|
|
Appealing
Jun 19, 2017 13:09:43 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by gary on Jun 19, 2017 13:09:43 GMT -5
Dear dragon: We are all DC fans. Appeal denied. Great Caesar's Ghost! ALJ Appeals Panel Catwoman is DC. There's one saving grace. So is Mister Mxyzptlk; try saying that backwards! |
|
|
|
Post by rhd on Jun 19, 2017 13:16:55 GMT -5
The notice of appeal rights states that a review will be based upon the existing record, or words kind of to that effect. This leads me to believe that they assign new grader(s) to re-grade your existing materials. An appeal letter might guide them what to look for, but our NORs don't even tell us what to look for. So, making any kind of argument in an appeal letter seems mostly useless to me. Why should they consider what's in your appeal letter when nobody else got to submit such an extraneous piece when their packages were scored?
I also don't think they review your file, assign a score, and then do any other calculations on it, like averaging with your original score. That particular result would not be any kind of reflection on how you actually performed, even if (maybe ESPECIALLY if) both the original and re-score were wrong, and the average is closer to reality than either of the scores. Two wrong scores cannot make a right. An average score is arbitrary, as would be extra points or demerits for appealing in the first place.
Therefore, I conclude after several sleepless nights, that they give your whole package to a new grader or team, it is scored as if no one has seen it before, and you are stuck with the outcome, good or bad. Two strikes - that's what you get.
I don't see how OPM can do it any other way without risking litigation. See how I broke this up and made white space for easier reading?
|
|
|
|
Appealing
Jun 19, 2017 13:28:01 GMT -5
via mobile
rhd likes this
Post by gary on Jun 19, 2017 13:28:01 GMT -5
The notice of appeal rights states that a review will be based upon the existing record, or words kind of to that effect. This leads me to believe that they assign new grader(s) to re-grade your existing materials. An appeal letter might guide them what to look for, but our NORs don't even tell us what to look for. So, making any kind of argument in an appeal letter seems mostly useless to me. Why should they consider what's in your appeal letter when nobody else got to submit such an extraneous piece when their packages were scored? I also don't think they review your file, assign a score, and then do any other calculations on it, like averaging with your original score. That particular result would not be any kind of reflection on how you actually performed, even if (maybe ESPECIALLY if) both the original and re-score were wrong, and the average is closer to reality than either of the scores. Two wrong scores cannot make a right. An average score is arbitrary, as would be extra points or demerits for appealing in the first place. Therefore, I conclude after several sleepless nights, that they give your whole package to a new grader or team, it is scored as if no one has seen it before, and you are stuck with the outcome, good or bad. Two strikes - that's what you get. I don't see how OPM can do it any other way without risking litigation. See how I broke this up and made white space for easier reading? Beautiful paragraphs! And good thinking. I believe that's most likely how they do it. |
|
|
|
Post by hope2017 on Jun 19, 2017 13:32:35 GMT -5
The notice of appeal rights states that a review will be based upon the existing record, or words kind of to that effect. This leads me to believe that they assign new grader(s) to re-grade your existing materials. An appeal letter might guide them what to look for, but our NORs don't even tell us what to look for. So, making any kind of argument in an appeal letter seems mostly useless to me. Why should they consider what's in your appeal letter when nobody else got to submit such an extraneous piece when their packages were scored? I also don't think they review your file, assign a score, and then do any other calculations on it, like averaging with your original score. That particular result would not be any kind of reflection on how you actually performed, even if (maybe ESPECIALLY if) both the original and re-score were wrong, and the average is closer to reality than either of the scores. Two wrong scores cannot make a right. An average score is arbitrary, as would be extra points or demerits for appealing in the first place. Therefore, I conclude after several sleepless nights, that they give your whole package to a new grader or team, it is scored as if no one has seen it before, and you are stuck with the outcome, good or bad. Two strikes - that's what you get. I don't see how OPM can do it any other way without risking litigation. See how I broke this up and made white space for easier reading? Beautiful paragraphs! And good thinking. I believe that's most likely how they do it. |
|
|
|
Post by hope2017 on Jun 19, 2017 13:34:32 GMT -5
Sorry that I did not post correctly. I would appreciate some clarification on the rhd/gary posts above. If I am only appealing the WD, will everything be reviewed or only the WD for which I did not receive the minimum score? TIA.
