candidates... I know testing experts may be able to state or argue otherwise....to me the WD , SI etc was/is the meat of the thing. They've collected the preliminarily qualified and are now simply turning the spigot on /off. ... Although I see no way this could possibly benefit me..and it could in fact be a sign that many who remain on the register are disfavored for some reason.... I'm more or less happy for these folks because I've always felt it was a thin basis for turning people away
3.Personally, I believe the in person components cannot and should not be manipulated in the same manner.
4. I have a smallish GAL (10) which I don't (at this point) intend to expand if given the choice.....Since I understand the opportunity to expand has arisen in the past... I won't begrudge folks if they are given the opportunity in the future... However... I tend to agree with sratty ... the announcement made the importance of GAL selection pretty clear
5. Finally... I think everyone should say what they think... we're attorneys we all know in all endeavors everyone is not going to end up happy..... understand that some of the points we discuss could mean the difference between someone getting a good job or not so some grace is in order... but honest direct discussion imho is an important part of this board
|
|
|
Post by moopigsdad on May 16, 2015 11:54:12 GMT -5
I haven't posted in a while, but I was hired in one of the rounds off this register. This lowering of the cut off score reminds me of when OPM refreshed a prior register. Didn't they let new applicants take the test and then integrate their scores with the scores of people already on the register? This is a different variation in that OPM isn't starting from the beginning, but isn't this similar? Good to hear from you again. It looks similar to me. But also different. It does not allow new applications and does not open up the GALs of people on the Register for modification. I am not sure this is going to solve a lot of SSA's problems because it is likely a lot of the candidates moving on may have limited GALs, which doesn't solve the issue of enough candidates for places like Harlingen, Mt. Pleasant, Toledo, etc. Hence, it will only be a stop gap measure for a short term solution. Eventually, there will be a refresh and and ability to expand GALs as there is no real other way to get enough candidates for the "crapland" locations IMHO.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeRatty on May 16, 2015 12:07:01 GMT -5
Wow its almost like OPM realized we were running out of things to talk about ! : A few thoughts from the cobwebs of my mind 1. The size of register discussion directly correlates and is proof of the great intel, stats, analysis, thinking etc available on this board ..Thanks again to all ! 2. The phrase "preliminarily qualified" suggests to me that the first component was always (or retroactively ??) intended to manage the numbers on the front end... a funnel and nothing more. Personally.....i never viewed it as having any great heft or any degree of acuity in screening candidates... I know testing experts may be able to state or argue otherwise....to me the WD , SI etc was/is the meat of the thing. They've collected the preliminarily qualified and are now simply turning the spigot on /off. ... Although I see no way this could possibly benefit me..and it could in fact be a sign that many who remain on the register are disfavored for some reason.... I'm more or less happy for these folks because I've always felt it was a thin basis for turning people away 3.Personally, I believe the in person components cannot and should not be manipulated in the same manner. 4. I have a smallish GAL (10) which I don't (at this point) intend to expand if given the choice.....Since I understand the opportunity to expand has arisen in the past... I won't begrudge folks if they are given the opportunity in the future... However... I tend to agree with sratty ... the announcement made the importance of GAL selection pretty clear 5. Finally... I think everyone should say what they think... we're attorneys we all know in all endeavors everyone is not going to end up happy..... understand that some of the points we discuss could mean the difference between someone getting a good job or not so some grace is in order... but honest direct discussion imho is an important part of this board Totally agree on all points. I think you are dead on with point 2 that this was a means to control how many got through the funnel into the most significant portion of the testing process allowing them to dial up the flow if they chose to do so at a later date. This really is an interesting development.
|
|
|
Post by Gaidin on May 16, 2015 12:41:02 GMT -5
Good to hear from you again. It looks similar to me. But also different. It does not allow new applications and does not open up the GALs of people on the Register for modification. I am not sure this is going to solve a lot of SSA's problems because it is likely a lot of the candidates moving on may have limited GALs, which doesn't solve the issue of enough candidates for places like Harlingen, Mt. Pleasant, Toledo, etc. Hence, it will only be a stop gap measure for a short term solution. Eventually, there will be a refresh and and ability to expand GALs as there is no real other way to get enough candidates for the "crapland" locations IMHO. If it buys them even a year before going to a full refresh then it saves them lots of time and money. I believe a GAL expansion will be offered as well. Even 50 new candidates with viable GALs is a training class. If they can snag 150 then that is their anticipated need for ODAR in FY2016/17. The fact is they are probably just moving to the "next highest rated score group."
|
|
|
Post by gary on May 16, 2015 12:55:55 GMT -5
How many applicants did we estimate made it past preliminary screening only to be cut after taking the online component?
|
|
|
Post by mikeinthehills on May 16, 2015 14:49:18 GMT -5
How many applicants did we estimate made it past preliminary screening only to be cut after taking the online component? This is the WAG of WAGs. But at the time, people were estimating that 5,000 plus submitted an application. That group may have been cut to 4,000 or so to take the SJT. That's the biggest guess. We know approximately 1,100 got invited to DC for the WD/LBMT/SI. So 3,000 plus or minus 500 is a good guestimate for the number cut at the SJT stage. It would be easy to get a thousand or more to DC for the third round by expanding the "highest scoring subgroup" taking the SJT.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeRatty on May 16, 2015 16:51:01 GMT -5
How many applicants did we estimate made it past preliminary screening only to be cut after taking the online component? This is the WAG of WAGs. But at the time, people were estimating that 5,000 plus submitted an application. That group may have been cut to 4,000 or so to take the SJT. That's the biggest guess. We know approximately 1,100 got invited to DC for the WD/LBMT/SI. So 3,000 plus or minus 500 is a good guestimate for the number cut at the SJT stage. It would be easy to get a thousand or more to DC for the third round by expanding the "highest scoring subgroup" taking the SJT. I think that with so many in that pipeline they could keep doing this as many times as they see fit. Quite good news for many people I know.
|
|
|
Post by prescient on May 16, 2015 19:50:27 GMT -5
It seems like it would be easier to lower the bar and take whoever now qualified than to have everyone retake step 2, no?
|
|
|
Post by gary on May 16, 2015 20:25:13 GMT -5
It seems like it would be easier to lower the bar and take whoever now qualified than to have everyone retake step 2, no? Nobody will be retaking step 2. OPM will be lowering the bar and inviting those cut at the online component whose scores exceed the new cutoff to test in DC.
|
|
|
Post by Missundaztood on May 16, 2015 20:25:32 GMT -5
Well, if they keep lowering the minimum score, the explanation that came with the NOR that scores start at zero will finally make sense.
|
|
|
Post by moopigsdad on May 16, 2015 21:04:17 GMT -5
Well, if they keep lowering the minimum score, the explanation that came with the NOR that scores start at zero will finally make sense. Thank you for my laugh of the day Miss.....LOL.
|
|