|
|
Post by Pixie on Aug 7, 2017 13:15:50 GMT -5
But, I agree if you are a low scoring type, you will not have the long run time to get selected as you did in the past, as the refresh will shake it up each time, such is life! Tiger
Curious what will now be considered a "low score?" Hi there newbie; I wondered where you were. Go to the Polling section and look at some of the polls there. That should give you a good idea of what is a "low" score. |
|
SEP
Full Member
Posts: 55 
|
Post by SEP on Aug 7, 2017 13:23:55 GMT -5
Hey Pixie! You haven't gotten rid of me just yet. When I didn't make the first round of certs and understood it could be awhile before anything else happened, I've tried to focus on earning my current paycheck. :-)
I've seen the poll numbers, but was thinking that with a continued influx of new folks with NORs in the coming days, what I would consider a mediocre score (i.e. high 60's) would now be considered "low."
|
|
|
|
Post by Pixie on Aug 7, 2017 13:35:32 GMT -5
It will be more than a few "days" before the new people hit the register. OPM hasn't even made the JOA yet. Nor have the new people (to be) applied, tested, been graded or received their NOR. So you still have 1 to 1 1/2 years before the register is flooded again. Your score should be competitive after another cert has washed through. More important is the size of your GAL Pixie
|
|
SEP
Full Member
Posts: 55
|
Post by SEP on Aug 7, 2017 13:44:04 GMT -5
Curious what will now be considered a "low score?" Hi there newbie; I wondered where you were. Go to the Polling section and look at some of the polls there. That should give you a good idea of what is a "low" score. It wasn't enormous, but at least 6 of my cities are on this first cert. |
|
|
|
Post by usmccol on Aug 7, 2017 13:45:56 GMT -5
6. If you have an appeal in the works from a recent FOAD, re-apply.
Col
|
|
|
|
Post by Pixie on Aug 7, 2017 13:51:08 GMT -5
Hi there newbie; I wondered where you were. Go to the Polling section and look at some of the polls there. That should give you a good idea of what is a "low" score. It wasn't enormous, but at least 6 of my cities are on this first cert. Then you are competitive right now. It will only get better as time moves on. You might get picked up this round. I wouldn't be worrying about new people hitting the register in over a year from now. Pixie |
|
|
|
Post by Pixie on Aug 7, 2017 15:32:09 GMT -5
The cat is out. Email about the upcoming retest just circulated to all ODAR employees in a couple of regions, suggesting the notice be posted in public waiting areas. Interesting.
Sure seems like ODAR wants to see more insiders on the register. Why else would they be pushing for a refresh before they even have the results from the interviews from the first cert?
Why do you think SSA is pushing for a refresh? Why do you think the number of insiders on the register is low? Have I missed something? Pixie |
|
|
|
Post by bayou on Aug 7, 2017 15:35:40 GMT -5
Some of the PMs I have been receiving have been commenting on the insider vs outsider ratio. I don't buy into the theory that SSA won't hire outsiders and didn't think it worth commenting on. While SSA may have a preference for productive insiders, I think they have hired way too many outsiders over the years for there to be any real basis to believe that they try to avoid outsiders. I tend to think that if SSA had their druthers, they would create a system that would indeed funnel them a much higher percentage of insiders. However, I also firmly believe that SSA is playing fair under the system they are forced to play in and absolutely give outsiders a fair shake. *subject to revision if I'm not hired*  Anyway, if I have time, I'll go back and pull out the stats on the insider vs outsider ratio but my guess based solely on recollection is that it is pretty even. Pro tip: For those who can't figure out who is an insider and who is an outsider, pay attention to what is given to each person when you are escorted to the upstairs waiting area. Those who receive the envelope are outsiders and those who receive a single sheet of paper are the insiders. At least that is how it broke down at my time slot. |
|
|
|
Post by msp on Aug 7, 2017 15:36:03 GMT -5
I feel it's based in part on the sheer number of appeals they likely received when scores were released, not whether or not insider/outsider status. IIRC, there were quite a few insiders who were either cut at the online component stage or at the DC stage.
|
|
|
|
Post by bayou on Aug 7, 2017 15:41:57 GMT -5
Interesting.
Sure seems like ODAR wants to see more insiders on the register. Why else would they be pushing for a refresh before they even have the results from the interviews from the first cert?
Why do you think SSA is pushing for a refresh? Why do you think the number of insiders on the register is low? Have I missed something? Pixie Somebody commented early in this thread that a prior budget (or some Congressional action) had given authorization for SSA to mandate that OPM reopen the testing at SSA's request. Since then, that thought has been the assumption, although I haven't seen any evidence it is true. Perhaps so, but I haven't seen anybody post anything beyond speculation. Maybe I missed it.