|
|
|
|
Post by moopigsdad on Jun 19, 2017 13:49:48 GMT -5
Your entire scoring is reviewed, not just your WD.
|
|
|
|
Post by rhd on Jun 19, 2017 13:50:38 GMT -5
Sorry that I did not post correctly. I would appreciate some clarification on the rhd/gary posts above. If I am only appealing the WD, will everything be reviewed or only the WD for which I did not receive the minimum score? TIA. As I understand it, if you are only appealing the WD, that's all they look at.
My post was directed at those appealing a low score, not a FOAD.
|
|
|
|
Post by gary on Jun 19, 2017 13:53:52 GMT -5
Sorry that I did not post correctly. I would appreciate some clarification on the rhd/gary posts above. If I am only appealing the WD, will everything be reviewed or only the WD for which I did not receive the minimum score? TIA. I do not know for sure. In my Appeal Rights email from OPM, in talking about the categories of appeals, they said: "5. An applicant who received a NOR with a final numerical rating, for appeal of the entire examination. If you appeal your final numerical rating, you will be appealing your whole score. Accordingly, every part of the examination will be reviewed (i.e., Preliminary Qualifications, Online Component, Proctored Component and Structured Interview)." They did not say anything like that for an appeal of the WD. Since you have not received a score, that's mostly neither here nor there. However, you have cleared the Preliminary Qualifications and (apparently) the SI minimum score hurdles. I suspect they would bounce you on Preliminary Qualifications if they ever learned you did not have them, leaving only the SI result at risk. So here's my bottom line: My reading of the Appeals Rights Notice suggests that if the appeal is from failure to make the WD minimum score, that's all they will review. However, even if an appeal of the WD opens everything up for review, you have nothing to lose at this point. |
|
|
|
Post by rhd on Jun 19, 2017 13:58:16 GMT -5
Sorry that I did not post correctly. I would appreciate some clarification on the rhd/gary posts above. If I am only appealing the WD, will everything be reviewed or only the WD for which I did not receive the minimum score? TIA. gary beat me to it. I couldn't find my notice of appeal rights quick enough. He is So Fast. |
|
|
|
Post by JudgeKnot on Jun 19, 2017 14:02:59 GMT -5
Sorry that I did not post correctly. I would appreciate some clarification on the rhd/gary posts above. If I am only appealing the WD, will everything be reviewed or only the WD for which I did not receive the minimum score? TIA. As I understand it, if you are only appealing the WD, that's all they look at.
My post was directed at those appealing a low score, not a FOAD.
I agree with this. If you failed to reach the minimum on the WD and appeal the WD, then that's all that is reviewed. You can't get a worse score than you had. If you have a NOR with a score, and appeal it, hoping for a higher score, then they'll review each component considered in your score. That could result in a better score, the same score, a worse score, or a failure to reach the minimum. |
|
|
|
Post by gary on Jun 19, 2017 14:15:10 GMT -5
As I understand it, if you are only appealing the WD, that's all they look at.
My post was directed at those appealing a low score, not a FOAD.
I agree with this. If you failed to reach the minimum on the WD and appeal the WD, then that's all that is reviewed. You can't get a worse score than you had. If you have a NOR with a score, and appeal it, hoping for a higher score, then they'll review each component considered in your score. That could result in a better score, the same score, a worse score, or a failure to reach the minimum. It's all that and more. OPM says: "The Panel has the authority to affirm, raise, or lower the rating; change a rating from eligible to ineligible and remove an applicant from the register; or remand for further development." |
|
|
|
Post by foghorn on Jun 19, 2017 14:30:56 GMT -5
For those that may want to see the record that they say they will review, is a standard request with the appeal adequate or do we need to file a contemperaneous FOIA request?
