|
|
Post by gary on Aug 3, 2017 19:32:56 GMT -5
I am really surprised they are going to reopen rather than go to the lower scoring subgroup as they did last time. Of course I was surprised when they cut so many applicants at the DC stage of the examination. Pixie So does this mean they probably won't issue another cert in the new fiscal year for folks on the current (2016) register? I would say no. They've got a whole bunch of fresh faces on the register from the recently completed refresh and have just begun to look at you. I think the idea is to have new candidates put on the register before they run short of eligibles they're interested in hiring. In other words, they are trying to get the hiring conveyor belt going and to keep it going without interruption for lack of enough "good" candidates. |
|
|
|
Post by lucy on Aug 3, 2017 19:34:53 GMT -5
I am really surprised they are going to reopen rather than go to the lower scoring subgroup as they did last time. Of course I was surprised when they cut so many applicants at the DC stage of the examination. Pixie So does this mean they probably won't issue another cert in the new fiscal year for folks on the current (2016) register? I wouldn't think that at all. After the 2013 folks were added, I think certs occurred every 4-6 months. And remember, it took 14 months for us to get NOR results after applying in 2016. Certs were occurring during that time period for those already on the register. I am choosing to be optimistic and believe that the reopening of testing signals a lot of hiring is just around the corner. Including 100-125 from this cert! 😊 |
|
|
|
Post by legalbythesea on Aug 3, 2017 19:35:13 GMT -5
So does this mean they probably won't issue another cert in the new fiscal year for folks on the current (2016) register? I would say no. They've got a whole bunch of fresh faces on the register from the recently completed refresh and have just begun to look at you. I think the idea is to have new candidates put on the register before they run short of eligibles they're interested in hiring. In other words, they are trying to get the hiring conveyor belt going and to keep it going without interruption for lack of enough "good" candidates. No, meaning yes? I.e. I think you mean they will issue another cert. (Sorry to be obtuse) That's reassuring. |
|
|
|
Post by gary on Aug 3, 2017 19:35:59 GMT -5
Ha  I would say he would surely be on the next cert, It would not make sense to reapply. Thanks! It's hard to discern the meaning of the new testing when you're an English teacher and not in the legal biz. I was afraid that meant that they would not be doing a second cert from this current group. Whew. I appreciate your easing my mind a bit! Husband is busy preparing for a huge trial (he's a very experienced litigator for a large government agency; how's that for ambiguity?), so I took over the board-watching duties. ;-)Â What they're doing is adding to the current register. It'll probably be a year or more before anybody is added. During that year, I anticipate SSA will continue hiring new ALJs. Once the new people are added, the old people who haven't yet been hired will remain on the register. |
|
|
|
Post by gary on Aug 3, 2017 19:42:29 GMT -5
I would say no. They've got a whole bunch of fresh faces on the register from the recently completed refresh and have just begun to look at you. I think the idea is to have new candidates put on the register before they run short of eligibles they're interested in hiring. In other words, they are trying to get the hiring conveyor belt going and to keep it going without interruption for lack of enough "good" candidates. No, meaning yes? I.e. I think you mean they will issue another cert. Â (Sorry to be obtuse) That's reassuring. I was answering the question: "So does this mean they probably won't issue another cert in the new fiscal year for folks on the current (2016) register?" No, it does not mean they probably won't issue more certs in the new fiscal year. In other words, I think there will be more certs before they complete this next round of testing. |
|
|
|
Post by legalbythesea on Aug 3, 2017 19:59:37 GMT -5
No, meaning yes? I.e. I think you mean they will issue another cert. (Sorry to be obtuse) That's reassuring. I was answering the question: "So does this mean they probably won't issue another cert in the new fiscal year for folks on the current (2016) register?" No, it does not mean they probably won't issue more certs in the new fiscal year. In other words, I think there will be more certs before they complete this next round of testing. This illustrates my difficulty with cross examination, as judges have told me over and over. |
|
|
|
Post by franperirose on Aug 3, 2017 20:02:00 GMT -5
No, meaning yes? I.e. I think you mean they will issue another cert. Â (Sorry to be obtuse) That's reassuring. I was answering the question: "So does this mean they probably won't issue another cert in the new fiscal year for folks on the current (2016) register?" No, it does not mean they probably won't issue more certs in the new fiscal year. In other words, I think there will be more certs before they complete this next round of testing. you seem to be indefatigable! Thank you for all your help! |
|
|
|
Post by aljwishhope on Aug 3, 2017 20:03:36 GMT -5
I would be shocked if they did not issue another cert. As stated- it will take more than a year for applicants to be added to the register.
