|
Post by firehouse9 on Jun 10, 2016 10:31:30 GMT -5
You are so right, Funky. Those are the ones I never understood. Add to that the ones where that got caught at the beginning, but some got through with just a month and a year of admission, while others were dinged for not having a complete date- month, day and year. Were people informed that they were disqualified for not having the day listed? Most applications don't even have a space for the day of admission, just month and year. Assuming the information is correct otherwise, does OPM have a policy on this month/day thing?
|
|
|
Post by blinky on Jun 10, 2016 10:36:11 GMT -5
Were people informed that they were disqualified for not having the day listed? Most applications don't even have a space for the day of admission, just month and year. Assuming the information is correct otherwise, does OPM have a policy on this month/day thing? And I definitely didn't list the day I was admitted (I have no idea what it is), but I did get the email to advance.
|
|
|
Post by texasgal on Jun 10, 2016 10:41:38 GMT -5
Howdy - another newbie saying hello and good luck to everyone moving on to the next stage!
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Jun 10, 2016 10:41:51 GMT -5
There have been reports in past applications that people were cut simply because the put 9/1995 instead of 9/1/1995 when asked for the "date" of admission. There have also always been reports of some who did like 9/1995 and still got thru. It's just part of the insane, subjective, which grader did you get, ridiculousness of this whole thing.
|
|
|
Post by phoenixrisingALJ on Jun 10, 2016 10:59:16 GMT -5
There have been reports in past applications that people were cut simply because the put 9/1995 instead of 9/1/1995 when asked for the "date" of admission. There have also always been reports of some who did like 9/1995 and still got thru. It's just part of the insane, subjective, which grader did you get, ridiculousness of this whole thing. Perhaps also the person reporting it as the cause for not getting through is guessing that is the reason but instead it might have been an issue with how they described their experience? Speculation on my part....Unless those who do not make it through are given a specific reason for not making it through - i.e the problem was your response to Q. No. 1.... it failed to state X.
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Jun 10, 2016 11:11:40 GMT -5
I think the info about that particular style of cut came from registers past and people were ultimately, either through FOIA or the Azdell litigation, to finally get some answers as to why they were cut. I may be wrong and it may be pure speculation...but I seem to recall some old threads and discussion about people somehow finding out that the date thing was why they were found not qualified.
|
|
|
Post by sisafras on Jun 10, 2016 13:24:53 GMT -5
Is anyone still waiting for the first round email? Any chance there may be another round to come? Thanks guys.
|
|
|
Post by ALJCandidate on Jun 10, 2016 13:55:30 GMT -5
Just a follow up. I received the email invite but the application manager has not changed from "awaiting results"
|
|
jbrky
New Member
Posts: 17
|
Post by jbrky on Jun 10, 2016 14:17:17 GMT -5
Is anyone still waiting for the first round email? Any chance there may be another round to come? Thanks guys. I still haven't received the email. And yes, I have checked my spam folder.
|
|
|
Post by bittertrials on Jun 10, 2016 15:11:33 GMT -5
I am new here and I wish I had found this forum before I submitted my application. I had no idea there were so many pitfalls in this process! I have heard nothing and I am hoping against hope that there may still be some good news in the offing. Pros: I am pretty sure I meet each and every one of the qualifications and my status is "no results yet." Not sure if this is the same as "awaiting results," but I am hoping. Cons: No e-mail yet. Also, I am a judicial employee and I think I read that somebody was DQ'd for this because their law license was not considered active. I keep telling myself that maybe once OPM realized that they made some mistakes, perhaps they halted the notification process in order to double check the accuracy of the remaining notifications.
|
|
|
Post by outlawswife on Jun 10, 2016 16:00:48 GMT -5
Glad I checked my trash folder (and this board), the email was sent two days ago! And so, it all begins...
I'm a newbie, and I'm looking forward to getting to know and taking this ride along with you other newbies and not-so newbies. Carpe Diem!
|
|
|
Post by bayou on Jun 10, 2016 16:18:21 GMT -5
This date thing makes no sense. The only requirement is that you have an active license at the time of the application and throughout the process. The date of admission is irrelevant for that requirement. Just when I thought I could focus on the next step, I now have to worry about some ticky tack thing jumping up and biting me in 8 months. How are any of you that have been at this for years still sane?
Seriously, somebody found the blueprint for the Spanish inquisition and just changed the title to ALJ Hiring Process. I'm going have a beer.
