|
|
Post by JudgeKnot on Feb 1, 2018 18:48:18 GMT -5
This can be updated for self-scheduling dates of 2/5-2/16. Thanks for doing this, JudgeKnot ! Done. |
|
|
|
Post by pumpkin on Feb 1, 2018 19:07:39 GMT -5
I have moved all of the DC invite posts to the appropriate thread. I wish I remembered who started posting in this unrelated thread so I could punish him, but I didn't make a note of it. I imagine it was aa guy as they are the hardest to control and the most likely to screw things up. I have very few problems with the females on the board. Well, except for pumpkin. It wasn’t me - I am busy trying to figure out whether to post at 2am or 3am that NORs are out. |
|
jklaw
New Member
Posts: 7 
|
Post by jklaw on Feb 1, 2018 20:22:15 GMT -5
The 2016 timeline shows the DC testing period spanned 6 months. Is it reasonable to assume it would be the same time frame this time around (assuming a budget is passed), or was there an intervening factor in 2016-2017 that made that time frame longer?
|
|
|
|
Post by ssa on Feb 1, 2018 21:41:47 GMT -5
The 2016 timeline shows the DC testing period spanned 6 months. Is it reasonable to assume it would be the same time frame this time around (assuming a budget is passed), or was there an intervening factor in 2016-2017 that made that time frame longer? People are SWAGing that there are fewer candidates who made it this time around, based on the note in the email about rescheduling happening in June (which suggests, if all testing is finished by then, that this time around it would span only three instead of six months). |
|
|
|
Post by JudgeKnot on Feb 2, 2018 8:26:10 GMT -5
My thought, based on absolutely no inside information, is that TPTB have come to realize that there is a HUGE supply of potential ALJs. Each year, there will be new people interested - and potentially qualified - for the job. That being the case, why continue the past practice of waiting years between each cycle? If they create a register in 2009, and continue using the same list for four years, I would think there would be people on the list in 2013 who are no longer interested in the job, or perhaps even unqualified. Instead of creating a huge register from which they draw names for several years, why not create a new one every 1-2 years, and take the best of them? I'm expecting the DC window will be much less than last time. Probably three months instead of six.
It's interesting to me how many people have posted that they were invited to DC in 2016, and not invited in 2018. What does that say about the selection process? Those people would, presumably, be more developed in their legal skills, but still didn't make the grade. They were cut, I think, because TPTB have concluded they can be much more selective, and not because of some shortcoming on their part. Instead of inviting the top 2,500 people to DC over six months, why not invite the top 1,200 people over three months? It saves them a lot of money, and they still have a substantial pool from which they can draw.
It's never easy to get eliminated from the quest. There's always the self-doubt, wondering, "What did I do wrong?" Don't beat yourself up. Sure, you need to go through the grieving process, but then you can move past it. This is a highly competitive process, and the odds are stacked against every one of you. They have thousands of people who apply, and from that initial pool, only 100-200 get the final call. (I'm doing this from memory. Excuse me if my numbers are off.) As disappointing as it is to be eliminated early, I think it would be better to get axed at one of the first stages, before spending hundreds, or thousands, on a trip to DC. It gives you certainty now. You don't have to hold on to hope for years that, someday, maybe someday, you'll get the call inviting you to Craplandia. You can more securely move on with your life and make other decisions that you might have postponed if you were on the register. Cheers to you all, and have a blessed weekend.
|
|
|
|
Post by foghorn on Feb 2, 2018 10:59:39 GMT -5
My thought, based on absolutely no inside information, is that TPTB have come to realize that there is a HUGE supply of potential ALJs. Each year, there will be new people interested - and potentially qualified - for the job. That being the case, why continue the past practice of waiting years between each cycle? If they create a register in 2009, and continue using the same list for four years, I would think there would be people on the list in 2013 who are no longer interested in the job, or perhaps even unqualified. Instead of creating a huge register from which they draw names for several years, why not create a new one every 1-2 years, and take the best of them? I'm expecting the DC window will be much less than last time. Probably three months instead of six. It's interesting to me how many people have posted that they were invited to DC in 2016, and not invited in 2018. What does that say about the selection process? Those people would, presumably, be more developed in their legal skills, but still didn't make the grade. They were cut, I think, because TPTB have concluded they can be much more selective, and not because of some shortcoming on their part. Instead of inviting the top 2,500 people to DC over six months, why not invite the top 1,200 people over three months? It saves them a lot of money, and they still have a substantial pool from which they can draw. It's never easy to get eliminated from the quest. There's always the self-doubt, wondering, "What did I do wrong?" Don't beat yourself up. Sure, you need to go through the grieving process, but then you can move past it. This is a highly competitive process, and the odds are stacked against every one of you. They have thousands of people who apply, and from that initial pool, only 100-200 get the final call. (I'm doing this from memory. Excuse me if my numbers are off.) As disappointing as it is to be eliminated early, I think it would be better to get axed at one of the first stages, before spending hundreds, or thousands, on a trip to DC. It gives you certainty now. You don't have to hold on to hope for years that, someday, maybe someday, you'll get the call inviting you to Craplandia. You can more securely move on with your life and make other decisions that you might have postponed if you were on the register. Cheers to you all, and have a blessed weekend.
