|
|
Post by roymcavoy on May 3, 2022 13:21:03 GMT -5
From usaJobs website: Applicant cut-off Some job announcements close when the hiring agency receives a certain number of applications. If the ‘cut-off’ number is reached during the day, the job announcement will usually close that night at midnight. For example, a job announcement may say it will close after the hiring agency receives 200 applications. If they receive 200 applications by 1:30 p.m. ET, the job will close that same day at 11:59 p.m. ET. www.usajobs.gov/Help/how-to/job-announcement/closing-types/ This seems to indicate that the "1000 applications" is just the cutoff number that simply triggers the closing of the announcement, and the applications received before the announcement closes are eligible to be considered. Otherwise, if an agency strictly intends to consider only the first 1000 applications, the announcement would need to close immediately upon receipt of that 1000th application, and not later at midnight that day. All signs I’ve seen point to this as the correct interpretation. two things… I think the fact that this posting might be used for multiple hires might cause them to accept everyone who applied before 11:59PmEDT… That being said, not for an ALJ job and not for an SSA job, I applied for a different position on USA jobs that was number limiting and received notice after the fact that although I did apply within the time frame (it also closed same day), I was outside of the 200 limit. |
|
|
|
Post by hillsarealive on May 3, 2022 14:09:58 GMT -5
All signs I’ve seen point to this as the correct interpretation. two things… I think the fact that this posting might be used for multiple hires might cause them to accept everyone who applied before 11:59PmEDT… Yes, I had the same thought. A set of 1000 applicants seems a little small for filling, say, 150 ALJ positions over the next couple years. SSA would need hire about 1 out of 7 applicants, which strikes me as a high ratio for such a sought after job. Also, the first 1000 may include a large number of incomplete or barely complete applications. So perhaps SSA will want to see more instead of choosing from a limited set. |
|
|
|
Post by gazoo on May 3, 2022 14:24:57 GMT -5
All signs I’ve seen point to this as the correct interpretation. two things… I think the fact that this posting might be used for multiple hires might cause them to accept everyone who applied before 11:59PmEDT… That being said, not for an ALJ job and not for an SSA job, I applied for a different position on USA jobs that was number limiting and received notice after the fact that although I did apply within the time frame (it also closed same day), I was outside of the 200 limit. Very interesting. How were you notified that you were outside the magic 200? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2022 18:08:26 GMT -5
two things… I think the fact that this posting might be used for multiple hires might cause them to accept everyone who applied before 11:59PmEDT… Yes, I had the same thought. A set of 1000 applicants seems a little small for filling, say, 150 ALJ positions over the next couple years. SSA would need hire about 1 out of 7 applicants, which strikes me as a high ratio for such a sought after job. Also, the first 1000 may include a large number of incomplete or barely complete applications. So perhaps SSA will want to see more instead of choosing from a limited set. Since they don’t have to go through the OPM registry process, why wouldn’t SSA just do another posting? I think this is just for this year and, budget depending, next. Out of 1000 applicants you should not have an issue getting 25-75 qualified candidates. I don’t see why SSA would limit themselves to this list in 3-4 years. |
|
|
|
Post by roymcavoy on May 3, 2022 19:19:25 GMT -5
two things… I think the fact that this posting might be used for multiple hires might cause them to accept everyone who applied before 11:59PmEDT… That being said, not for an ALJ job and not for an SSA job, I applied for a different position on USA jobs that was number limiting and received notice after the fact that although I did apply within the time frame (it also closed same day), I was outside of the 200 limit. Very interesting. How were you notified that you were outside the magic 200? I looked earlier but couldn’t find the specific app. I thought it was a D of Edu posting, but now I am not sure. It was not an email or anything, just a notification through the [insert Pixie’s most hated two words] for the agency that basically said my application was above the cutoff number, etc. |
|
|
|
Post by montyburns on May 3, 2022 19:22:05 GMT -5
Yes, I had the same thought. A set of 1000 applicants seems a little small for filling, say, 150 ALJ positions over the next couple years. SSA would need hire about 1 out of 7 applicants, which strikes me as a high ratio for such a sought after job. Also, the first 1000 may include a large number of incomplete or barely complete applications. So perhaps SSA will want to see more instead of choosing from a limited set. Since they don’t have to go through the OPM registry process, why wouldn’t SSA just do another posting? I think this is just for this year and, budget depending, next. Out of 1000 applicants you should not have an issue getting 25-75 qualified candidates. I don’t see why SSA would limit themselves to this list in 3-4 years. I would guess so too. Let’s not forget that they already had a bunch of applicants vetted from the ill fated 2019 posting and they elected to re post rather than use that list of vetted applicants. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2022 19:39:26 GMT -5
