|
Post by goldenretrievermom on Jun 13, 2017 21:22:22 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? 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.
|
|
|
Post by gary on Jun 13, 2017 21:22:24 GMT -5
Could any of the more experienced board members (hint Gary) weigh in on the 2 panel vs. 3 panel SI? I certainly don't recall signing a waiver either, but I would imagine the difference between 2 and 3 interviewers is discretionary, instead of mandatory. I would be surprised if OPM gave us that kind of a softball for appeal. I could certainly benefit from an SI do-over. I think the regulation panel in 2013 was supposed to be an ALJ, an OPM staffer, and a member of the bar. My panel was 2 ALJs and an OPM staffer. They had me sign a waiver of the regulation panel before I went in to be interviewed. They did not give me a copy of the waiver I signed or any of the CAs I signed.
|
|
|
Post by hope2017 on Jun 13, 2017 21:24:53 GMT -5
I was wondering the same thing.
|
|
|
Post by hope2017 on Jun 13, 2017 21:27:42 GMT -5
Im just not seeing a downside to appealing. I'm too old to wait for the register to reopen and there's a slight chance it may work. Never say too old.
|
|
|
Post by mjpsu1980 on Jun 13, 2017 21:32:13 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? 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.
|
|
|
Post by goldenretrievermom on Jun 13, 2017 21:33:00 GMT -5
Short for Covefefe? weisstho, this was a very big pond full of highly qualified applicants. Very easy to be in the bottom half of this one.
|
|
|
Appealing
Jun 13, 2017 21:38:41 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by lucy on Jun 13, 2017 21:38:41 GMT -5
Mamaru, Were you asked to sign the waiver before or after you entered the actual room for the SI? I know for sure that I didn't sign a waiver in the actual room where the SI occurred. I believe the only thing I signed was the sign in sheet when I first arrived, but I don't remember signing a waiver or even being asked to sign one. However, my brain was a little fried from the logic test the day before the SI. Thanks for your input. [br. It was at a table with an OPM staffer before being escorted to the waiting room with other applicants. Not in the room where the test was given. I had a 2 person panel and don't think I signed a waiver. I passed, but if I was appealing, I would bring it up. Nothing to lose, right?
|
|
|
Post by weisstho on Jun 13, 2017 21:39:24 GMT -5
Yeah: I'll ask it. Think AGE was a factor in the SI?
|
|
|
Post by goldenretrievermom on Jun 13, 2017 21:40:22 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. I believe you are mistaken. And I don't believe they would have you come back again. No sign = no interview. OPM makes the rules. We follow them or we don't advance at every stage of this process.
|
|
|
Post by goldenretrievermom on Jun 13, 2017 21:44:04 GMT -5
Yeah: I'll ask it. Think AGE was a factor in the SI? No. The ALJ position lends itself to an older, more established set of applicants. If age were a factor, a relic like me wouldn't have met the minimum score.
|
|
|
Post by denise on Jun 13, 2017 22:03:38 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? 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. For what it's worth, I had 2 interviewers and didn't sign a waiver. I didn't think anything of it at all at the time.
|
|
|
Post by goldenretrievermom on Jun 13, 2017 22:39:14 GMT -5
If OPM guidelines "suggest that 3 people conduct the SI," how is that a "requirement"? And if you didn't raise the issue, haven't you waived it? But, heh, I'm not discouraging you from raising any issue you want. I'm just being pragmatic.
|
|
|
Post by mamaru on Jun 13, 2017 22:42:00 GMT -5
Could any of the more experienced board members (hint Gary) weigh in on the 2 panel vs. 3 panel SI? I certainly don't recall signing a waiver either, but I would imagine the difference between 2 and 3 interviewers is discretionary, instead of mandatory. I would be surprised if OPM gave us that kind of a softball for appeal. I could certainly benefit from an SI do-over. I think the regulation panel in 2013 was supposed to be an ALJ, an OPM staffer, and a member of the bar. My panel was 2 ALJs and an OPM staffer. They had me sign a waiver of the regulation panel before I went in to be interviewed. They did not give me a copy of the waiver I signed or any of the CAs I signed. That's exactly as I remember it. Hope that's reassuring to you alohastate.
|
|
|
Post by mamaru on Jun 13, 2017 22:55:47 GMT -5
If OPM guidelines "suggest that 3 people conduct the SI," how is that a "requirement"? And if you didn't raise the issue, haven't you waived it? But, heh, I'm not discouraging you from raising any issue you want. I'm just being pragmatic. I don't remember whether the composition of the panel was part of "guidelines" or something stronger. Also, I don't remember iif the composition of the panel was "suggested" but I believe that in 2013 it was more than a suggestion. Otherwise OPM would not have insisted on the waiver and argued so strenuously to get me to sign it when I expressed reservations. I no longer have a dog in the hunt so I'm not spending my time going back and looking at wording, but I think anyone who intends to raise the issue should do so. It also seems to me that there's a DP concern about using different rules for different groups of applicants applying for the same register.
