26 y/o, just graduated law school

[sgl]

Hi,

I'm 26, just graduated law school (sat for the bar in July), and want to eventually become an Administrative Law Judge (SSA preferably). My first job will likely involve state criminal prosecution. But in 2 to 3 years I plan to become a staff attorney/atty adviser at the SSA.

What career course should I take to improve my chances? Does OPM look highly on staff atty experience with the federal agency for which you'd like to serve as ALJ? I would like to first apply at age 33 or 34 (when I've hit the 7 year experience mark).

Any advice?

[workdrone]

Sept 10, 2008 16:18:30 GMT -5 @sgl said:

Any advice?

If you really want to optimize your odds. You're better off joining one of the military JAG Corps as a prosecutor/defense counsel for a tour of duty because you'll get litigation experience and a 5 pt veteran's preferences due to services during a time of war (as had been decleared by the POTUS for military service since 9/11/2001).

As for why veteran's preference is helpful. Search through this forum and you'll find reams of posts explaining why.

After that, find a litigation job in the public or private sector to your liking, and litigate for another handful of years. Good place to work could be a trial counsel with ICE doing deportation work. Daily litigation, GS-14/15 tracks available, and possibility to become either an Immigration ALJ or apply for the traditional ALJ position.

Being a staff attorney at SSA is not necessarily a plus. In fact, in previous hirings, it was a negative in the eyes of OPM. Additionally, being a staff attorney is only a plus if you are a high performer and has a good professional reputation. It appears most of the insiders hired this round had additional experiences either serving as Senior Attorneys, Group Supervisors, HOD, or worked at the Region.

Finally, as for applying as soon as you hit 7 years. It's good to start young, but don't hold your breath. Most of the candidates hired last round are in there 40-50s with 10-20+ years of experiences. There were exceptions, but they were few and far in between.

It's good to start with a goal in mind, but in this case, you got many years of hard work ahead of you that you might be looking too far ahead. Find a job you enjoy, excel in it, and the rest of the pieces will fall in place naturally. Good luck.

[pm]

OPM looks down on ODAR staff attorney experience. OPM does not evaluate people on an agency specific basis either.

I suggest you acquaint yourself with the 6 different categories of experience that OPM wants you to list on the ALJ application and try to get solid experience in those 6 areas. It's entirely possible to be a prosecutor and yet have no experience in 2 or 3 of the areas that appear on the application.

A good start would be to clerk for a judge, then work in a high volume job as prosecutor or public defender, then get some administrative law experience.

[sgl]

Thanks for your advice. I appreciate it.

[sgl]

Where can I find a listing of these 6 categories?

[barkley]

Next time the job is advertised (and there should be at least one posting between now and the time you get your six years in) review the criteria. I don't have my materials with me to spout them off but most of them, any attorney should be able to address - the ability to do legal research, the ability to write well, the ability to communicate orally. I heard some people struggled with judicial management. So if you get the opportunity to manage a docket or an office, that would give you something to talk about.

As to your original question, the answer is no one career path will lead to ALJ. If you could poll current judges, you would find vastly different paths - some with just agency experience, some with heavy litigation, some with military, some with Worker's Comp. You would see folks in their 30s and folks in their 80s. Some made it their first time applying, some were on an old register and waited 20 years or more to be selected.

I guess my point is there is no golden ticket to punch on the way to ALJ. For someone fresh out of school, I would advise that you find something to be passionate about. Whether it is criminal prosecution, or serving your country in the military, or helping people negotiate their their way through an SSI claim or any other area of the law - tFind something that interests you and makes you look forward to going to work in the morning. Take advantage of opportunities to travel. Volunteer to serve in your bar association. Teach at a youth court.

If you can find a path that fits your skills and personality, you will succeed and be satisfied. Success in any corner lends itself to a stronger ALJ packet. Then, if the ALJ thing works out, great. If it does not work out for you, you still have a career to be proud of. The thing is, if you are not a litigator, don't be a public defender for 7 years thinking it will help you be an ALJ. If you don't like being told what to do, don't join the military just to be an ALJ. Ask government lawyers what they like/don't like about the job before you go that route. No job is worth being miserable for.