Since they don’t have to go through the OPM registry process, why wouldn’t SSA just do another posting? I think this is just for this year and, budget depending, next. Out of 1000 applicants you should not have an issue getting 25-75 qualified candidates. I don’t see why SSA would limit themselves to this list in 3-4 years. I would guess so too. Let’s not forget that they already had a bunch of applicants vetted from the ill fated 2019 posting and they elected to re post rather than use that list of vetted applicants. That “class” (if you want to call it that) was limited to those that had a passing score from OPM based on the budget language from Congress. This posting does not have that limit, which I think is a significant distinction. That being said, the logic is the same. If they wanted a quick hire of 25, there were at least a few of us still around they (maybe) could have picked up without interviewing another 100 candidates, but that’s not how they went. |
|
|
|
Post by roymcavoy on May 3, 2022 19:51:33 GMT -5
I would guess so too. Let’s not forget that they already had a bunch of applicants vetted from the ill fated 2019 posting and they elected to re post rather than use that list of vetted applicants. That “class” (if you want to call it that) was limited to those that had a passing score from OPM based on the budget language from Congress. This posting does not have that limit, which I think is a significant distinction. That being said, the logic is the same. If they wanted a quick hire of 25, there were at least a few of us still around they (maybe) could have picked up without interviewing another 100 candidates, but that’s not how they went. there also may be geographical oddities at play. After transfers, the top of that list may not have solved any of the hiring problems. Of course, they could also have that list and use it to compare names. Who knows. I’m just here for AM jokes. |
|
cielo
Full Member
Posts: 52
|
Post by cielo on May 3, 2022 20:42:53 GMT -5
I would guess so too. Let’s not forget that they already had a bunch of applicants vetted from the ill fated 2019 posting and they elected to re post rather than use that list of vetted applicants. That “class” (if you want to call it that) was limited to those that had a passing score from OPM based on the budget language from Congress. This posting does not have that limit, which I think is a significant distinction. That being said, the logic is the same. If they wanted a quick hire of 25, there were at least a few of us still around they (maybe) could have picked up without interviewing another 100 candidates, but that’s not how they went. That 2019 “announcement” closed and we received FOAD letters. I don’t think SSA could use that list. I was part of that group and got my app in on time to be considered this round. I’m hoping (granted realizing it’s extremely unlikely) that they cross reference those of us from 2019. Good luck to everyone! |
|
|
|
Post by bp on May 3, 2022 21:27:26 GMT -5
My application was not in the first 1000. However, I have heard rumors that a bunch of young decision writers that did not meet the 7 years experience requirement applied despite not being eligible. If they only allow 1000 apps, I am holding out hope that OPM weeds out the ones that obviously don't qualify before they send the 1000 over. Maybe some of us that are eligible will slip into the list.
|
|
|
|
Post by redbird on May 3, 2022 22:25:57 GMT -5
How are people determining whether they were in the first 1,000 or not?
|
|
|
|
Post by 71stretch on May 4, 2022 0:24:11 GMT -5
Is it wrong to apply even though one knows there is only a very slim chance at selection, thus bumping someone else out of the 1,000 potential applicants? Have No, it's not wrong to apply. Have fun rounding up your law school transcripts everyone. That's a new wrinkle in this process. And yes, if past is predictive of present, they may well call all those references. Good luck, all! It has been a long time, indeed! |
|
|
|
Post by roymcavoy on May 4, 2022 6:49:38 GMT -5
Very interesting. How were you notified that you were outside the magic 200? I looked earlier but couldn’t find the specific app. I thought it was a D of Edu posting, but now I am not sure. It was not an email or anything, just a notification through the [insert Pixie’s most hated two words] for the agency that basically said my application was above the cutoff number, etc. while looking for the number restricted app, I did stumble across the emails from the 2019 SSA ALJ application process. Here was that timeline as I was able to reconstruct it… 4/8/19 — email to open 4/12/19–app closes on USA Jobs 4/22/19–email with forms to be completed 5/2x/19–additional consent form 5/2x/19–(one day later) phone call to confirm interview 6/0x/19—(less than 2 weeks later) interview A few points…. (1) the forms (resume, etc) submitted with the app were (as I remember) roughly the same. (2) I seem to remember the guesstimate being somewhere between 700 and 1200 names on the former register—someone can correct me if that is off base. So a 1000 limit is close to what they handled then. (Also worth noting that everyone in SSA I talked to said that 2019 was a trial run to streamline the processes). (3) everyone who got that email on 4/8 was previously on the register, thus had established 7y (and gone through the OPM testing). Here SSA will at least have to make the 7y cutoff determination. That’s an extra step or at least extra time from 2019. OPM used the “didn’t show 7y of experience” like a bouncer throws people out of lines at clubs—there was often little rhyme or reason. So who knows how SSA will handle the 7y. (4) the emailed forms were agreements to background check, etc. (5) if the interviews are over Zoom, I’d not be shocked if they were able to do 2w or less from when they say “go” |
