|
Post by hopefulop on Aug 23, 2017 0:50:40 GMT -5
I can't believe I am considering starting this process all over again It's exciting right! Betcha can't wait to do the Logic based again! Seriously, you know you did the first part OK, so you'll focus and do fine. In the meantime you'll have read up, figured out areas of weakness, and be ready to rumble with the rest of us old lags. We shall of course be singing our stirring war song: You're right, we need to work some group dance moves for when we enter the test room. Foghorn: gotta love your attitude. Thanks for giving us reason to smile through all this. I hope to meet you someday in ALJ training
|
|
|
Post by judgymcjudgypants on Aug 23, 2017 9:29:25 GMT -5
Look at this way: everybody needs a hobby!
J
|
|
|
Post by firehouse9 on Aug 23, 2017 9:50:50 GMT -5
Curious here. How many people ended up on the register as a result of the 2016 vacancy announcement/testing cycle? Out of how many overall applicants? Anyone have a clue? there was congressional hearing testimony near the start of the 2016 which stated there was approximately 5600 applicants there was a thread discussing it with links to the transcripts
during dc testing sophie ran a thread in which we counted the number of people who tested at dc and the final count was in the 2200 range
the polling we did on the Voldemort status prior to the release of NORs indicated a 50% cut after the dc testing
so the reasonable guess is that approximately 1100 new souls were added to the existing register in june
guessing the number of persons on the register from 13/15 is a bit more difficult there was discussion of the number in the congressional testimony discussed above but i cant recall the number off the top of my head i want to say 600 but im not sure
plus there was hiring from the register after the congressional testimony and before the NORs were issued so my guess is about 300 existing people were on the register but that is a really loose guess
At first blush, given the amount of time and effort involved, it seems really seems insane to reopen testing so soon. 1. Is it correct that no one really knows why they would do this? 2. Does anyone think it's worthwhile to retest? I am on the cert with a limited GAL, but I do not know if I will be among the top 3 scoring applicants this time around to be even considered. If the application process is the same as the 2016 process, I think I could probably increase my score into the 80s, but it would be a colossal pain. Does anyone think I should reapply? (of course this will be moot if 1. I do get a job this time or 2. I am prohibited from reapplying).
|
|
|
Post by Pixie on Aug 23, 2017 10:24:09 GMT -5
If you received a score within one year of the reopening of the examination you may not reapply. If your score is in the mid to upper 70s, probably best to not risk everything for another go at it. OPM has some gotchas built into the process. One of them may trip you up on reexamination, and you would be off the register.
|
|
|
Post by gern on Aug 23, 2017 10:30:02 GMT -5
Mid to Upper? Probably? PROBABLY?
Aiieeeeee......
|
|
|
Post by gern on Aug 23, 2017 10:31:34 GMT -5
If you received a score within one year of the reopening of the examination you may not reapply. If your score is in the mid to upper 70s, probably best to not risk everything for another go at it. OPM has some gotchas built into the process. One of them may trip you up on reexamination, and you would be off the register. Shirley, she meant to say "60s."
|
|
|
Post by firehouse9 on Aug 23, 2017 10:53:38 GMT -5
If you received a score within one year of the reopening of the examination you may not reapply. If your score is in the mid to upper 70s, probably best to not risk everything for another go at it. OPM has some gotchas built into the process. One of them may trip you up on reexamination, and you would be off the register. Are those gotchas known?
|
|
|
Post by hopefulop on Aug 23, 2017 11:16:47 GMT -5
Hopefulop, do not despair. You already have the information you gathered for the first application, so there will be less work to do to complete the process. If you really want to be an ALJ, and if you are a driven person, it's worth another try, unless you are nearing age 85 or so! Thinking about how I would feel about myself if I didn't try again and about my desire to be an ALJ, I found the mental and physical strength to persevere, with a good outcome so far (I think--it's all a mystery to me)! I am nowhere near close to 85! haha so I guess its worth another try. I REALLY do want the job and am driven so... thanks for the support
|
|
|
Post by rp on Aug 23, 2017 11:17:11 GMT -5
If you received a score within one year of the reopening of the examination you may not reapply. If your score is in the mid to upper 70s, probably best to not risk everything for another go at it. OPM has some gotchas built into the process. One of them may trip you up on reexamination, and you would be off the register. Shirley, she meant to say "60s." I don't think so -- the question was from someone who is on this cert right now -- so I believe Pixie was addressing her answer to this person specifically. As far as anyone can tell -- no one on this cert has a score in the "60s." And don't call me Shirley.