If the sun shines brighter and you win the appeal--you prepare, do the best, but know that it's a very long haul, even if you get a score you may not get an interview, if you get an interview you may not get an offer.
It's an app. A gov't app. So you don't get called in,everyone knows you or of you, you chat about whether you want partnership or not, your expectations then you do the contract --or in some cases just the handshake.
It's artisanally (or not) craft your app package, send it out, maybe it's referred, maybe not, you may hear you may not you may get an interview--or not- you may hear after that--but likely won't.
So once more internalize the lessons, transfer energy from the anxiety bucket into the prep bucket. And in the meantime--keep your eye on your plan B's and C's.
|
|
|
|
Post by SPN Lifer on Feb 3, 2018 3:45:47 GMT -5
My thought, based on absolutely no inside information, is that TPTB have come to realize that there is a HUGE supply of potential ALJs. Each year, there will be new people interested - and potentially qualified - for the job. That being the case, why continue the past practice of waiting years between each cycle? If they create a register in 2009, and continue using the same list for four years, I would think there would be people on the list in 2013 who are no longer interested in the job, or perhaps even unqualified. Instead of creating a huge register from which they draw names for several years, why not create a new one every 1-2 years, and take the best of them? I'm expecting the DC window will be much less than last time. Probably three months instead of six. It's interesting to me how many people have posted that they were invited to DC in 2016, and not invited in 2018. What does that say about the selection process? Those people would, presumably, be more developed in their legal skills, but still didn't make the grade. They were cut, I think, because TPTB have concluded they can be much more selective, and not because of some shortcoming on their part. Instead of inviting the top 2,500 people to DC over six months, why not invite the top 1,200 people over three months? It saves them a lot of money, and they still have a substantial pool from which they can draw. It's never easy to get eliminated from the quest. There's always the self-doubt, wondering, "What did I do wrong?" Don't beat yourself up. Sure, you need to go through the grieving process, but then you can move past it. This is a highly competitive process, and the odds are stacked against every one of you. They have thousands of people who apply, and from that initial pool, only 100-200 get the final call. (I'm doing this from memory. Excuse me if my numbers are off.) As disappointing as it is to be eliminated early, I think it would be better to get axed at one of the first stages, before spending hundreds, or thousands, on a trip to DC. It gives you certainty now. You don't have to hold on to hope for years that, someday, maybe someday, you'll get the call inviting you to Craplandia. You can more securely move on with your life and make other decisions that you might have postponed if you were on the register. Cheers to you all, and have a blessed weekend. Use of the term "Craplandia" is highly offensive to its demonym Craplandians. It is at least as bigoted toward those people and places so denoted as "s**thole countries" is toward its international counterparts. Even when uttered in a self-deprecating, humorous vein, it is grossly insulting to others so implicated, and unworthy of being used by a federal ALJ or aspirant. Can you imagine the vexillological consequences? There is a reason the counterpart emoji (steaming pile of poo) was rejected by the relevant authorities. Thank you, fellow board members, for your consideration. Live and learn! |
|
|
|
Post by bayou on Feb 3, 2018 7:35:31 GMT -5
