|
|
Post by roymcavoy on Jul 11, 2019 7:30:51 GMT -5
fowlfinder is correct. In the past, it was explicitly stated in the cert email that you would have 24 hours to respond to the offer. One of the main reasons for the short turnaround time was that the next offer(s) were sometimes contingent on the acceptance/rejection of the offer currently being considered by the applicant. So, because the hiring process came to a halt every time an applicant wanted to take their allotted and deserved 24 hours, it became less of personal decision and more of a group debate about whether or not you should be prepared to say yes on the call. Even more so in cases where the agency was up against the end of the FY. I believe in 2016 the agency did not make as many offers as it wanted because more applicants than the agency took the permitted 24 hours. In the current process, I don’t recall seeing anything in writing that explicitly requires a response in 24 hours. Because the offers should not be contingent on each other, it’s very possible that more time could be allotted. In the recent past (maybe 10 to 15 years), if a selectee declined an offer, the location she was offered wouldn't be filled during that cycle of hiring. In other words, there was no alternate candidate who would be offered the same location if the original selectee declined. May have been different in the past, but I doubt it. Pixie someone posted on one of the threads that because of interviews and the cities that the ‘attractive’ candidates identified as their top choices, SSA was planning to hire more ALJs into the cities that were popularly identified and not into those not chosen (I believe the analogy was instead of 1 each into A, B, and C, it would be 2 into A and 1 into B). This seemingly supports everything everyone has said on this thread the past few posts. |
|
|
|
Post by Pixie on Jul 11, 2019 7:59:14 GMT -5
In the recent past (maybe 10 to 15 years), if a selectee declined an offer, the location she was offered wouldn't be filled during that cycle of hiring. In other words, there was no alternate candidate who would be offered the same location if the original selectee declined. May have been different in the past, but I doubt it. Pixie someone posted on one of the threads that because of interviews and the cities that the ‘attractive’ candidates identified as their top choices, SSA was planning to hire more ALJs into the cities that were popularly identified and not into those not chosen (I believe the analogy was instead of 1 each into A, B, and C, it would be 2 into A and 1 into B). This seemingly supports everything everyone has said on this thread the past few posts. That may well be, but I would be surprised if TPTB have an alternative candidate for a location in the event there is a declination. The selection process utilized in the past was complex enough without adding additional levels of complexity. Although without the rule of three, and the involvement of OPM, the process should be simplified. Pixie |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 11, 2019 8:05:02 GMT -5
someone posted on one of the threads that because of interviews and the cities that the ‘attractive’ candidates identified as their top choices, SSA was planning to hire more ALJs into the cities that were popularly identified and not into those not chosen (I believe the analogy was instead of 1 each into A, B, and C, it would be 2 into A and 1 into B). This seemingly supports everything everyone has said on this thread the past few posts. That may well be, but I would be surprised if TPTB have an alternative candidate for a location in the event there is a declination. The selection process utilized in the past was complex enough without adding additional levels of complexity. Although without the rule of three, and the involvement of OPM, the process should be simplified. Pixie
So, SSA is going to select the 35 they want, and then if 5 decline, only hire 30?
I guess that makes sense. I can't imagine the committee advising the hiring will be sticking around in Falls Church while calls are being made, and there are so many possible permutations of declinations that it would be a huge task to try and sort out the butterfly effects.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prrple on Jul 11, 2019 8:38:47 GMT -5
That may well be, but I would be surprised if TPTB have an alternative candidate for a location in the event there is a declination. The selection process utilized in the past was complex enough without adding additional levels of complexity. Although without the rule of three, and the involvement of OPM, the process should be simplified. Pixie
So, SSA is going to select the 35 they want, and then if 5 decline, only hire 30?
I guess that makes sense. I can't imagine the committee advising the hiring will be sticking around in Falls Church while calls are being made, and there are so many possible permutations of declinations that it would be a huge task to try and sort out the butterfly effects.
The matrix is not as complex as when the rule of 3 applied, so it would be possible to have a tier of second choice candidates to offer jobs in the event of declination. Might need a spreadsheet, but I don't think it would even require a pivot table.