[morgullord]

I concur with barkley's counsel.

[sgl]

Thanks Barkley. Is it really the consensus that SSA/agency experience as an attorney adviser is generally worthless and even detrimental? FWIW, it seems unfathomable to me that experience as an attorney with the Social Security Administration would be viewed negatively when applying for a position as an ALJ with the....Social Security Administration. I'd think OPM would want ALJ's with a working knowledge of the subject matter over which they're presiding.

As for JAG, it's a good enough idea, but I'm not really in a financial position to join the military for the next 4 years (not to mention the physical requirements).

[pm]

Sept 10, 2008 22:58:20 GMT -5 @sgl said:

Thanks Barkley. Is it really the consensus that SSA/agency experience as an attorney adviser is generally worthless and even detrimental? FWIW, it seems unfathomable to me that experience as an attorney with the Social Security Administration would be viewed negatively when applying for a position as an ALJ with the....Social Security Administration. I'd think OPM would want ALJ's with a working knowledge of the subject matter over which they're presiding.

As for JAG, it's a good enough idea, but I'm not really in a financial position to join the military for the next 4 years (not to mention the physical requirements).

You don't apply to individual agencies. You apply to OPM which establishes one register from which ALJ positions at various agencies are filled. OPM does not care about agency specific experience. OPM is oriented toward evaluating the best ALJs for any and all federal agencies. 20 years of experience at SSA will not help you much at the FCC.

Last year OPM apparently gave some weight (not much) to SSA experience but in the past they have given it little or no weight. It is clear that OPM does not consider SSA experience of great value to agencies other than SSA. It certainly can be detrimental if you've done it for too long or done it to the exclusion of other broader experience.

[sgl]

Sept 10, 2008 23:26:58 GMT -5 pm said:

Sept 10, 2008 22:58:20 GMT -5 @sgl said:

Thanks Barkley. Is it really the consensus that SSA/agency experience as an attorney adviser is generally worthless and even detrimental? FWIW, it seems unfathomable to me that experience as an attorney with the Social Security Administration would be viewed negatively when applying for a position as an ALJ with the....Social Security Administration. I'd think OPM would want ALJ's with a working knowledge of the subject matter over which they're presiding.

As for JAG, it's a good enough idea, but I'm not really in a financial position to join the military for the next 4 years (not to mention the physical requirements).

You don't apply to individual agencies. You apply to OPM which establishes one register from which ALJ positions at various agencies are filled. OPM does not care about agency specific experience. OPM is oriented toward evaluating the best ALJs for any and all federal agencies. 20 years of experience at SSA will not help you much at the FCC.

Last year OPM apparently gave some weight (not much) to SSA experience but in the past they have given it little or no weight. It is clear that OPM does not consider SSA experience of great value to agencies other than SSA. It certainly can be detrimental if you've done it for too long or done it to the exclusion of other broader experience.

Sounds like you just need well-rounded experience. What about experience with state administrative law? Perhaps serving as a state ALJ?

[jagghagg]

Sept 10, 2008 22:58:20 GMT -5 @sgl said:

As for JAG, it's a good enough idea, but I'm not really in a financial position to join the military for the next 4 years (not to mention the physical requirements).

Well, Barkley and I served in one location together and I expect we both would tell you that, without considering being a Marine JAG, the physical requirements for JAGS (and Chaplains) are not that strenuous. (Marines are another creature altogether.) If you can run a mile and a half, do 100 situps, and something like 25 pushups - and your weight is appropriate - you can probably be a JAG. It's a great opportunity - you'll get more trial experience off the bat as a JAG than you will ever get in any other place with the exception of, perhaps, a public defender.