|
|
|
Post by rp on Aug 23, 2017 11:22:10 GMT -5
If you received a score within one year of the reopening of the examination you may not reapply. If your score is in the mid to upper 70s, probably best to not risk everything for another go at it. OPM has some gotchas built into the process. One of them may trip you up on reexamination, and you would be off the register. Are those gotchas known? I can think of a few. For example, some may put only MM/YY for bar admission when it asks for MM/DD/YY -- the gotcha is that whomever reviews it may not let the MM/YY go past. Or they might. If they don't -- Gotcha -- no online portion for you and you have to appeal and wait until the end -- all because you didn't state your "date of admission." Another example -- you aren't among the higher scoring subset of persons on the online component. Gotcha -- no trip to DC for you. I am sure given enough time I could come up with more. There are risks associated with starting this process again. The point is. If you are certain that you won't get on another cert, you may want to go for it. But right now -- you are on the Register. You could easily be NOT on the Register if you go through the process again. You are NOT GUARANTEED to make it again.
|
|
|
Post by judgymcjudgypants on Aug 23, 2017 11:47:55 GMT -5
Hopeful,
There are worse games to play.
May the odds be ever in your favor.
J
|
|
|
Post by redraider05 on Aug 23, 2017 12:06:00 GMT -5
Posting is up on USAjobs. 8/23/17-8/30/17. Today was the first day I've been in the board in months. Glad I did! If I've posted in the wrong place, my apologies and please feel free to move. www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/ViewDetails/476891900
|
|
|
Post by bayou on Aug 23, 2017 12:12:24 GMT -5
Posting is up on USAjobs. 8/23/17-8/30/17. Today was the first day I've been in the board in months. Glad I did! If I've posted in the wrong place, my apologies and please feel free to move. www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/ViewDetails/476891900There is a dedicated thread that Pixie needs to unlock to send up the bat signal.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeKnot on Aug 23, 2017 12:12:43 GMT -5
So folks, y'all have a week to get your application together and select your GAL from more than 200 locations. (No openings this time in East Craplandia or West Craplandia.) Choose wisely. Draft diligently. Proofread everything, and then proofread everything again. May the marathon begin again!
|
|
|
Post by redraider05 on Aug 23, 2017 12:17:32 GMT -5
Bayou - I PM'd Pixie (I hope..at least I tried) as well, but thought everyone would like to know ASAP. I figured the post could be moved if necessary. 😊
|
|
|
Post by franperirose on Aug 23, 2017 12:18:22 GMT -5
Posting is up on USAjobs. 8/23/17-8/30/17. Today was the first day I've been in the board in months. Glad I did! If I've posted in the wrong place, my apologies and please feel free to move. www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/ViewDetails/476891900I am glad I am not having to try again at the moment, but excited for everyone starting fresh! Best of luck!
|
|
|
Post by Judge McJudgeypants on Aug 23, 2017 12:18:36 GMT -5
So now that this posting is out, when can those already on the register expect the GAL expansion email?
|
|
|
Post by franperirose on Aug 23, 2017 12:21:53 GMT -5
And to confirm, those of us who received a final numerical rating on or after June 2017 are not eligible.
|
|
|
Post by bayou on Aug 23, 2017 12:23:17 GMT -5
So now that this posting is out, when can those already on the register expect the GAL expansion email? The instructions on how to expand (or contract) your GAL are in the announcement. Thank you. I wasn't even going to read the announcement.
|
|
|
Post by Judge McJudgeypants on Aug 23, 2017 12:26:48 GMT -5
So now that this posting is out, when can those already on the register expect the GAL expansion email? The instructions on how to expand (or contract) your GAL are in the announcement. Thanks!! I would have been waiting for an email! THe posting says: Changing Geographical Locations: If you are currently on the ALJ register, you may (but are not required to) change (i.e., add, or remove) your selected geographical location (s) during the job opportunity announcement open period. To change your selection(s), an email stating your request to change your selected locations, must be sent to aljapplication@opm.gov. See the Geographic Availability section in the Assessment Questionnaire for more details. So does anyone know whether the email we send is just a short statement like "I want to expand my GAL" or do we actually send a list of all the additional cities we want to add?
|
|