|
|
Post by counsel on Apr 25, 2008 10:48:31 GMT -5
Which sites?
|
|
|
|
Post by privateatty on Apr 25, 2008 16:17:46 GMT -5
What's with the numbers before the locations in the other thread? Is that the region?
|
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Apr 26, 2008 11:01:51 GMT -5
This may have been covered before. I think it was. But, is the "rule of three" still relevant? Are candidates certified in groups of three to each spot? For example, only one of my choices is on the new cert. So, am I competing with two others or the number who responded to the poll as certified to the same city?
|
|
|
|
Post by pm on Apr 26, 2008 11:08:48 GMT -5
The rule of three is always relevant with respect to who is being hired. These large SSA certs are not made up of 3 for each city.
|
|
mango
Full Member
Posts: 50 
|
Post by mango on Apr 28, 2008 18:16:54 GMT -5
40-50
|
|
|
|
Post by Asterisk on Apr 28, 2008 18:37:46 GMT -5
Mango, any particular reason for the 40-50 #?
While that might be right, I'm optimistically going for the 55+ [which would sync with the cert of 155+] mentioned here and on the other board, although I suppose no one other than true insiders knows for sure, as that info is "not available to applicants"
|
|
|
|
Post by happy on Apr 28, 2008 20:06:50 GMT -5
Essentially, the Commish DID say he was hiring more. He said the additional 40 to make up the 175 and some to expand the NHCs. My credible Regional Office source says 54-55 is consistent with what they have been led to expect.
|
|
|
|
Post by nonamouse on Apr 30, 2008 16:15:50 GMT -5
Essentially, the Commish DID say he was hiring more. He said the additional 40 to make up the 175 and some to expand the NHCs. My credible Regional Office source says 54-55 is consistent with what they have been led to expect. I also heard 55 from a very reliable source inside the agency. |
|
|
|
Post by morgullord on May 1, 2008 8:13:30 GMT -5
That will be staffed with transfers until it is up and running.
|
|
|
|
Post by Asterisk on May 3, 2008 20:12:22 GMT -5
This was posted on the other board at 7:11 pm (5/1):
"170 candidates are on the current certificate. There will be 20 to 25 new interviews of people not on the old certificate. The scores being considered are lower than most think. "
No way of knowing the accuracy or source, but it is interesting, and doesn't seem to outlandish to be a prank
|
|
|
|
Post by Asterisk on May 3, 2008 20:13:16 GMT -5
sorry, it was posted on 5/3...
|
|
|
|
Post by jagghagg on May 4, 2008 7:58:37 GMT -5
This was posted on the other board at 7:11 pm (5/1): ...The scores being considered are lower than most think. " And, once again, the scores only matter on the Register, not on the Cert. It stands to reason, of course, that lower "scores" are making it from the Register onto the most recent Cert because some 150 scores are now "off" the cert (and scheduled into classes being held in Baltimore). To repeat information we all know, the score indicates you are "qualified" to be an ALJ and ranks you on the Register and it, along with your geographic availability, governs how soon OPM gets to you to put you on the Cert, but once on the Cert, your score becomes inconsequential. |
|
|
|
Post by jagghagg on May 5, 2008 5:08:00 GMT -5
your score still matters even if on the certificate. the higher your score, the better the chance that you make the top 3 for a location. Candidates referred on OPM certificates are ranked by score and veterans preference. Normally, at least three candidates are referred, with additional candidates if more than one vacancy is being filled. For selection, the rule of three applies. This means that selection must be made from the top three candidates on the certificate, keeping in mind that you cannot bypass a candidate with veterans preference to select a candidate with no preference, unless the supervisor can adequately justify doing so on security or suitability grounds. On this Cert, the chances are good that if you are on it, -- what with the multiple location availability of most everyone --- you are already one of the top three for at least one location. Hence, scores become less and less important. |
|
|
|
Post by jagghagg on May 5, 2008 8:48:15 GMT -5
jagghagg, I respectfully disagree. we went round and round on this topic for the last certificate. Okey-doak, Boley!  Bottom line, of course, is that there is no sense for anyone to wrap themselves around an axel over the Rule of Three, Vet Preferences, or anything that SSA will do in their quest to fill the positions. I expect SSA will act within the legal parameters that exist and the end result will be whatever it will be. I guess I've had years of training in this Zen art of accepting the machinations of the federal personnel system..... |
|
Bottom line, of course, is that there is no sense for anyone to wrap themselves around an axel over the Rule of Three, Vet Preferences, or anything that SSA will do in their quest to fill the positions. I expect SSA will act within the legal parameters that exist and the end result will be whatever it will be. I guess I've had years of training in this Zen art of accepting the machinations of the federal personnel system.....