|
|
|
Post by mamaru on Jun 13, 2017 22:58:40 GMT -5
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. I believe you are mistaken. And I don't believe they would have you come back again. No sign = no interview. OPM makes the rules. We follow them or we don't advance at every stage of this process. Goldenretrievermom, I can't speak for anyone else's experience, but I was told very specifically that if I did not sign a waiver that I would be rescheduled for a time when they could guarantee a three-person panel, but the travel would be at my expense. I am not making this up.
|
|
|
Post by blondswede on Jun 13, 2017 23:15:11 GMT -5
Interesting about you being given at least the professions of the three on your panel. When I did my SI in 2015 (which I flunked, having passed the WD), after we were finished, I asked if I could at least find out what each of the panel members' professions were. I was told absolutely "no," that that was not allowed. I'm now wondering who makes up these "rules," and if they're different depending on the panels.
At least I'm glad I'm in good company for having flunked the SI. I didn't mention it before because I was embarrassed: I thought most people who weren't given an NOR passed the SI but flunked the WD.
|
|
|
Post by goldenretrievermom on Jun 13, 2017 23:48:28 GMT -5
I believe you are mistaken. And I don't believe they would have you come back again. No sign = no interview. OPM makes the rules. We follow them or we don't advance at every stage of this process. Goldenretrievermom, I can't speak for anyone else's experience, but I was told very specifically that if I did not sign a waiver that I would be rescheduled for a time when they could guarantee a three-person panel, but the travel would be at my expense. I am not making this up. Don't doubt you for one minute mamaru. But you must've been given a waiver. And it appears you objected to signing it or at least raised the issue. Did you then sign? It would take courage, in my view, to refuse and insist that they reschedule. I'd be worried that OPM would never find a time "when they could guarantee a three-person panel" or if they did, it would be held against the interviewee in some subtle way. And maybe it's too late, but I just can't wrap my head around the concept of "due process" in hiring.
|
|
Sassy
Full Member
Posts: 37
|
Post by Sassy on Jun 14, 2017 1:21:37 GMT -5
I didn’t get the minimum score on the WD. It actually makes me laugh, because I was Senior Note Editor of a law journal at a top 20 law school, and in my 19 years of practice I have had several judges at different trial / appellate levels in complex litigation tell me I am one of the best legal writers they know, and have had a number of judges encourage me to become a judge. When I first saw the "See Details" my initial reaction was disappointment, but it has been pretty quickly replaced by feeling like the whole "testing" process is a joke. The way I view it is I probably “failed” based on my secretarial / typing skills that have nothing to do with the skills required to be an ALJ. Is that a legit basis for an appeal? We'll see if I decide to appeal, since it's another step in a seemingly arbitrary process (just to get a lower paying job and have a boss and decision quotas, although the trade-off of better work-life balance does sound appealing). However, I applaud those of you who are determined enough to appeal, or re-apply and re-test. You all seem more than capable of doing this job, and if it's what you really want, don't pass up any opportunity to make it happen!
|
|
|
Post by southerngal on Jun 14, 2017 2:52:03 GMT -5
I didn’t get the minimum score on the WD. It actually makes me laugh, because I was Senior Note Editor of a law journal at a top 20 law school, and in my 19 years of practice I have had several judges at different trial / appellate levels in complex litigation tell me I am one of the best legal writers they know, and have had a number of judges encourage me to become a judge. When I first saw the "See Details" my initial reaction was disappointment, but it has been pretty quickly replaced by feeling like the whole "testing" process is a joke. The way I view it is I probably “failed” based on my secretarial / typing skills that have nothing to do with the skills required to be an ALJ. Is that a legit basis for an appeal? We'll see if I decide to appeal, since it's another step in a seemingly arbitrary process (just to get a lower paying job and have a boss and decision quotas, although the trade-off of better work-life balance does sound appealing). However, I applaud those of you who are determined enough to appeal, or re-apply and re-test. You all seem more than capable of doing this job, and if it's what you really want, don't pass up any opportunity to make it happen! The whole process is laughable--I think who makes the register should be determined by a lottery.
|
|
|
Post by pubdef on Jun 14, 2017 4:40:57 GMT -5
I passed the SI both times I have tested. The first time I signed a waiver and it was a large production. I was taken to a somewhat private area with a person from OPM who explained I could either sign the waiver to interview at my scheduled time or refuse to sign and come back at a later date. I signed yet had a 3 person panel. I think everyone signed because not all the panels had 3 people.
This time there was not any waiver that I signed aside from the confidentiality agreement. I figured it was because all panels had 3 people. Surprisingly, I had two people.
|
|