April 27, 2022 SSA ALJ Hiring Announcement on USAJOBS

[fowlfinder]

May 10, 2022 11:39:08 GMT -5 Prrple said:

References - do we have any idea of what point in the process the contacting of references would happen?

I am hoping it is AFTER applicants are assessed as to whether they meet the minimum requirements for consideration, like sufficient descriptions of years of experience, having a complete application package, etc. I am also hoping applications will be notified if they meet the minimum requirements for consideration before references are contacted.

Reference checks are going to be a huge volume of work, so it seems possible that the process would be to do that after some narrowing of the field. It certainly worked that way in the old system.

Thoughts?

Based on the 2019 process I expect references will be checked around the time interviews happen (or following). I suspect references will only be checked for those interviewed. If I recall that was also similar to the prior process with the now non-existent register. While the agency has a chance to do something new, I suspect they won't change that part of the process. But what do I know? Probably not much.

[roymcavoy]

As I recall, they used ALJs (HOCALJs) to call references in 2019. Not sure what that means for this version, but it’s interesting.

[hillsarealive]

In the interest of keeping this thread alive as we wait for the next stage of the hiring process, I will post a question that is on my mind.

Why did the agency add the “preferred location” question, i.e., Question 1 on the job application? In past rounds of hiring, each candidate selected all of the offices where he or she would be willing to go. In other words, Question 15 on the current application. But there was never a step in the old process where the candidate identified his or her preferred location, right?

Perhaps putting candidates in preferred locations whenever possible will cut down on transfers down the road. On the other hand, I could see people answering Question 1 in a strategic manner, and then--after selection for less desirable offices--requesting transfers to the places where they actually hope to end up (subject to the waiting period and space in the desired HOs). Besides, SSA already has a possible method for determining preferred location, which is looking at where the candidate currently lives. This method is not perfect, obviously, but it is also not something that a candidate could easily game for strategic purposes.

So why ask for the candidate’s preferred location? It seems simpler to assume that candidates prefer placement in a nearby HO but would be willing to work in any of the locations they select in response to Question 15.

[fowlfinder]

May 12, 2022 10:51:04 GMT -5 hillsarealive said:

In the interest of keeping this thread alive as we wait for the next stage of the hiring process, I will post a question that is on my mind.

Why did the agency add the “preferred location” question, i.e., Question 1 on the job application? In past rounds of hiring, each candidate selected all of the offices where he or she would be willing to go. In other words, Question 15 on the current application. But there was never a step in the old process where the candidate identified his or her preferred location, right?

Perhaps putting candidates in preferred locations whenever possible will cut down on transfers down the road. On the other hand, I could see people answering Question 1 in a strategic manner, and then--after selection for less desirable offices--requesting transfers to the places where they actually hope to end up (subject to the waiting period and space in the desired HOs). Besides, SSA already has a possible method for determining preferred location, which is looking at where the candidate currently lives. This method is not perfect, obviously, but it is also not something that a candidate could easily game for strategic purposes.

So why ask for the candidate’s preferred location? It seems simpler to assume that candidates prefer placement in a nearby HO but would be willing to work in any of the locations they select in response to Question 15.

I suspect (But do not know) that was added based on the input from the union. We were told that the union was allowed to give some input into the process this time. I also suspect that was very much due to the desire to cut down on transfers and to get hired individuals in locations were they are likely to stay for the duration of their careers. (Happier ALJs turn over more cases right?) It also could help the agency avoid revolving doors at hard to fill locations.

I suspect (which I am doing a lot here) that if someone listed one of those hard to fill locations in Outer Craplandia locations as their preferred location, was hired in that location, and then asked to transfer from away from that location, the agency would be non-to happy about that, and frankly may take that into account when offering or accepting transfers in the future. 

But that is just my pure speculation about that question. In 2019 we had to identify 5 locations from our geographic availability. I suspect that the agency really is making an effort to get people where they want to be, permanently. 

[nylawyer]

I'd agree with the general sentiment that the Agency may be trying to place ALJs in offices they will stay in.

Under the current rules (which could certainly change), the Agency really can't do much to punish the ALJ who gave a preferred location that they fully intend to leave at first opportunity.

It is also possible the agency is looking toward a future with a lot more phone/video hearings, where ALJs can be anywhere, so the Agency might be more interested in getting the people they want and placing them where they want to go, as opposed to filling particular offices.