Since it wouldn't be nearly as hard as in the past to have a layer of people to offer the position to if some decline, and declinations are a known possibility, here's hoping that they do.
|
|
|
|
Post by dshawn on Jul 11, 2019 8:40:32 GMT -5
No pressure from me. Just sharing our family’s approach. We planned for contingencies including, moving on if no offer came. I would assume that is a good quality in an ALJ candidate.
I guess I just misread your post. I am still a little punchy because before we even got a shot the latest batch of new ALJs has already been described here as “mediocre.” My apologies to you.
I do agree with the impact on others comment and more time is preferable to wrap-up practice and notify clients. That comes after the acceptance period though—which, as I stated, really should not be a surprise. I agree it is unfair/unprofessional to allow only a few days from acceptance to report date. This would make meeting one’s professional obligations more difficult than it otherwise has to be.
Luckily, I did not have to deal with this as I have been afforded more than a reasonable amount of time.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 11, 2019 8:43:10 GMT -5
I don't know...It depends on if you are going to move people based on first, second, third choices as well:
We were going to offer X their number 3 city, but Y declined their number 1, so we now are going to move X, or do we offer the number 2 choice for the city Y declined.
And so on down the line.
And who even has the authority to make those changes? The people making the calls? I think that would be unlikely. So after every declination you'd have to consult with someone up the chain.
Albeit, I went to law school because I'm bad at math, but seems like it could get pretty complicated pretty quickly.
Or everyone could just say "YES" |
|
|
|
Post by Prrple on Jul 11, 2019 9:00:57 GMT -5
Without Rule of 3, they can make the initial round of offers, let the dust settle, and look at a list of hiring committee approved alternates to see whether any approved alternates match the declination cities.
What I just described was not possible under the old system. It is an example of an easy approach (that I just made up) that they could choose under the new system.
No preferences and no rule of 3 = they can be as simple or complex in terms of making offers among the candidates who made it onto this final list of eligible candidates that they created.
|
|
|
|
Post by arkstfan on Jul 11, 2019 10:00:24 GMT -5
Agree and if you want, you can do what I did. I accepted and then said oh where is it? That's exactly what I said. I was in play for two or three locations and was just happy to get the call. Pixie When I was called the board was a blast because you could watch here as the offers started in the east and began moving across the country. When I picked up the phone, I was convinced I was going to receive an offer at one of three locations within three hours of my home because there were reported offers for most of the places to the east of my location except the two closest. Offer was for one of those three, I expected it would be at that point. |
|
|
|
Post by roymcavoy on Jul 11, 2019 10:26:50 GMT -5
someone posted on one of the threads that because of interviews and the cities that the ‘attractive’ candidates identified as their top choices, SSA was planning to hire more ALJs into the cities that were popularly identified and not into those not chosen (I believe the analogy was instead of 1 each into A, B, and C, it would be 2 into A and 1 into B). This seemingly supports everything everyone has said on this thread the past few posts. That may well be, but I would be surprised if TPTB have an alternative candidate for a location in the event there is a declination. The selection process utilized in the past was complex enough without adding additional levels of complexity. Although without the rule of three, and the involvement of OPM, the process should be simplified. Pixie my point was that the earlier posts supports what you said: if they have identified the 35 they want and are sending multiples to the same city, I can’t imagine they would replace a candidate who rejects an offer for city A |
|
|
|
Post by desert2beach on Jul 11, 2019 10:40:00 GMT -5
I'm somewhat shocked that Pixie gave an answer on the merits versus suggesting search. The topic of how much time may/should you take once receiving an offer has been extensively discussed in the past.
Within the timeframe identified by the prospective employer, take as much time as you need. Don't let anyone, much less a bunch of anonymous folks on the internet, influence you to take less time than you need.
|
|
|
|
Post by foghorn on Jul 11, 2019 11:06:51 GMT -5
On reflection I will modify my earlier comments to note that I believe that even if the spouse has stated they are on board, making sure they are consulted assures buy-in, as it were, and avoids the "but you didn't tell me."
It's an extremely important decision, because if not a move a long commute (and less time at home) may be involved, so even if they've said "I don't care if it's Mount Pleasant or Mount Hemorrhoid, take the [expletive deleted] judge thing and lets move on with our lives!"-- or even a much stronger statement-- experience and decades of marriage suggest that discretion and inclusion are the better part of executive acceptance.