My thought, based on absolutely no inside information, is that TPTB have come to realize that there is a HUGE supply of potential ALJs. Each year, there will be new people interested - and potentially qualified - for the job. That being the case, why continue the past practice of waiting years between each cycle? If they create a register in 2009, and continue using the same list for four years, I would think there would be people on the list in 2013 who are no longer interested in the job, or perhaps even unqualified. Instead of creating a huge register from which they draw names for several years, why not create a new one every 1-2 years, and take the best of them? I'm expecting the DC window will be much less than last time. Probably three months instead of six. It's interesting to me how many people have posted that they were invited to DC in 2016, and not invited in 2018. What does that say about the selection process? Those people would, presumably, be more developed in their legal skills, but still didn't make the grade. They were cut, I think, because TPTB have concluded they can be much more selective, and not because of some shortcoming on their part. Instead of inviting the top 2,500 people to DC over six months, why not invite the top 1,200 people over three months? It saves them a lot of money, and they still have a substantial pool from which they can draw. It's never easy to get eliminated from the quest. There's always the self-doubt, wondering, "What did I do wrong?" Don't beat yourself up. Sure, you need to go through the grieving process, but then you can move past it. This is a highly competitive process, and the odds are stacked against every one of you. They have thousands of people who apply, and from that initial pool, only 100-200 get the final call. (I'm doing this from memory. Excuse me if my numbers are off.) As disappointing as it is to be eliminated early, I think it would be better to get axed at one of the first stages, before spending hundreds, or thousands, on a trip to DC. It gives you certainty now. You don't have to hold on to hope for years that, someday, maybe someday, you'll get the call inviting you to Craplandia. You can more securely move on with your life and make other decisions that you might have postponed if you were on the register. Cheers to you all, and have a blessed weekend. Use of the term "Craplandia" is highly offensive to its demonym Craplandians. It is at least as bigoted toward those people and places so denoted as "s**thole countries" is toward its international counterparts. Even when uttered in a self-deprecating, humorous vein, it is grossly insulting to others so implicated, and unworthy of being used by a federal ALJ or aspirant. Can you imagine the vexillological consequences? There is a reason the counterpart emoji (steaming pile of poo) was rejected by the relevant authorities. Thank you, fellow board members, for your consideration. Live and learn! Does this mean I can't wear my Craplandia tshirts any longer? How else do I commemorate my trips to big cities? |
|
|
|
Post by JudgeKnot on Feb 3, 2018 8:28:06 GMT -5
If you're a fan of vexillology, you can always have Fun With Flags, with Dr. Sheldon Cooper.
|
|
|
|
Post by alohastate on Feb 3, 2018 13:50:37 GMT -5
The 2016 timeline shows the DC testing period spanned 6 months. Is it reasonable to assume it would be the same time frame this time around (assuming a budget is passed), or was there an intervening factor in 2016-2017 that made that time frame longer? People are SWAGing that there are fewer candidates who made it this time around, based on the note in the email about rescheduling happening in June (which suggests, if all testing is finished by then, that this time around it would span only three instead of six months). And I think this is pretty good SWAGing. In 8/2016, when the same scheduling invitation email came out, it stated that rescheduling was "anticipated in Spring 2017." The 2016 DC testing window was mid-Sept. to mid-March. So this gives a bit of S to the WAG that the upcoming DC testing window will likely cover March, April, and May, with rescheduling in June. This suggests that the 2018 DC group is about 1/2 the size of the 2016 DC group, as the scheduling window has been about cut in 1/2. |
|
|
|
Post by phoenixrisingALJ on Feb 3, 2018 13:52:35 GMT -5
One persons craplandia is another’s paradise!
|
|
|
|
Post by SPN Lifer on Feb 3, 2018 15:03:42 GMT -5
One person’s craplandia is another’s paradise! Exactly! So don’t dis’ it. |
|
|
|
Post by JudgeKnot on Feb 5, 2018 8:29:47 GMT -5
Timeline updated to show DC testing dates. Good luck y'all.