I would strongly urge anyone who is planning to take a position with the intent to transfer- do not accept an office you are unwilling to be in for the next decade. Yes, you might be able to transfer after 2 years, but that is very much a maybe.

Assume you are going nowhere.

[Pixie]

May 12, 2022 11:41:02 GMT -5 nylawyer said:

I'd agree with the general sentiment that the Agency may be trying to place ALJs in offices they will stay in.

Under the current rules (which could certainly change), the Agency really can't do much to punish the ALJ who gave a preferred location that they fully intend to leave at first opportunity.

It is also possible the agency is looking toward a future with a lot more phone/video hearings, where ALJs can be anywhere, so the Agency might be more interested in getting the people they want and placing them where they want to go, as opposed to filling particular offices.

I would strongly urge anyone who is planning to take a position with the intent to transfer- do not accept an office you are unwilling to be in for the next decade. Yes, you might be able to transfer after 2 years, but that is very much a maybe. Assume you are going nowhere.

Good advice. We really don't know what the future holds for potential transfers. Pixie

[Top Tier]

Has anyone else heard word of another early retirement offer coming for ALJs perhaps at the end of this FY?

[rp]

May 12, 2022 12:27:26 GMT -5 Top Tier said:

Has anyone else heard word of another early retirement offer coming for ALJs perhaps at the end of this FY?

I think there is still one out there right now. It is open until 12/31/2022.

[Gaidin]

When I was hired in 2016 they asked us to rank our preferences for the cities on our cert. There were a lot of people who wound up getting locations they wanted. I mean not everyone and YMMV but I think a lot of people wound up happy.

I would remind all the folks thinking about getting hired to remember that the transfer process today is unlikely to be the transfer process 12 months from now. The contract is being negotiated and the agency has wanted to make transfers harder for a long time.

[tripper]

Chiming in on transfers… don’t count on them. It took me 5.5 years to get a transfer and I had several offices in a major urban area I was happy to go to. I was hired into a nice office but in retrospect I had WAY too many cities on my list. My hubby and I made it work, but it was through a lot of luck and not easy at all. It’s a good job. But not so good that you’ll be happy flying home every weekend for years.

[Gaidin]

May 13, 2022 7:12:46 GMT -5 tripper said:

Chiming in on transfers… don’t count on them. It took me 5.5 years to get a transfer and I had several offices in a major urban area I was happy to go to. I was hired into a nice office but in retrospect I had WAY too many cities on my list. My hubby and I made it work, but it was through a lot of luck and not easy at all. It’s a good job. But not so good that you’ll be happy flying home every weekend for years.

I really recommend places you're willing to relocate to or willing to commute for a very long time. Even if there are only minimal changes to the transfer process depending on where you want to go it can take a long time.

[jagvet]

I know of some people stuck with tough commutes that caught them by surprise because they only visited on a weekend. If you're not really familiar with an area, make a visit there and see what traffic patterns are like before buying or renting a home. There are some really great "diamond-in-the-rough" cities out there, so if you pick a less popular town or city, you might have a better chance of getting the nod, but as @gaidin and tripper said, don't plan on a transfer out very soon, if at all.

[hillsarealive]

Thank you to everyone who chimed in with insights about locations and transfers. Based on these insights, I am rethinking at least one location on my list. Better to rethink it now rather than later.

Which brings me to another question. Does anyone have thoughts on whether SSA will give candidates an option to narrow geographic locations prior to the step when offers are made? On the one hand, the hiring process likely will not be as drawn out as it was in past years when OPM was more involved, so this step may be less critical than in the past. On the other hand, candidates had to apply in a hurry, so maybe it makes sense to let them rethink Question 15 in the cold light of day. I realize a candidate could always decline an offer, but it might be more efficient to let people cross out locations before SSA assembles whatever matrix, table, or list it will use to sort candidates into offices.

I realize I am getting ahead of myself. Many are called and few are chosen, etc.

[ba]

May 16, 2022 9:22:27 GMT -5 hillsarealive said:

Thank you to everyone who chimed in with insights about locations and transfers. Based on these insights, I am rethinking at least one location on my list. Better to rethink it now rather than later.