As for the money - I don't know what you think you are going to be able to earn in the public sector (criminal work), but the pay for being a JAG is comparable. AND about half of your income is tax-exempt because it is not considered "pay." Additionally, you have no need for sick leave because it doesn't exist in the military. If you are sick, you are "on quarters" and that's that. Your pay is not affected. Finally, you have a leave benefit that is comparable to federal service - and is, in fact, better than you get as an entry-level attorney in federal service. (It takes about 16 years of federal civil service to match military leave. This is offset by the fact that you are "serving" 24/7 and so if you want to be on vacation over a weekend and are out of town doing so, you have to take leave.)

If your financial consideration is the existence of law school loans, I would note that (first) I think, in the military, you would earn as much as public sector criminal work and (second) loans like that can be deferred for awhile when you take on military service. Additionally, the military services are providing rather substantial bonuses for staying in after a few years.

But don't get the idea that it is "easy" to become a JAG. I think many on the outside think all you have to do is apply and - BOOM - they will take you, because that's not true. Acceptance rates vary between 25%-40%. I served with a number of "Ivy Leaguers."

Finally - as for SSA experience --- given the high percentage of ALJ candidates who made it who HAVE SSA experience, I would say the tide has turned from SSA not wanting it to actually preferring it. COSS Astrue reported to Congress through the GSA that SSA would prefer to be able to easily hire ALJ candidates with agency-specific experience. That, in and of itself, should settle that kind of debate. (And with all the agency attorneys getting ALJ positions, there are a number of agency attorney-advisor positions opening up. If you want to be an SSA ALJ, you might not want to wait to get your agency-specific experience. You could get your trial experience by continually doing pro bono work - then you would have most of what you would need to be an attractive candidate.)

[barkley]

slg - here is the deal on agency experience, at least from my seat in the house.

The way OPM used to run things, one had to have seven years of litigation experience in order to complete the other parts of the process to become ALJ. Agency people who had limited experience prior to joining SSA had difficulty meeting the initial qualifying threshold. OPM also gave different weight to vet pref points, so even if an agency person was on the list, it was difficult to get a high enough score to be considered when the rare opening occurred. There was some litigation over the vet pref, which meant some 10 years or so passed without any ALJ hiring. NOW, OPM will allow seven years of litigation OR seven years of administrative law experience to qualify. Vet pref points are applied differently. When you combine that with the huge numbers of slots being hired at one time, agency people have had a much better success rate in getting passed OPM and being hired by SSA.

The problem that I see agency people having with the six OPM accomplishment record questions is the oral communication skills question and the judicial management. It is not good enough to be an excellent SSA employee doing their job. To really have meaningful things to talk about in those two sections, one has to be doing something above the normal or have something qualifying in their pre-agency life.

There are plenty of threads which discuss whether what agency employees do is worthwhile in comparison to other law jobs. I want to re-emphasize that I would not take an agency job just to fill a square on my dance card on my way to be an ALJ. Talk to some people who do it and decide if the pros and cons balance out for you and what you want from your career. I like the job, but know some who are miserable.

[nonamouse]

Sept 10, 2008 22:58:20 GMT -5 @sgl said:

Thanks Barkley. Is it really the consensus that SSA/agency experience as an attorney adviser is generally worthless and even detrimental? FWIW, it seems unfathomable to me that experience as an attorney with the Social Security Administration would be viewed negatively when applying for a position as an ALJ with the....Social Security Administration. I'd think OPM would want ALJ's with a working knowledge of the subject matter over which they're presiding.

As for JAG, it's a good enough idea, but I'm not really in a financial position to join the military for the next 4 years (not to mention the physical requirements).

No it is not true that SSA exeperience is useless or a detriment. A diversity of legal experiece that includes high volume litigation is a plus because it gives you more options and additional skills/subject matter knowledge that will help you get through the OPM part of the process. Having some SSA exeperience will significantly improve your odds of being selected by SSA as an ALJ if that is where you would like to serve. The people doing the hiring at SSA seemed to realize this year that they could get an ALJ with "inside" experience to full performance faster than someone with no experience. A number of those who went through the first training classes this year are already at full performance level and working very well as the staff grapevine is passing along praises for them.