That being said, especially in a small office situation where you are dealing with the office, I think it's good if you reassure them that you are on board and are just doing the considerate thing. Waiting until the hour before the deadline may make them think y'all are tentative.
Hey, we've spent possibly years growing more and more neurotic with a generally opaque process, trying to read vibes in every nuance of an announcement or choice of type face, why should we stop at the acceptance stage? Let it all hang out!
|
|
|
|
Post by hillsarealive on Aug 6, 2022 18:42:14 GMT -5
This thread seemed overdue for a bump. Lots of good food for thought in here.
Of course, the current round of hiring is different from any previous round. In the current iteration, applicants interviewed without learning the particular location(s) they were interviewing for. If, as some suspect, the agency intends to place all or most of the new ALJs in their preferred locations, then I imagine most applicants will say 'yes' without much drama. But if the agency is reaching further down on GALs, then you might expect more dithering compared with the pre-2019 rounds of hiring as it is harder for applicants to work through all possibilities (and obtain spouses' buy-in) in advance. I don't intend any of this as a criticism, and I am happy with my GAL, but it seems like the offer/acceptance part might be messier than usual in this round if the agency is looking beyond preferred locations.
edit: fixed a typo
|
|
|
|
Post by Gaidin on Aug 7, 2022 11:05:28 GMT -5
So I have always advocated being able to answer "yes" when you get the call no matter the location. I still stand by that. Talk to your spouse and kids and whoever. Make sure they understand that this is the opportunity to have input. So you can be ready.
That was all predicated on the fact that the agency had to hire in a specific order and you hanging the hiring up could actually prevent someone else from getting the call.
I still think you should be ready to make your decision and here is why. They will not send you the offer packet until you say "yes". So you shouldn't start the clock in telling your current employer you're leaving until you get that. You likely will only have a few weeks before you have to report. Every day you delay that decision is a day you aren't using to notify your employer.
Remember these appointments are ratified by the Commissioner based upon a hiring committee made up of very senior leadership. There is no "Go put 3 more names through the process". They MIGHT have gotten some alternate names approved but I wouldn't count on it. This is a new process for them to.
Be ready and if you need 24 hours I guess take it but you're already delaying the process which will have a short time line anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by operationalj on Aug 7, 2022 12:17:20 GMT -5
I enjoy advocating for the most difficult cases. It's my choice - I know that. However, it's Sunday, and I'm finishing up another 75-80 workweek. My next week looks about the same. I must admit, working this hard was part of my plan to create opportunities such as the ALJ position. I'm ready to advocate for the American public as an SSA ALJ. If I get 'the call,' it's a yes, where do you want me to go. Decision already discussed with family, we are ready.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2022 17:21:47 GMT -5
Albeit, I don’t know anything, but based on the highly qualified insiders I know who were not interviewed (including many who got interviews under the old system), versus those I know who were, I don’t think the goal was to just “hire people where they want to go.” They are looking to fill specific locales. If you are willing to go there, you were interviewed. While everyone I know who got them is qualified, I was very surprised at some who were omitted.
So…I’m very curious about how these offers roll out and how long they give. Do they give you one city? More to pick between? Who knows. There is plenty of time to get the ALJ hires done, but there are other postings that also need to be done this FY, and there has been a lot of attrition on the personnel side (or everywhere in SSA).
Anyways, I’m excited for those still in the process! Especially with the pending contract, ALJ is a great job with great benefits and awesome flexibility. Next week should be exciting for a lot of people.
|
|
|
|
Post by superalj on Aug 7, 2022 18:02:28 GMT -5
It took me literally a second before I said yes and that’s because I didn’t want to interrupt Bob.
|
|
|
|
Post by dshawn on Aug 7, 2022 18:30:10 GMT -5
Got the offer almost three years ago. It’s a great job! Like any, it has its positives and negatives. On balance though, its a great gig.