|
|
|
Post by hillsarealive on May 4, 2022 7:37:22 GMT -5
I looked earlier but couldn’t find the specific app. I thought it was a D of Edu posting, but now I am not sure. It was not an email or anything, just a notification through the [insert Pixie’s most hated two words] for the agency that basically said my application was above the cutoff number, etc. while looking for the number restricted app, I did stumble across the emails from the 2019 SSA ALJ application process. Here was that timeline as I was able to reconstruct it… 4/8/19 — email to open 4/12/19–app closes on USA Jobs 4/22/19–email with forms to be completed 5/2x/19–additional consent form 5/2x/19–(one day later) phone call to confirm interview 6/0x/19—(less than 2 weeks later) interview A few points…. (1) the forms (resume, etc) submitted with the app were (as I remember) roughly the same. (2) I seem to remember the guesstimate being somewhere between 700 and 1200 names on the former register—someone can correct me if that is off base. So a 1000 limit is close to what they handled then. (Also worth noting that everyone in SSA I talked to said that 2019 was a trial run to streamline the processes). (3) everyone who got that email on 4/8 was previously on the register, thus had established 7y (and gone through the OPM testing). Here SSA will at least have to make the 7y cutoff determination. That’s an extra step or at least extra time from 2019. OPM used the “didn’t show 7y of experience” like a bouncer throws people out of lines at clubs—there was often little rhyme or reason. So who knows how SSA will handle the 7y. (4) the emailed forms were agreements to background check, etc. (5) if the interviews are over Zoom, I’d not be shocked if they were able to do 2w or less from when they say “go” Thanks for posting this timeline, which may be a good roadmap for this time. As for point (3), I wonder if OPM might still handle this bouncer function for this pool of applicants. I applied for an Immigration Judge position in February, and OPM referred my application to DOJ after making a 'tentative' eligibility determination. This step took 7-8 days to screen a similar or larger pool of applications. This sort of thing is squarely within OPM's wheelhouse, and I could see SSA wanting OPM to perform this tedious step. If there will be a 'first 1000' cut-off, it might occur after the tentative eligible applications are referred to SSA. This is just my speculation, but speculation is all we have at this point! |
|
|
|
Post by neufenland on May 4, 2022 8:29:06 GMT -5
My application was not in the first 1000. However, I have heard rumors that a bunch of young decision writers that did not meet the 7 years experience requirement applied despite not being eligible. If they only allow 1000 apps, I am holding out hope that OPM weeds out the ones that obviously don't qualify before they send the 1000 over. Maybe some of us that are eligible will slip into the list. Naughty, naughty... A "bunch" sounds unlikely. Maybe a handful. With all of these public apps, there's always the chance that people will apply who don't meet the selection criteria. I wouldn't be surprised if a few non-attorneys applied because...well, because some people are nuts (or they just don't read position descriptions, etc.). There will be fewer than 1,000 total in the pool of eligibles, but I imagine the number won't be much lower than 1,000. And yes, that stinks for people who are eligible and didn't get their application into USAJOBS in the very short window. |
|
|
|
Post by roymcavoy on May 4, 2022 9:16:17 GMT -5
while looking for the number restricted app, I did stumble across the emails from the 2019 SSA ALJ application process. Here was that timeline as I was able to reconstruct it… 4/8/19 — email to open 4/12/19–app closes on USA Jobs 4/22/19–email with forms to be completed 5/2x/19–additional consent form 5/2x/19–(one day later) phone call to confirm interview 6/0x/19—(less than 2 weeks later) interview A few points…. (1) the forms (resume, etc) submitted with the app were (as I remember) roughly the same. (2) I seem to remember the guesstimate being somewhere between 700 and 1200 names on the former register—someone can correct me if that is off base. So a 1000 limit is close to what they handled then. (Also worth noting that everyone in SSA I talked to said that 2019 was a trial run to streamline the processes). (3) everyone who got that email on 4/8 was previously on the register, thus had established 7y (and gone through the OPM testing). Here SSA will at least have to make the 7y cutoff determination. That’s an extra step or at least extra time from 2019. OPM used the “didn’t show 7y of experience” like a bouncer throws people out of lines at clubs—there was often little rhyme or reason. So