Which brings me to another question. Does anyone have thoughts on whether SSA will give candidates an option to narrow geographic locations prior to the step when offers are made? On the one hand, the hiring process likely will not be as drawn out as it was in past years when OPM was more involved, so this step may be less critical than in the past. On the other hand, candidates had to apply in a hurry, so maybe it makes sense to let them rethink Question 15 in the cold light of day. I realize a candidate could always decline an offer, but it might be more efficient to let people cross out locations before SSA assembles whatever matrix, table, or list it will use to sort candidates into offices.

I realize I am getting ahead of myself. Many are called and few are chosen, etc.

We are stabbing in the dark, since this is a new process, but in the past, you were told what locations you were being considered for when you did the agency interview. The agency seems to be trying to tether somewhat closely to the OPM process, so it is possible you may know what locations you are being considered for prior to being interviewed, but none of us can say for sure. HTH.

[tripper]

If anyone has only one city or two they are willing to go to, feel free to PM me to ask if there are people waiting to transfer to it. That way you can gauge your likelihood of being offered that city.

[trp888]

May 16, 2022 13:54:34 GMT -5 tripper said:

If anyone has only one city or two they are willing to go to, feel free to PM me to ask if there are people waiting to transfer to it. That way you can gauge your likelihood of being offered that city.

I am doubtful the current transfer lists will be a good gauge of where new hires will land - especially with only a class of 25ish on the way. I have several HOs around me and most have largely depleted ALJ #s - lots of empty offices etc., but I know if only 1 of these HOs that the ALJ transfer list was worked and several on the list that were called said no to the transfer. There’s a plausible possibility that HOs with current transfer lists have already been “worked” and they still need seats filled and/or they’ll place a new hire regardless of the transfer list (which happened in my office during the last 2015/2016 hiring).

[rp]

May 16, 2022 14:42:43 GMT -5 trp888 said:

May 16, 2022 13:54:34 GMT -5 tripper said:

If anyone has only one city or two they are willing to go to, feel free to PM me to ask if there are people waiting to transfer to it. That way you can gauge your likelihood of being offered that city.

I am doubtful the current transfer lists will be a good gauge of where new hires will land - especially with only a class of 25ish on the way. I have several HOs around me and most have largely depleted ALJ #s - lots of empty offices etc., but I know if only 1 of these HOs that the ALJ transfer list was worked and several on the list that were called said no to the transfer. There’s a plausible possibility that HOs with current transfer lists have already been “worked” and they still need seats filled and/or they’ll place a new hire regardless of the transfer list (which happened in my office during the last 2015/2016 hiring).

Agreed. In addition the number of empty offices have no relationship to projected receipts and other metrics that are used to determine number of ALJs needed. Unfortunately, without knowing all that goes into the determination, reading tea leaves is likely just as effective, sorry to say.

The best advice has been given already. Only put places down where you are willing to live long term.

[neufenland]

25 seems to be the magic number for this FY, but a few of you have posted that this group of applicants will likely also be in consideration for planned hiring next FY. Does anyone know how many are being planned for FY23? October is only five months away.  

Guesses are welcome in lieu of actual information .

[Gaidin]

May 16, 2022 15:46:19 GMT -5 neufenland said:

25 seems to be the magic number for this FY, but a few of you have posted that this group of applicants will likely also be in consideration for planned hiring next FY. Does anyone know how many are being planned for FY23? October is only five months away.  

Guesses are welcome in lieu of actual information .

I have heard approximately 75 next year.

[tripper]

May 16, 2022 15:42:22 GMT -5 rp said:

May 16, 2022 14:42:43 GMT -5 trp888 said:

I am doubtful the current transfer lists will be a good gauge of where new hires will land - especially with only a class of 25ish on the way. I have several HOs around me and most have largely depleted ALJ #s - lots of empty offices etc., but I know if only 1 of these HOs that the ALJ transfer list was worked and several on the list that were called said no to the transfer. There’s a plausible possibility that HOs with current transfer lists have already been “worked” and they still need seats filled and/or they’ll place a new hire regardless of the transfer list (which happened in my office during the last 2015/2016 hiring).

Agreed. In addition the number of empty offices have no relationship to projected receipts and other metrics that are used to determine number of ALJs needed. Unfortunately, without knowing all that goes into the determination, reading tea leaves is likely just as effective, sorry to say.

The best advice has been given already. Only put places down where you are willing to live long term.

But if you only have two cities that have 20+ names on the transfer list and some of them were added in the last couple years then you know it’s unlikely.