Not only will the register shrink from hiring but some candidates having applied as early as 2013 may simply no longer be interested.
Previously there was Intel that the goal was to have more frequent exams.
And maybe just maybe OMHA will hire.
|
|
|
|
Post by Serious, J. on Aug 3, 2017 20:09:05 GMT -5
It's been a long time since I looked at an ALJ JOA, but if I recall correctly, if you are currently on the register you cannot reapply. My recollection is that it was better to have no score than a low score, because if you have no score you can reapply.
gary is the expert on this all things so I will defer to his wisdom and infallible memory.
|
|
|
|
Post by gary on Aug 3, 2017 20:17:55 GMT -5
It's been a long time since I looked at an ALJ JOA, but if I recall correctly, if you are currently on the register you cannot reapply. My recollection is that it was better to have no score than a low score, because if you have no score you can reapply. gary is the expert on this all things so I will defer to his wisdom and infallible memory. I think if you received a final numerical rating, i.e., a score, you can't retake the exam until at least a year has passed. That would mean that those added to the register this year would not be able to retake the exam if they received scores. |
|
|
|
Post by fowlfinder on Aug 3, 2017 20:30:01 GMT -5
Well that takes the stressful wonder of should I or should I not (a little clash please christina ) with a refresh. |
|
|
|
Post by franperirose on Aug 3, 2017 20:42:15 GMT -5
It's been a long time since I looked at an ALJ JOA, but if I recall correctly, if you are currently on the register you cannot reapply. My recollection is that it was better to have no score than a low score, because if you have no score you can reapply. gary is the expert on this all things so I will defer to his wisdom and infallible memory. I think if you received a final numerical rating, i.e., a score, you can't retake the exam until at least a year has passed. That would mean that those added to the register this year would not be able to retake the exam if they received scores. I wonder if it varies with each announcent. I just found this in the linked documents from the 2016 JOA: Retaking the ALJ Examination: You may retake the ALJ examination when the examination is open to the receipt of new applications if: • You received a NOR indicating any "ineligible" rating at any stage of the ALJ examination assessment process • You received a final numerical rating before November 2015. That seems to allow for reapplication within less than one year. Source: staffing.opm.gov/pdf/Administrative_Law_Judge_How_You_Will_Be_Evaluated.pdf |
|
|
|
Post by montyburns on Aug 3, 2017 20:45:50 GMT -5
I think if you received a final numerical rating, i.e., a score, you can't retake the exam until at least a year has passed. That would mean that those added to the register this year would not be able to retake the exam if they received scores. I wonder if it varies with each announcent. I just found this in the linked documents from the 2016 JOA: Retaking the ALJ Examination: You may retake the ALJ examination when the examination is open to the receipt of new applications if: • You received a NOR indicating any "ineligible" rating at any stage of the ALJ examination assessment process • You received a final numerical rating before November 2015. That seems to allow for reapplication within less than one year. Source: staffing.opm.gov/pdf/Administrative_Law_Judge_How_You_Will_Be_Evaluated.pdfNov 2015 was when they let in those from the lower scoring subgroup. Expect the new joa to update that to June 17 or whenever y'all got your scores |
|
|
|
Post by franperirose on Aug 3, 2017 20:50:10 GMT -5
I wonder if it varies with each announcent. I just found this in the linked documents from the 2016 JOA: Retaking the ALJ Examination: You may retake the ALJ examination when the examination is open to the receipt of new applications if: • You received a NOR indicating any "ineligible" rating at any stage of the ALJ examination assessment process • You received a final numerical rating before November 2015. That seems to allow for reapplication within less than one year. Source: staffing.opm.gov/pdf/Administrative_Law_Judge_How_You_Will_Be_Evaluated.pdfNov 2015 was when they let in those from the lower scoring subgroup. Expect the new joa to update that to June 17 or whenever y'all got your scores I guess it makes sense if you think about it. I think there would be a greater advantage to retaking it so quickly. |
|
|
|
Post by sweetnlow on Aug 3, 2017 21:01:11 GMT -5
I just made it through the line and am securely seated in my roller coaster seat. I don't care if they open up the line again. I've been in this line since 2013. There is no way I'm hopping off this ride to wait in line again if I already have a seat. I also don't care if they add more cars in case most of us fall out at the free fall interview hill up ahead. I will make it to the end of this ride!! I may throw up but I shall kiss the ground when I arrive at the end and am allowed to take the exit ramp to ALJ land. Hands in the air my friends!!