Also, there has been talk about OPM creating a new test, as in a new register, in the future. Perhaps OPM is doing this of their own volition with the intent of not testing again for 4 or 5 years so that they can focus on getting the new test in place.
This certainly upset my apple cart of thinking I would have many many chances to be picked up before the next refresh but I don't think it has anything to do with the quality of the 2016 cohort.
|
|
|
|
Post by bayou on Aug 7, 2017 15:44:21 GMT -5
Why do you think SSA is pushing for a refresh? Why do you think the number of insiders on the register is low? Have I missed something? Pixie You raise a good point. I may have jumped to a conclusion. Who asks OPM to initiate the ALJ Exam? I don't think anybody has to ask. It is OPM's duty to maintain the register, which includes having sufficient numbers on the register. In the past SSA complained that OPM was failing at that and was able to get Congressional action to permit SSA to force OPM to reopen the testing. However, that doesn't mean that OPM can't do it without a request. |
|
|
|
Post by Pixie on Aug 7, 2017 15:45:44 GMT -5
Why do you think SSA is pushing for a refresh? Why do you think the number of insiders on the register is low? Have I missed something? Pixie You raise a good point. I may have jumped to a conclusion. Who asks OPM to initiate the ALJ Exam? OPM, as far as I know, acts on its own initiative, sometimes with a little nudge from Congress and sometimes when SSA complains there aren't enough names on the register. When SSA complains to Congress, as has happened in the last few years, Congress might give a little nudge. With approximately 1300 names now on the register, I don't think SSA is complaining about an insufficient number of names. Pixie |
|
|
|
Post by aljalex on Aug 7, 2017 15:59:31 GMT -5
For what it's worth, I got an email today from NAALJ with a copy of a letter on the OPM letterhead and signed by its Acting Director, stating, inter alia, that the upcoming exam is to "replenish" the existing register and that Agencies may continue to request certs and hire off of the existing register until it is replenished. I can't cut and paste the letter (I tried, thank goodness this skill wasn't tested on the ALJ exam) but can forward the email to anyone interested seeing it for themselves.
|
|
|
|
Post by gary on Aug 7, 2017 16:00:15 GMT -5
You raise a good point. I may have jumped to a conclusion. Who asks OPM to initiate the ALJ Exam? OPM, as far as I know, acts on its own initiative, sometimes with a little nudge from Congress and sometimes when SSA complains there aren't enough names on the register. When SSA complains to Congress, as has happened in the last few years, Congress might give a little nudge. With approximately 1300 names now on the register, I don't think SSA is complaining about an insufficient number of names. Pixie The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015 provides in part: "Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Office of Personnel Management shall, upon request of the Commissioner of Social Security, expeditiously administer a sufficient number of competitive examinations, as determined by the Commissioner, for the purpose of identifying an adequate number of candidates to be appointed as Administrative Law Judges under section 3105 of title 5, United States Code. The first such examination shall take place not later than April 1, 2016 and other examinations shall take place at such time or times requested by the Commissioner, but not later than December 31, 2022." So until 2022, SSA can require that OPM give the ALJ examination when SSA wants it given. This of course does not answer the question of whether the coming refresh is being given on "request" of SSA or is being given on OPM's impetus without SSA prompting. |
|
|
|
Post by Renee98 on Aug 7, 2017 16:58:44 GMT -5
Some of the PMs I have been receiving have been commenting on the insider vs outsider ratio. I don't buy into the theory that SSA won't hire outsiders and didn't think it worth commenting on. While SSA may have a preference for productive insiders, I think they have hired way too many outsiders over the years for there to be any real basis to believe that they try to avoid outsiders. I tend to think that if SSA had their druthers, they would create a system that would indeed funnel them a much higher percentage of insiders. However, I also firmly believe that SSA is playing fair under the system they are forced to play in and absolutely give outsiders a fair shake. *subject to revision if I'm not hired* Anyway, if I have time, I'll go back and pull out the stats on the insider vs outsider ratio but my guess based solely on recollection is that it is pretty even. Pro tip: For those who can't figure out who is an insider and who is an outsider, pay attention to what is given to each person when you are escorted to the upstairs waiting area. Those who receive the envelope are outsiders and those who receive a single sheet of paper are the insiders. At least that is how it broke down at my time slot. Im an insider and received the same envelope as everyone esle in my group. I didnt need it, but I still had it. |
|
|
|
Post by gary on Aug 7, 2017 17:02:29 GMT -5
