|
|
Post by Pixie on Oct 9, 2024 20:45:46 GMT -5
We will no longer make comments about our application status nor ask questions about our application status in this thread.
Use this thread for those purposes: Application Status Change–All Must Read
There is a very good reason for this. Those of you who remember the Application Status Manager fiasco will understand. If I see any questions or remarks about the status of your application in this thread, the post will be deleted summarily and the poster may be punished.
I'm not normally into punishment or discipline, but a violation of this rule is the exception. Again, there is a very good and almost compelling reason for it. Think Kudzu.
EDIT NOTE: Here is an example of what we will not say in this thread. Use the appropriate thread.
"On the completed application page, my resume and bar card say "processed" but my transcripts say "pending retrieval". Any concern there? I dont want to be blacklisted because a file failed to upload." Pixie
|
|
|
|
Post by bourbonmanhattan on Oct 9, 2024 20:52:46 GMT -5
Basically they’ll tell you you’re under consideration for X,Y,Z. If you’re willing to go to a lot of places, and you got a good score, it could be a very long list. You’ll be asked to rank preferences, but no guarantee you get your first or second choice. I heard of people being considered for 50 different locations. You’ll get a call offering you a job wherever. Someone else may correct me, but I think the ability to reject an offer and ask for a different location is very limited. I recall it can be done, but it’s limited (I am not sure how everything is done after Lucia). This. When you see the acronym GAL we mean our geographic availability. Ie which cities we will go to. That becomes a factor because the announcement may indicate hiring for multiple locations. But not all locations will have a new candidate hired for that location. That is all a mystery how that gets sorted. So even though your application may have been spot on but you only put down Boise as your only location, your application may be overlooked and you would not get an interview if the agency doesn’t need any new judges in Boise this go around. But say you listed several cities, Boise Cleveland Columbus Des Moines etc and you were rated as highly qualified and Cleveland needs a new ALJ you would be considered for an interview. But you only know you’re getting an interview at that stage. Not for which city. Welcome to GAL roulette. Please whoever posted a GAL survey last time, we need another! |
|
|
|
Post by sunshinedaydream on Oct 9, 2024 21:54:15 GMT -5
I noted that the interview will be in person instead of virtually. Is this different from the last go around? Yes. Interviews last time were virtual It is unfortunate that interviews will not be held virtually, IMO. It is not easy or inexpensive for many to travel to D.C./VA. Since there is no longer "testing" associated with the visit, it is baffling (to me) that it would not be held virtually. That is a high burden for a very tenuous result -- unless they're only planning on interviewing people that actually have a high chance of being hired. If there are multiple rounds of interviews (and maybe there aren't), there is no reason why the initial interview should not be held virtually. |
|
|
|
Post by sunshinedaydream on Oct 9, 2024 22:09:17 GMT -5
Maybe it’s just me, but this ALJ posting round seems… tame on this board. Almost quite. A lot less posting than in the past. Are there just a lot less people applying or is everyone playing it close to the chest and not willing to be chatty?? I find it interesting. I know a handful of people sitting it out this round. Will be interesting when the inside chatter comes out about how many apps were actually submitted with this 3 day window. Maybe people are tired of the application / interview / hiring process. The "nine references" part seems excessive, or maybe I just don't like the idea of telling 9 people, including a current supervisor, that I've applied for a iob, and that they may, at some point, be contacted. Additionally, the questions seemed just different enough from past questions that a cut-and-paste wouldn't do. |
|
|
|
Post by bourbonmanhattan on Oct 9, 2024 22:31:02 GMT -5
Maybe it’s just me, but this ALJ posting round seems… tame on this board. Almost quite. A lot less posting than in the past. Are there just a lot less people applying or is everyone playing it close to the chest and not willing to be chatty?? I find it interesting. I know a handful of people sitting it out this round. Will be interesting when the inside chatter comes out about how many apps were actually submitted with this 3 day window. Maybe people are tired of the application / interview / hiring process. The "nine references" part seems excessive, or maybe I just don't like the idea of telling 9 people, including a current supervisor, that I've applied for a iob, and that they may, at some point, be contacted. Additionally, the questions seemed just different enough from past questions that a cut-and-paste wouldn't do. I do agree. Nine references is excessive. But then again, shouldn't we be vouched for, for America, for democracy. |
|
|
|
Post by Gaidin on Oct 9, 2024 22:39:24 GMT -5
It has always been 9 references gang. I know it's a lot but it's not new.