I became an ALJ this year after working for a variety of state agencies and SSA. I deliberately took what was technically a step backward in my career path to take the job of staff attorney in a hearing office. I did this specifically to learn the programs and internal business process where I hoped to eventually become an ALJ. If the application process had not opened last year, then I probably would have gone from the staff attorney position (writing decisions for ALJs) back to a government litigation position.

The staff attorney in a hearing office learns an invaluable amount about what the ALJs hearing SSA cases need to know because the staff attorneys do the pre- and post-hearing research, flesh out decisions from writing instructions that can be as inadequate as simply "pay" or "deny" and respectfully talk the ALJs down from the ledge when they are making a legal error. It was obvious during my "judge school" that people with no hearing office experience were going to have a much steeper learning curve over the next couple of years than those who know the programs and process. New ALJs who have served at least a few years in a hearing office can formulate hypothetical questions for the vocational expert almost in their sleep while it is a struggle for most new ALJs. The difference is their time in working with (or around) hypotheticals in many 100s or 1000s of cases and seeing what works and does not work on a daily basis. Additionally, don't underestimate the steepness of the learning curve for the electronic folders, the case management system, the SSA mainframe, timekeeping, staff interaction (unions) and a host of other quirky things that come with working for the federal government.

I did plan my career with an eye to becoming an ALJ at SSA and it worked. I'm one of the younger ALJs (a surprising # were hired in their 30s & early 40s this time). However, a large portion of my formal ALJ training was essentially a refresher course for things that I've already learned within the agency and in years past. I got a lot of contested litigation and administrative hearing experience representing the government for about 10 years. I also did some prosecution and some appellate work.

I presided over disability cases for a state agency which gave me important experience in working with medical issues. There is no way that someone who spent all of their time doing other types of work can "cram" years of medical knowledge into their head in a few weeks or months. It takes lots of study, picking the brains of helpful doctors and just dealing with 100s of medical cases (even if they are processed under non-SSA regulations). Some of the new ALJs were worker's comp judges or medical malpractice attorneys with nursing degrees. I was lucky because I worked in a state that had adopted the SSA "impairment listings" so the evaluation was the same. No one can learn how to efficiently read through 100s of pages of medical records picking out the relevant facts without years of practice. Some ALJs never learn how to do it properly and that is not the kind of ALJ that you want to be!

I would suggest finding something doing contested hearings or litigation for a state government or federal agency other than SSA first. It is too easy to get into the SSA staff attorney job and
get stuck if one has no litigation experience beforehand. Try to get a job as a hearing officer for a state agency or a worker's comp judge or anything where you will actually preside over the cases at some point. This is the one area of the 6 required in the application where most people cannot get any points.

Good luck to you!

[sgl]

Sept 11, 2008 5:29:01 GMT -5 @jagghagg said:

Sept 10, 2008 22:58:20 GMT -5 @sgl said:

As for JAG, it's a good enough idea, but I'm not really in a financial position to join the military for the next 4 years (not to mention the physical requirements).

Well, Barkley and I served in one location together and I expect we both would tell you that, without considering being a Marine JAG, the physical requirements for JAGS (and Chaplains) are not that strenuous. (Marines are another creature altogether.) If you can run a mile and a half, do 100 situps, and something like 25 pushups - and your weight is appropriate - you can probably be a JAG. It's a great opportunity - you'll get more trial experience off the bat as a JAG than you will ever get in any other place with the exception of, perhaps, a public defender.

As for the money - I don't know what you think you are going to be able to earn in the public sector (criminal work), but the pay for being a JAG is comparable. AND about half of your income is tax-exempt because it is not considered "pay." Additionally, you have no need for sick leave because it doesn't exist in the military. If you are sick, you are "on quarters" and that's that. Your pay is not affected. Finally, you have a leave benefit that is comparable to federal service - and is, in fact, better than you get as an entry-level attorney in federal service. (It takes about 16 years of federal civil service to match military leave. This is offset by the fact that you are "serving" 24/7 and so if you want to be on vacation over a weekend and are out of town doing so, you have to take leave.)