Some of the PMs I have been receiving have been commenting on the insider vs outsider ratio. I don't buy into the theory that SSA won't hire outsiders and didn't think it worth commenting on. While SSA may have a preference for productive insiders, I think they have hired way too many outsiders over the years for there to be any real basis to believe that they try to avoid outsiders. I tend to think that if SSA had their druthers, they would create a system that would indeed funnel them a much higher percentage of insiders. However, I also firmly believe that SSA is playing fair under the system they are forced to play in and absolutely give outsiders a fair shake. *subject to revision if I'm not hired* Anyway, if I have time, I'll go back and pull out the stats on the insider vs outsider ratio but my guess based solely on recollection is that it is pretty even. Pro tip: For those who can't figure out who is an insider and who is an outsider, pay attention to what is given to each person when you are escorted to the upstairs waiting area. Those who receive the envelope are outsiders and those who receive a single sheet of paper are the insiders. At least that is how it broke down at my time slot. Im an insider and received the same envelope as everyone esle in my group. I didnt need it, but I still had it. Maybe there's something your boss needs to tell you. |
|
|
|
Post by Pixie on Aug 7, 2017 17:06:52 GMT -5
OPM, as far as I know, acts on its own initiative, sometimes with a little nudge from Congress and sometimes when SSA complains there aren't enough names on the register. When SSA complains to Congress, as has happened in the last few years, Congress might give a little nudge. With approximately 1300 names now on the register, I don't think SSA is complaining about an insufficient number of names. Pixie The Bipartisan Budgest Act of 2015 provides in part: "Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Office of Personnel Management shall, upon request of the Commissioner of Social Security, expeditiously administer a sufficient number of competitive examinations, as determined by the Commissioner, for the purpose of identifying an adequate number of candidates to be appointed as Administrative Law Judges under section 3105 of title 5, United States Code. The first such examination shall take place not later than April 1, 2016 and other examinations shall take place at such time or times requested by the Commissioner, but not later than December 31, 2022." So until 2022, SSA can require that OPM give the ALJ examination when SSA wants it given. This of course does not answer the question of whether the coming refresh is being given on "request" of SSA or is being given on OPM's impetus without SSA prompting. Thanks, Gary. I had forgotten about the ability of SSA to cause the exam to be given. I knew there had been some action by Congress, but didn't know it was this strong. With this in mind, I seriously doubt that OPM is opening the register on its own initiative. SSA is probably looking ahead and sees that with its projected hiring needs in the next 2 to 5 years, the register will be depleted if OPM doesn't start the process in motion. SSA likes a nice plump register, while OPM is content to let it dwindle to sticks and stems. Pixie |
|
|
|
Post by judgymcjudgypants on Aug 7, 2017 17:08:39 GMT -5
Could be SSA wants the register to hit a random number, say 2,000 names and then keep it replenished at a fairly high level. If ever OPM had insufficient funding to administer the exam on a regular basis or took a hiatus while developing the new test, SSA could carry on for a long time with 2000 names.
J
|
|
|
|
Post by bayou on Aug 7, 2017 18:02:55 GMT -5
Some of the PMs I have been receiving have been commenting on the insider vs outsider ratio. I don't buy into the theory that SSA won't hire outsiders and didn't think it worth commenting on. While SSA may have a preference for productive insiders, I think they have hired way too many outsiders over the years for there to be any real basis to believe that they try to avoid outsiders. I tend to think that if SSA had their druthers, they would create a system that would indeed funnel them a much higher percentage of insiders. However, I also firmly believe that SSA is playing fair under the system they are forced to play in and absolutely give outsiders a fair shake. *subject to revision if I'm not hired* Anyway, if I have time, I'll go back and pull out the stats on the insider vs outsider ratio but my guess based solely on recollection is that it is pretty even. Pro tip: For those who can't figure out who is an insider and who is an outsider, pay attention to what is given to each person when you are escorted to the upstairs waiting area. Those who receive the envelope are outsiders and those who receive a single sheet of paper are the insiders. At least that is how it broke down at my time slot. Im an insider and received the same envelope as everyone esle in my group. I didnt need it, but I still had it. Well shoot. I had a pm saying this and it was true for me also so I thought it was a tip off. Perhaps they were low on envelopes that day. |
|
|
|
Post by rp on Aug 7, 2017 18:14:04 GMT -5
Im an insider and received the same envelope as everyone esle in my group. I didnt need it, but I still had it. Well shoot. I had a pm saying this and it was true for me also so I thought it was a tip off. Perhaps they were low on envelopes that day. That had to do with travel. It is possible the insider who got the envelope had different travel arrangements than the others. |
|