who knows how SSA will handle the 7y. (4) the emailed forms were agreements to background check, etc. (5) if the interviews are over Zoom, I’d not be shocked if they were able to do 2w or less from when they say “go” Thanks for posting this timeline, which may be a good roadmap for this time. As for point (3), I wonder if OPM might still handle this bouncer function for this pool of applicants. I applied for an Immigration Judge position in February, and OPM referred my application to DOJ after making a 'tentative' eligibility determination. This step took 7-8 days to screen a similar or larger pool of applications. This sort of thing is squarely within OPM's wheelhouse, and I could see SSA wanting OPM to perform this tedious step. If there will be a 'first 1000' cut-off, it might occur after the tentative eligible applications are referred to SSA. This is just my speculation, but speculation is all we have at this point! completely plausible. Remember that the prior Admin tried to disband OPM and Congress saved the day. This would render OPM a part of the process. My personal guess is that OPM (via USA Jobs) would perform the 1000 cap—I base this on the email I received in a different number limited application, which appeared “system generated”—and then the 7y cut off. But who knows |
|
|
|
Post by Gaidin on May 4, 2022 10:07:43 GMT -5
while looking for the number restricted app, I did stumble across the emails from the 2019 SSA ALJ application process. Here was that timeline as I was able to reconstruct it… 4/8/19 — email to open 4/12/19–app closes on USA Jobs 4/22/19–email with forms to be completed 5/2x/19–additional consent form 5/2x/19–(one day later) phone call to confirm interview 6/0x/19—(less than 2 weeks later) interview A few points…. (1) the forms (resume, etc) submitted with the app were (as I remember) roughly the same. (2) I seem to remember the guesstimate being somewhere between 700 and 1200 names on the former register—someone can correct me if that is off base. So a 1000 limit is close to what they handled then. (Also worth noting that everyone in SSA I talked to said that 2019 was a trial run to streamline the processes). (3) everyone who got that email on 4/8 was previously on the register, thus had established 7y (and gone through the OPM testing). Here SSA will at least have to make the 7y cutoff determination. That’s an extra step or at least extra time from 2019. So I think you can expect it to take substantially longer before the next step. The agency needs to review all the applications (I believe they will review all applications received on the 27th) and determine who meets the minimum requirements. Some like the 7 years are bright line assessments that will likely be performed by staff. However, reviewing the competencies will be done by people who know what the agency was looking for in an answer. Then the fun starts. I want you all to understand that this process will have lots of lulls where seemingly nothing is happening then suddenly you will be expected to do things in very short order. The agency is no longer bound by certs, the rule of 3, or scores generated by OPM. However, it is still an enormous organization trying to accomplish a lot of things at once all on different deadlines. If you don't want this job bad enough to put up with that I understand and don't blame you but if you do want this job bad enough you need to steel yourself for what lies ahead. I wish you all the best of luck and can say with no hesitation that I am glad I stuck it out and have this job. |
|
|
|
Post by Pixie on May 4, 2022 12:19:42 GMT -5
Received from a board member:
Hey Pix,
I figured I’d let you send out the following;
“Since it is such a topic of discussion, I have learned that the agency IS going to consider ALL applications submitted before the the closing of 11:59 Eastern. The agency is not going to consider only the first 1000 submitted applications.”
This is an interesting development that's contrary to what most of us thought. Pixie
|
|
|
|
Post by foghorn on May 4, 2022 13:15:13 GMT -5
Query for anyone with knowledge etc. (you can PM me if you don't want to post it) --do we know the number of slots they have to fill from this cadre a) now or in the immediate future b) in the fall or some other time?
For those new to the process, Gaidin is right and then some. Like the IJ process, much of this process was shrouded in some mystery. Hurry up, then wait.
All I can suggest is this point is to check your spam box to assure that your computer didn't divert any message. It does happen. Even a message from an address which you have used!
Get into zen. It's a zen process.
|
|
|
|
Post by trp888 on May 4, 2022 13:40:36 GMT -5
Query for anyone with knowledge etc. (you can PM me if you don't want to post it) --do we know the number of slots they have to fill from this cadre a) now or in the immediate future b) in the fall or some other time? For those new to the process, Gaidin is right and then some. Like the IJ process, much of this process was shrouded in some mystery. Hurry up, then wait. All I can suggest is this point is to check your spam box to assure that your computer didn't divert any message. It does happen. Even a message from an address which you have used! Get into zen. It's a zen process. The NTEU sent a newsletter last week saying they expected 25 hires this FY…. Take that for what it is though - numbers go up and down. |
|