If your financial consideration is the existence of law school loans, I would note that (first) I think, in the military, you would earn as much as public sector criminal work and (second) loans like that can be deferred for awhile when you take on military service. Additionally, the military services are providing rather substantial bonuses for staying in after a few years.

But don't get the idea that it is "easy" to become a JAG. I think many on the outside think all you have to do is apply and - BOOM - they will take you, because that's not true. Acceptance rates vary between 25%-40%. I served with a number of "Ivy Leaguers."

[/i] [/quote]

Thanks for this info. One of the factors I'm heavily weighing is school loan assistance. A federal law was recently passed that essentially affords a law grad the opportunity to wipe out a huge chunk (up to 60k) of federal loan debt if they serve as either a public defender (state or federal) or state criminal prosecutor for a certain number of years (at least 3 but no more than 6). Further, my state (WA), has a state program that wipes out something like 5k of debt each year if you serve as a state prosecutor (though I suspect the federal law preempts this program). This is essentially money that I can add to my current salary. That, combined with the litigation experience I'd receive at these kind of jobs, is just too good to pass up IMO. As attractive as JAG may be, I haven't come across any benefits that would allow me to wipe out this kind of debt (without having to stay for 7+ years). With JAG, I can't help but feel like the only reason I would be joining is to increase my chances at something (ALJ) that may or may not happen far into the future. And you're right, JAG is quite competitive, and I'd only want to go that route for the right reasons (genuine desire to serve in the military etc.). I seriously considered it during law school, but I just don't think I'm the right fit for it. I respect the hell out of those who do take that route, for sure.

[sgl]

Sept 11, 2008 8:57:29 GMT -5 barkley said:

slg - here is the deal on agency experience, at least from my seat in the house.

The way OPM used to run things, one had to have seven years of litigation experience in order to complete the other parts of the process to become ALJ. Agency people who had limited experience prior to joining SSA had difficulty meeting the initial qualifying threshold. OPM also gave different weight to vet pref points, so even if an agency person was on the list, it was difficult to get a high enough score to be considered when the rare opening occurred. There was some litigation over the vet pref, which meant some 10 years or so passed without any ALJ hiring. NOW, OPM will allow seven years of litigation OR seven years of administrative law experience to qualify. Vet pref points are applied differently. When you combine that with the huge numbers of slots being hired at one time, agency people have had a much better success rate in getting passed OPM and being hired by SSA.

The problem that I see agency people having with the six OPM accomplishment record questions is the oral communication skills question and the judicial management. It is not good enough to be an excellent SSA employee doing their job. To really have meaningful things to talk about in those two sections, one has to be doing something above the normal or have something qualifying in their pre-agency life.

There are plenty of threads which discuss whether what agency employees do is worthwhile in comparison to other law jobs. I want to re-emphasize that I would not take an agency job just to fill a square on my dance card on my way to be an ALJ. Talk to some people who do it and decide if the pros and cons balance out for you and what you want from your career. I like the job, but know some who are miserable.

Thanks for this. Would a combination of experience suffice? That is, say, 3 years litigation exp. plus 4 years of agency experience?

While I know little of SS law, per se, I LOVED the administrative law field in law school; it was one of my favorite courses. From what I've read, an ODAR AA just starting out would operate as a kind of staff attorney for the ALJ corp at whichever field office you're stationed--writing opinions, researching etc. Is it OGC who actually handles claimant litigation (i.e. should it arise on appeal to an Art 1 Mag or a USCA)? Who argues on behalf of the agency at hearings before the ALJ? Is that also OGC? Do ODAR lawyers ever transfer to OGC and vice versa? I presume experience at both would be valuable.