If you want my advice at this point in the game about your GAL. I would add as many places as you would possibly be willing to go. Then you can always cut locations later. They will ask you whether you want to interview for specific locations later you can decline to be interviewed for that location.
|
|
|
|
Post by nappyloxs on Oct 9, 2024 23:00:20 GMT -5
I am certain there are tons of people applying. I can confirm, there are several people from my office applying this go around who have never applied before. They are complaining about the 9 reference, 5 assessment questions, and 72 hour turnaround. I just chuckle and say “let me tell you about a wild 14-15 hour window from 2022 young grasshoppers.” What about the OPM days? Resumes were scrutinized,so strictly that if you did not put the date you were admitted to the bar, you were eliminated. If you were luckily enough to pass the 7-year requirement, then you faced an online test with actual hearing scenarios. They had different sets of questions were they could mix it up for each applicant. If you survived the SIMS stimulation, the next stage was to flying out to D.C, at your own expense to taking a full-day written test at OPM, a building down the street from the WH. Then you had to take an 1-hour or so cab ride to a hotel in another location for the interview. (They did give you the option to test or interview first). If it was 2018, it all was for nothing as the pulled the job announcement and to throw salt on the wound, they told you how you did on the interviews and written test but said too bad we aren’t hiring. |
|
|
|
Post by rmspringfield on Oct 9, 2024 23:00:29 GMT -5
I’d like to ask a more specific kind of question using a hypothetical if that’s ok: Dominic lives in Portland, ME with his wife and two young children. His family will not move. He accepts an offer from the Mt Pleasant OHO, planning to transfer closer to his home in ME as soon as he can; let’s say this is 15 months. My question is, during those 15 months, how often might Dominic reasonably see his family? Could he work from home in Maine 1/2 the time? 1/3 of the time? Thanks I can speak to this because I’m in this situation and making it work. On average I estimate I have between 2-8 hearing days per month that are in person. I schedule dockets back to back Monday through Wednesday. Sometimes it works out that I have totally virtual docket weeks and don’t have to make the trip. Sometimes I have 2 days in person and one virtual but for me it doesn’t make sense to clock out, make the trip back home, arrive at night and clock in early the next day. So I do the virtual docket from the office. I would say I do get to spend 1/2 to 2/3rds of the time at home. if we see an increase in cases at OHO who knows if that will continue. But for now that’s my experience. as to working with your HOCALJ to get the in person cases scheduled back to back. Good luck. But you’ll likely be informed that case schedules are based on the needs of the office. You have control over which days you are available. You aren’t supposed to be scheduled mixed modality dockets without your express consent. But you cannot request specific days be in person or virtual. |
|
|
|
Post by Top Tier on Oct 9, 2024 23:17:33 GMT -5
Good luck to everyone who applied! Good things are on the horizon for many.