|
|
|
|
Post by roymcavoy on Feb 5, 2018 21:16:14 GMT -5
I adapted this from a similar thread that was created for the 2016 application by tiberiustribble , thinking it would serve well to have this info in one place for future review/update. I've included the 2016 dates for quick comparison. If there are other important details that should be added, let me know and I'll figure out how to update it. And, as events have passed, remind me and I'll update those as well. | Event | 2017 App | 2016 App | | Application Period Opens | 8/23/17 | 3/29/16 | | Application Period Closes | 8/30/17 (extended to 9/5/17) | 4/8/16 | | Invitations to take Online Component | 11/6/17 | 6/8/16 | | Online Component Open | 11/27/17-12/8/17 | 6/20/16-7/1/16 | | Invitations to DC Testing | 1/30/18 | 8/12/16 | | Self-Scheduling Opens for DC Testing | 2/5/18-2/16/18 | 8/15/16 | DC Testing
| 3/5/18-6/7/18 | 9/12/16-3/24/17 | | AM Status Changes to Complete or SD |
| 5/25/17 | | NORs Released |
| 6/13/17 | | Notice to ALJ Candidate (ODAR Cert Notification) |
| 7/11/17 | | Scheduling of ODAR Interviews |
| 7/17/17 | | Interview Dates |
| 7/31/17-8/15/17 | | Medicare Cert |
|
| | First Offers made (ODAR cert only) |
| 8/31/17-9/15/17 | | Second certificate |
|
| | Approximate applicants |
| 5500 | | Approximate DC Testers |
| 2100 | | Approximate NOR scores |
|
|
The application deadline was extended in 2017. General consensus is that the extension was due to Hurricane Harvey, although no official reason has been discovered as of this edit on 9/2/17. One offer was reported as of 8/31/17. Others were made 9/1/17, then paused for Labor Day weekend. Resumed 9/5/17. Offers believed to have ended on 9/15/17. 2/5/18 updated to show DC Testing dates. JK... something you may want to consider adding to your chart is the date of the last set of SSA certs before NORs were released. That will be a point of concern later on... never apples-to-apples, I know, but it may be an indicator of when SSAs willingness to do a cert ends with an impending register refresh... FYI, for the June 2017 NORs, the last set of certs was 2/13/17 |
|
|
|
Post by Pixie on Feb 5, 2018 23:26:53 GMT -5
Any idea where the interviews will be held? I think this question would be better asked in the 2018 DC testing logistics thread. So that is where I will move it. Pixie |
|
|
|
Post by SPN Lifer on Feb 22, 2018 11:28:15 GMT -5
In the left column, perhaps the three mentions of ODAR could be updated to OHO.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pixie on Feb 22, 2018 12:07:58 GMT -5
In the left column, perhaps the three mentions of ODAR could be updated to OHO. What was the date ODAR became HOHO? |
|
|
|
Post by SPN Lifer on Feb 22, 2018 12:19:28 GMT -5
I believe OHO officially came to be at the beginning of FY 2018, on Sunday, 1 October 2017. From the Chief Cheerleader: Judges, Now that Fiscal Year 2017 has drawn to a close, I want to thank you for your dedication and hard work, as well as congratulate you on your achievements. This was a challenging year for ODAR (now OHO). In addition to our budget constraints, staffing challenges, and regulatory changes, our nation experienced multiple natural disasters. Despite these obstacles, you continued to hear and decide cases so that 685,657 Americans could receive decisions. Your dedication to public service has yielded great results. This is the first time in four years that we have met our dispositional goal. In fact, we exceeded it by more than 3,000 dispositions. Further, you have made tremendous strides in addressing our pending hearing requests by reducing the backlog by 87,000 cases just since last January. Notably, we now have fewer people waiting for decisions than at any point since July 2015. Given the large number of cases pending, it is no surprise that processing time remains a concern; nevertheless, we met this year’s average processing-time target of 605 days. As our backlog continues to shrink, I am confident that we will see a similar drop in processing time. I am proud of your accomplishments this year. Your impressive performance underscores my belief that we have a solid ALJ corps (which only became stronger with the recent addition of 103 new judges). As you continue to work hard to ensure our success, I promise to do my part to support you, improve our processes, and update our technology in a way that makes your jobs easier and allows you to be more efficient. With this in mind, I traveled to 47 offices around the country over the past nine months in an effort to get a sense of what is happening in a wide-range of hearing offices and to listen to your thoughts and concerns. I have reflected on your remarks and I will strive to make tangible improvements in our system to assist you this year. Together, I look forward to sharing an outstanding 2018. On behalf of the Office of Hearings Operations and the public we serve, please accept my heartfelt thanks. Simply stated: you rock! --Judge Nagle |
|
|
|
Post by Pixie on Feb 22, 2018 12:28:54 GMT -5
As those events occurred while OHO was ODAR, I think I will leave it alone as it is historically accurate. The OP, roymcavoy, could change it if he thought accuracy would be better served as OHO. As an aside, who comes up with these names? When do we get our real name back? Pixie |
|
|
|
Post by fowlfinder on Feb 22, 2018 12:34:26 GMT -5
I think they were just getting ready for Christmas in october. Oho oho oho.
|
|