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Jun 10, 2016 16:21:24 GMT -5
You are learning grasshopper.
|
|
|
Post by firehouse9 on Jun 10, 2016 16:22:30 GMT -5
This date thing makes no sense. The only requirement is that you have an active license at the time of the application and throughout the process. The date of admission is irrelevant for that requirement. Just when I thought I could focus on the next step, I now have to worry about some ticky tack thing jumping up and biting me in 8 months. How are any of you that have been at this for years still sane? Seriously, somebody found the blueprint for the Spanish inquisition and just changed the title to ALJ Hiring Process. I'm going have a beer. In relevant part, Merriam Webster defines "date" as follows: 1 a : the time at which an event occurs <the date of his birth> b : a statement of the time of execution or making <the date on the letter> 2 : duration 3 : the period of time to which something belongs "Date" can mean the exact day of the month, but not necessarily under this.
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Jun 10, 2016 16:29:22 GMT -5
I dunno if they are still that strict, but they were at one time.
You folks need to stop looking at this a reasonable, legal educated people.
Look at it from opm's perspective. 5000 people apply. They don't need 5000 people on the register. Even if they did, they can't test that many. The most they would probably want to bring to testing in DC is 20% of that number.
So, between now and DC, they need to cut 4000 of you. An easy way to do that is to cut anyone that doesn't follow every single direction to the letter.
If you, at any step, give them a reason to cut you, they will.
|
|
|
Post by Pixie on Jun 10, 2016 16:53:22 GMT -5
I dunno if they are still that strict, but they were at one time. You folks need to stop looking at this a reasonable, legal educated people. Look at it from opm's perspective. 5000 people apply. They don't need 5000 people on the register. Even if they did, they can't test that many. The most they would probably want to bring to testing in DC is 20% of that number. So, between now and DC, they need to cut 4000 of you. An easy way to do that is to cut anyone that doesn't follow every single direction to the letter. If you, at any step, give them a reason to cut you, they will. Yes, if OPM can cut you on a technicality, it doesn't have to go through the testing process with you. It is much easier to cut you on a missed date than it is to "grade your paper." Pixie
|
|
|
Post by Prrple on Jun 10, 2016 17:10:28 GMT -5
You are learning grasshopper. Wise Kung Fu mentor says, "When you can snatch the [beer] from my hand, it will be time for you to leave."
|
|
|
Post by 71stretch on Jun 10, 2016 17:17:44 GMT -5
There have been reports in past applications that people were cut simply because the put 9/1995 instead of 9/1/1995 when asked for the "date" of admission. There have also always been reports of some who did like 9/1995 and still got thru. It's just part of the insane, subjective, which grader did you get, ridiculousness of this whole thing. Perhaps also the person reporting it as the cause for not getting through is guessing that is the reason but instead it might have been an issue with how they described their experience? Speculation on my part....Unless those who do not make it through are given a specific reason for not making it through - i.e the problem was your response to Q. No. 1.... it failed to state X. No, they actually told those people they didn't provide the correct date of admission - no reference to the experience issue. Just as Funky and I both indicated upthread, some would get through, and some would not, expressing the date exactly the same way. That's the maddening part.
|
|
|
Post by Gaidin on Jun 10, 2016 19:06:29 GMT -5
What a gut punch. That being said, I don't think just because an email was sent incorrectly is a basis for an appeal. Seems to me it still goes back to the underlying merits of the decision. Hopefully it clears up in your favor. Unfortunately, I think you are exactly right. For a newbie in this class, you actually have potential. Pixie. bayou have you ever considered a side career in poll administration? You can earn literally hundreds of likes all while sitting at your desk.
|
|
|
Post by Abe_Froman on Jun 10, 2016 19:36:44 GMT -5
Perhaps also the person reporting it as the cause for not getting through is guessing that is the reason but instead it might have been an issue with how they described their experience? Speculation on my part....Unless those who do not make it through are given a specific reason for not making it through - i.e the problem was your response to Q. No. 1.... it failed to state X. No, they actually told those people they didn't provide the correct date of admission - no reference to the experience issue. Just as Funky and I both indicated upthread, some would get through, and some would not, expressing the date exactly the same way. That's the maddening part. Regarding Date of Admission: I found some more info on this in old thread "HELP - I got rejected message BUT" (May, 2013), but I'm not clear what round applicants who only provided month/day instead of month/day/year got kicked out of the process? Were applicants tossed after Round-1 for this mistake, Round-2, or both/anytime? Any current ALJ's get through with just a month and year?
|
|