I stand by what I said above a few years back. In my opinion you should be as ready as possible to say “yes.” Harder if you have a large GAL. It appears this go round however, that might be less of an issue given the request for preferred location. We shall see. I travelled 2400 miles. It was quite the adventure. I do not recommend driving a 26 ft moving truck through PA to anyone. It was white knuckle driving to say the least. Significant other (SO), two best friends, three dogs, a bird and a story we will tell for the rest of our lives.
If your employer is on board (mine was) prepare them. Closing out / withdrawing from cases and transferring to other attorneys takes time. Prepare family and friends for the possibility. It is (or at least was in may case) pretty hard on them too. Transfer and save important files in your work computer ASAP. This is common in private practice. Not so much when you are a fFed. Start thinking about modifying social media presence. Look into bar status. If you can provide an address other than home IMHO that is a good idea. If you know insiders seek their valuable guidance. Read this Board. Take some of it with a grain of salt. I found it largely indispensable. YMMV. By and large the people here really do want to help you and see you succeed.
In terms of saying yes in the initial call, you have to do what works for you and your family. I had all my Ts crossed and Is dotted, so it was a no-brainer. The “boss” (SO) greeted me with “where are we moving to?” Regardless, know that from the time of offer to reporting date will fly. My agency was quite generous with the lead time. It still was hard. We made it work. Early prep was key both pysically and emotionally.
But most of all, enjoy it! Looking back it was a very exciting time in my professional and personal lives. My SO and I treated it as a great adventure. A complete change of pace going from the zealous advocate to the impartial decision maker. Not to sound melodramatic, but it is an important decision and we have real impact on people’s lives. I assure you, there will be bumps and pains (and probably even some tears) but it is entirely worth it.
I wish all those waiting for “the call” all the best. To those who didn’t make it through—don’t give up. It is well worth the effort. Being back in public service was a dream come true for me. The fact that my new colleagues and friends are awesome was mere icing on the cake.
Take a deep breath. For some of you your life is about to change. As stated by one of the speakers at our really cool swearing in ceremony (paraphrasing now), “from this day forward you are no longer an attorney. You will always carry with you the title judge.” My advice. Enjoy the ride but do it with humility and grace.
|
|
|
|
Post by neufenland on Aug 7, 2022 18:31:21 GMT -5
Albeit, I don’t know anything, but based on the highly qualified insiders I know who were not interviewed (including many who got interviews under the old system), versus those I know who were, I don’t think the goal was to just “hire people where they want to go.” They are looking to fill specific locales. If you are willing to go there, you were interviewed. While everyone I know who got them is qualified, I was very surprised at some who were omitted. So…I’m very curious about how these offers roll out and how long they give. Do they give you one city? More to pick between? Who knows. There is plenty of time to get the ALJ hires done, but there are other postings that also need to be done this FY, and there has been a lot of attrition on the personnel side (or everywhere in SSA). Anyways, I’m excited for those still in the process! Especially with the pending contract, ALJ is a great job with great benefits and awesome flexibility. Next week should be exciting for a lot of people. Did you just drop a spoiler?...or a guess? |
|
|
|
Post by neufenland on Aug 8, 2022 11:33:20 GMT -5
I think there are at least 47 Board participants who interviewed, and estimates are that we are, what, like 1/3 of the overall pool?
Probably something like 150 or so folks that got interviewed? Only 25 spots up for hiring this FY (or that's the common understanding).
This has been discussed elsewhere, I think, but I am just asking to refresh my memory and try and tailor my expectations.
Reminds me of applying for colleges...
|
|
|
|
Post by fowlfinder on Aug 8, 2022 11:43:22 GMT -5
I think there are at least 47 Board participants who interviewed, and estimates are that we are, what, like 1/3 of the overall pool? Probably something like 150 or so folks that got interviewed? Only 25 spots up for hiring this FY (or that's the common understanding). This has been discussed elsewhere, I think, but I am just asking to refresh my memory and try and tailor my expectations. Reminds me of applying for colleges... I don't think we know 100%. In the old days when you actually showed up in person for your interview you got to see how many people were waiting at the same time at your time slot so you got a really good idea. With the Teams interview that data point went away. That unfortunately left us with much more guessing. I think we don't really know other than the numbers interviewed probably fit somewhere between 75-150. |
|