|
|
|
|
Post by ssa on Oct 10, 2024 5:41:18 GMT -5
It has always been 9 references gang. I know it's a lot but it's not new. If you want my advice at this point in the game about your GAL. I would add as many places as you would possibly be willing to go. Then you can always cut locations later. They will ask you whether you want to interview for specific locations later you can decline to be interviewed for that location. I don’t recall this happening in 2022. I could just be forgetting, but it also could be something that happened in the days of the register and is no longer part of the process. |
|
|
|
Post by ssa on Oct 10, 2024 5:45:41 GMT -5
I’d like to ask a more specific kind of question using a hypothetical if that’s ok: Dominic lives in Portland, ME with his wife and two young children. His family will not move. He accepts an offer from the Mt Pleasant OHO, planning to transfer closer to his home in ME as soon as he can; let’s say this is 15 months. My question is, during those 15 months, how often might Dominic reasonably see his family? Could he work from home in Maine 1/2 the time? 1/3 of the time? Thanks I can speak to this because I’m in this situation and making it work. On average I estimate I have between 2-8 hearing days per month that are in person. I schedule dockets back to back Monday through Wednesday. Sometimes it works out that I have totally virtual docket weeks and don’t have to make the trip. Sometimes I have 2 days in person and one virtual but for me it doesn’t make sense to clock out, make the trip back home, arrive at night and clock in early the next day. So I do the virtual docket from the office. I would say I do get to spend 1/2 to 2/3rds of the time at home. if we see an increase in cases at OHO who knows if that will continue. But for now that’s my experience. as to working with your HOCALJ to get the in person cases scheduled back to back. Good luck. But you’ll likely be informed that case schedules are based on the needs of the office. You have control over which days you are available. You aren’t supposed to be scheduled mixed modality dockets without your express consent. But you cannot request specific days be in person or virtual. and starting in November, claimants will have to opt out in a relatively short period of time if they don’t want phone hearings. This could mean many fewer in-person hearings on the horizon. |
|
|
|
Post by benchslap on Oct 10, 2024 6:18:33 GMT -5
ewartdunlop and starting in November, claimants will have to opt out in a relatively short period of time if they don’t want phone hearings. This could mean many fewer in-person hearings on the horizon. As someone who practices in this area, I’ve started filing hearing agreement / VTC objections with my RFH. I’m not alone in this. |
|
|
|
Post by ewartdunlop on Oct 10, 2024 6:27:07 GMT -5
Now that the window to apply is closed, I’m interested in speculating.
In the past it seems like there were a lot more ways to weed out applicants than there are now, what with the simulation and the written test. I’m curious as to how it’s likely to go now (and how it went in 2022) since so many applications are likely to look very similar.
Sure, they can throw out all the ones who don’t meet the requirements. But many will be from SSA lifers, maybe with supervisory or claimant rep experience on top of that. And all you have to distinguish between them is “how good are these five essays?” Especially when whoever is reviewing them must be reading hundreds a piece. Seems likely that a small grammatical error could be enough to drop you significantly in the pile.
What do others think?
|
|
|
|
Post by neufenland on Oct 10, 2024 6:37:47 GMT -5
I can confirm, there are several people from my office applying this go around who have never applied before. They are complaining about the 9 reference, 5 assessment questions, and 72 hour turnaround. I just chuckle and say “let me tell you about a wild 14-15 hour window from 2022 young grasshoppers.” What about the OPM days? Resumes were scrutinized,so strictly that if you did not put the date you were admitted to the bar, you were eliminated. If you were luckily enough to pass the 7-year requirement, then you faced an online test with actual hearing scenarios. They had different sets of questions were they could mix it up for each applicant. If you survived the SIMS stimulation, the next stage was to flying out to D.C, at your own expense to taking a full-day written test at OPM, a building down the street from the WH. Then you had to take an 1-hour or so cab ride to a hotel in another location for the interview. (They did give you the option to test or interview first). If it was 2018, it all was for nothing as the pulled the job announcement and to throw salt on the wound, they told you how you did on the interviews and written test but said too bad we aren’t hiring. I did all of this, but am local to DC, so my 2018 adventure was, at least, less expensive. I did get a nice score, and with that and $1.50, I can get a Diet Coke from the drink machine. |
|
|
|
Post by shmi1979 on Oct 10, 2024 7:37:13 GMT -5
I got a terrible score (bombed the interview, I guess). So I wouldn't have been hired regardless. But I felt bad for all the folks that would have been in the running.