|
|
|
|
Post by judgymcjudgypants on Aug 3, 2017 21:24:08 GMT -5
As a 2016'er, I gotta say the timing is . . . almost rude, as our group hasn't even weathered a single cert, yet! It's kinda like being stood up on a blind date! Was it something we said? J |
|
|
|
Post by msp on Aug 3, 2017 21:26:09 GMT -5
Based on what you relayed, stevil, it sounds like they may be moving on down to the next higher-scoring subgroup. I wish everyone in that group the best of luck! And thanks for sharing the intel! They are not doing that. Well, fine. Whatever they're doing, I wish the new applicants good luck. I've had my interview, my references have been checked, I left my baskets of kittens, puppies and cookies for my interviewers, there's not much left to do except root for the best candidates to be selected. |
|
|
|
Post by bayou on Aug 3, 2017 21:32:12 GMT -5
This sucks. There is no bright side to this unless it means that the recent intel that SSA is headed to attrition level hiring is incorrect. Absent this signaling an intent to increase the hiring levels even more, this means that those that were just added won't receive multiple considerations like the last group from 2013.
Even if they were hiring at 250 per year, it would have taken 5 years to exhaust the register, so it would have made sense for them to wait about 3 years to start this. I think this is bad news for those with lower scores, as it will be hard for them to be considered over multiple certs. If they start refreshing every two years, then there will be a constant flow of higher scores onto the register.
Plus, even if you have a higher score and made the first certs with a smaller GAL, it means that you will have less time for them to hit the right hiring combo to hit your GAL.
This will only benefit those with a high score and small GAL that want to expand their GAL and of course, those didn't make the cut at some point in the last go around. So good for those that have been on this board and thought that they were out of the running for 4 or so years.
|
|
|
|
Post by prescient on Aug 4, 2017 5:53:11 GMT -5
This sucks. There is no bright side to this unless it means that the recent intel that SSA is headed to attrition level hiring is incorrect. Absent this signaling an intent to increase the hiring levels even more, this means that those that were just added won't receive multiple considerations like the last group from 2013. Even if they were hiring at 250 per year, it would have taken 5 years to exhaust the register, so it would have made sense for them to wait about 3 years to start this. I think this is bad news for those with lower scores, as it will be hard for them to be considered over multiple certs. If they start refreshing every two years, then there will be a constant flow of higher scores onto the register. Plus, even if you have a higher score and made the first certs with a smaller GAL, it means that you will have less time for them to hit the right hiring combo to hit your GAL. This will only benefit those with a high score and small GAL that want to expand their GAL and of course, those didn't make the cut at some point in the last go around. So good for those that have been on this board and thought that they were out of the running for 4 or so years. This is my take away as well. The traditional thinking that even if you have a low score, "as long as you have a wide open GAL, they will likely eventually get to you" is over. Unless they plan for some massive hiring, which all indications is that they will not, there will only be a few certs pulled from the current register before the next wave is added. This is a massive boost to 10 pt vets, who traditionally receive the bulk of hires from the 1st 2 certs, but for the rest of us, it's just made it even harder to break through. |
|
|
|
Post by bayou on Aug 4, 2017 6:27:44 GMT -5
I wouldn't think that at all. After the 2013 folks were added, I think certs occurred every 4-6 months. And remember, it took 14 months for us to get NOR results after applying in 2016. Certs were occurring during that time period for those already on the register. I am choosing to be optimistic and believe that the reopening of testing signals a lot of hiring is just around the corner. Including 100-125 from this cert! 😊 There will always be lots of hiring just around the corner! So that's good news! This is not a fun job and about 100 plus retire each fiscal year, I like it, but I love going to work every day until I'm at least 70!
There will not be 100-125 hired off of this Cert, too many and ODAR can't train them before the big "slow down" which happens every year in Nov/Dec. But, that only means that by the end of January, there will be another Cert. The refresh means 100% nothing to ODAR, they will hire off the register until there is no one to hire if the TPTB believe the new hire can do the job!
Tiger
I think it is possible for them to hire 125 and train them timely. When these certs were requested, we had pretty solid intel through reliable sources via Pixie that said the request to OPM was for certs for 140 hires. That changed after the certs were received but I have to think if that was the original intent and the intent changed not based on the ability to train such a large class, then they had a plan to train 140 and thus, 125 is viable. What causes me pause about the current 125 rumor is that Pixie hasn't confirmed yet through her sources and the reasons for dropping from 140 to 70 haven't been resolved. Oh well, outta my control and this will be answered in a few weeks. |
|