|
|
|
|
Post by 71stretch on Jun 19, 2017 16:14:15 GMT -5
So I too didn't receive the minimum score on the SI part and I have a question for my upcoming appeal. In reading the ALJ testing description on the board, it says OPM guidelines suggest that 3 people conduct the SI, but I only had 2 people conduct my SI and I don't recall signing a waiver of this requirement. Is this an appealable issue? I would say no. The norm has been two for many, many rounds now. Since you may have signed the waiver but just don't recall for sure, I would not appeal based only on that. The SI is scored on the spot by the people who do the interview. I don't know on what basis you could appeal their findings, and if you do, I don't know who actually reviews the appeals. |
|
|
|
Post by 71stretch on Jun 19, 2017 16:16:15 GMT -5
Are you sure you didn't sign a waiver as you sat reading the instructions paperwork immediately prior to your interview? Only two interviewers per room on the day I tested, and I think I remember signing a waiver. I am sure I didn't sign a waiver with my instructions paperwork. The only thing I remember signing is the sign in sheet and no one from OPM discussed a waiver with me because I would have wanted the third person. I live about 2 hours from DC, so if they would have "threatened" that I would have to come back again, I would have agreed to come back. And you might have had to wait a long time, perhaps until the next 10 point vet testing. |
|
|
|
Post by Pixie on Jun 19, 2017 18:56:49 GMT -5
For those that may want to see the record that they say they will review, is a standard request with the appeal adequate or do we need to file a contemperaneous FOIA request? I doubt OPM will give you anything unless they are required to do so. Although I once requested information on the number of people who were on the cert for the various locations. About 6 months later, after I had forgotten about it, they sent me the information. I would plan on the FOIA, but you won't get it in time to help with your appeal. Pixie |
|
|
|
Post by hope2017 on Jun 19, 2017 20:26:26 GMT -5
Has anyone filed an appeal and received email responses to the filing? TIA.
|
|
fauxdar
Member
Just Trollin
Posts: 20
|
Post by fauxdar on Jun 19, 2017 20:31:35 GMT -5
Has anyone filed an appeal and received email responses to the filing? TIA. After sending my email appeal, i received an automated reply within an hour. The next day, I received another email indicating a "Changed Status to Appeals" and "Added Assignee" |
|
|
|
Post by hope2017 on Jun 19, 2017 20:36:29 GMT -5
Has anyone filed an appeal and received email responses to the filing? TIA. After sending my email appeal, i received an automated reply within an hour. The next day, I received another email indicating a "Changed Status to Appeals" and "Added Assignee" Thank you, Fauxdar. Same for me. |
|
Sassy
Full Member
Posts: 37 
|
Post by Sassy on Jun 19, 2017 23:36:51 GMT -5
After having "checked out" for a while, I came back and skimmed through the appeal posts. I see that when I said I was laughing and called the process a "joke", it might have been taken the wrong way by some who passed everything and got scores. Please understand that that was not my intent. I applaud everyone who made it through, and know every one of you deserved it.
My intent was simply a message to others who were feeling down: No one should let their self-worth be determined by OPM. They can tell me all they want that I suck as a writer or decision maker, or that I didn't demonstrate the core competencies, or I bombed so horrifically that I don't even deserve a score. However, I know I am an analytical, clear and effective writer. I did not use flowery prose or $25 words. I tend to write clearly and concisely because that's how I win cases and appeals. I am also confident the same is true for many others who didn't pass, and when that's the case, it seems pretty arbitrary. So please take my original message as intended - nobody should take OPM's judgment as meaning you / I / we are incapable of doing this job. I firmly believe that OPM got it wrong in many cases, and excluded a lot of applicants who deserved to pass and would have made damn good ALJ's.
Heeding my own advice, I just e-mailed off my own appeal.
And now I'll get off my soapbox....
|
|
|
|
Appealing
Jun 20, 2017 7:40:28 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by deckhand on Jun 20, 2017 7:40:28 GMT -5
Does anyone have anecdotal evidence of someone successfully appealing the SI?
|
|