|
|
|
|
Post by trp888 on Oct 10, 2024 7:55:02 GMT -5
It has always been 9 references gang. I know it's a lot but it's not new. If you want my advice at this point in the game about your GAL. I would add as many places as you would possibly be willing to go. Then you can always cut locations later. They will ask you whether you want to interview for specific locations later you can decline to be interviewed for that location. I don’t recall this happening in 2022. I could just be forgetting, but it also could be something that happened in the days of the register and is no longer part of the process. You’re correct it didn’t not happen this way in the 2022 & 2023 hiring classes. You’re not asked if you want to interview for a specific GAL . You are interviewed IF one (or more) of the places you checked may get a hire. You will not know which office(s) until you get the offer call. You have that moment to decided if you accept or decline. The wording in the announcement appears quite clear if you decline this location, you’re very likely not being offered another. |
|
|
|
Post by niemekv on Oct 10, 2024 8:05:30 GMT -5
It has always been 9 references gang. I know it's a lot but it's not new. If you want my advice at this point in the game about your GAL. I would add as many places as you would possibly be willing to go. Then you can always cut locations later. They will ask you whether you want to interview for specific locations later you can decline to be interviewed for that location. Great advice. This is the approach I used. I also took into consideration that we do not know how long they will be hiring from this applicant pool and the places I am willing to go today might not be the same as they will be in a couple years when my daughter is out of school. Instead of where am I willing to go today, I chose all locations where I could be willing to go at any point in the next few years. |
|
|
|
Post by dwesq on Oct 10, 2024 8:27:29 GMT -5
It has always been 9 references gang. I know it's a lot but it's not new. If you want my advice at this point in the game about your GAL. I would add as many places as you would possibly be willing to go. Then you can always cut locations later. They will ask you whether you want to interview for specific locations later you can decline to be interviewed for that location. Great advice. This is the approach I used. I also took into consideration that we do not know how long they will be hiring from this applicant pool and the places I am willing to go today might not be the same as they will be in a couple years when my daughter is out of school. Instead of where am I willing to go today, I chose all locations where I could be willing to go at any point in the next few years. I took the same approach. I'm just not in a position to accept any location, even for 15 months. |
|
|
|
Post by jimmyjiggles on Oct 10, 2024 10:01:22 GMT -5
Got it in. I can’t believe I am doing this again.
I found it interesting that they got rid of the competency question about SSA subject matter experience. This seems to suggest that they do not see a lot of value in hiring insiders or claimants reps - ie those with the most knowledge of substantive SSA law.
OTOH, it said to list 9 references but also stated that if you were a former SSAer, they might talk to people in the agency about you even if you didn’t list them! I thought that was a little weird, but hopefully plays into my favor as a former SSAer.
Also strange that they got rid of virtual interviews, especially since most of the hearing are virtual. Perhaps this is just a nod to the broader return to the office policies that are all the rage. Or maybe they hired someone in 22/23 from the virtual interviews, and then the hired applicant showed up IRL and had terrible BO.
|
|
|
|
Post by neufenland on Oct 10, 2024 10:21:06 GMT -5
Got it in. I can’t believe I am doing this again. I found it interesting that they got rid of the competency question about SSA subject matter experience. This seems to suggest that they do not see a lot of value in hiring insiders or claimants reps - ie those with the most knowledge of substantive SSA law. OTOH, it said to list 9 references but also stated that if you were a former SSAer, they might talk to people in the agency about you even if you didn’t list them! I thought that was a little weird, but hopefully plays into my favor as a former SSAer. Also strange that they got rid of virtual interviews, especially since most of the hearing are virtual. Perhaps this is just a nod to the broader return to the office policies that are all the rage. Or maybe they hired someone in 22/23 from the virtual interviews, and then the hired applicant showed up IRL and had terrible BO. “This seems to suggest that they do not see a lot of value in hiring insiders or claimants reps - ie those with the most knowledge of substantive SSA law.” I doubt this is true. The “professional competence” question was broader than last time, but was tailored to how you could relate it to the SSA ALJ position. This is where the agency attorneys would stress their familiarity with the program. I think the question being broader was meant to not discourage outsiders (vs. to discourage insiders). They will pick the people they want, regardless. That will include many current SSA attorneys. |
|