[sgl]

Sept 11, 2008 9:01:33 GMT -5 nonamouse said:

Sept 10, 2008 22:58:20 GMT -5 @sgl said:

Thanks Barkley. Is it really the consensus that SSA/agency experience as an attorney adviser is generally worthless and even detrimental? FWIW, it seems unfathomable to me that experience as an attorney with the Social Security Administration would be viewed negatively when applying for a position as an ALJ with the....Social Security Administration. I'd think OPM would want ALJ's with a working knowledge of the subject matter over which they're presiding.

As for JAG, it's a good enough idea, but I'm not really in a financial position to join the military for the next 4 years (not to mention the physical requirements).

No it is not true that SSA exeperience is useless or a detriment. A diversity of legal experiece that includes high volume litigation is a plus because it gives you more options and additional skills/subject matter knowledge that will help you get through the OPM part of the process. Having some SSA exeperience will significantly improve your odds of being selected by SSA as an ALJ if that is where you would like to serve. The people doing the hiring at SSA seemed to realize this year that they could get an ALJ with "inside" experience to full performance faster than someone with no experience. A number of those who went through the first training classes this year are already at full performance level and working very well as the staff grapevine is passing along praises for them.

I became an ALJ this year after working for a variety of state agencies and SSA. I deliberately took what was technically a step backward in my career path to take the job of staff attorney in a hearing office. I did this specifically to learn the programs and internal business process where I hoped to eventually become an ALJ. If the application process had not opened last year, then I probably would have gone from the staff attorney position (writing decisions for ALJs) back to a government litigation position.

The staff attorney in a hearing office learns an invaluable amount about what the ALJs hearing SSA cases need to know because the staff attorneys do the pre- and post-hearing research, flesh out decisions from writing instructions that can be as inadequate as simply "pay" or "deny" and respectfully talk the ALJs down from the ledge when they are making a legal error. It was obvious during my "judge school" that people with no hearing office experience were going to have a much steeper learning curve over the next couple of years than those who know the programs and process. New ALJs who have served at least a few years in a hearing office can formulate hypothetical questions for the vocational expert almost in their sleep while it is a struggle for most new ALJs. The difference is their time in working with (or around) hypotheticals in many 100s or 1000s of cases and seeing what works and does not work on a daily basis. Additionally, don't underestimate the steepness of the learning curve for the electronic folders, the case management system, the SSA mainframe, timekeeping, staff interaction (unions) and a host of other quirky things that come with working for the federal government.

I did plan my career with an eye to becoming an ALJ at SSA and it worked. I'm one of the younger ALJs (a surprising # were hired in their 30s & early 40s this time). However, a large portion of my formal ALJ training was essentially a refresher course for things that I've already learned within the agency and in years past. I got a lot of contested litigation and administrative hearing experience representing the government for about 10 years. I also did some prosecution and some appellate work.

I presided over disability cases for a state agency which gave me important experience in working with medical issues. There is no way that someone who spent all of their time doing other types of work can "cram" years of medical knowledge into their head in a few weeks or months. It takes lots of study, picking the brains of helpful doctors and just dealing with 100s of medical cases (even if they are processed under non-SSA regulations). Some of the new ALJs were worker's comp judges or medical malpractice attorneys with nursing degrees. I was lucky because I worked in a state that had adopted the SSA "impairment listings" so the evaluation was the same. No one can learn how to efficiently read through 100s of pages of medical records picking out the relevant facts without years of practice. Some ALJs never learn how to do it properly and that is not the kind of ALJ that you want to be!

I would suggest finding something doing contested hearings or litigation for a state government or federal agency other than SSA first. It is too easy to get into the SSA staff attorney job and
get stuck if one has no litigation experience beforehand. Try to get a job as a hearing officer for a state agency or a worker's comp judge or anything where you will actually preside over the cases at some point. This is the one area of the 6 required in the application where most people cannot get any points.

Good luck to you!

Thanks so much. I wondered whether state agency experience was valuable (particularly experience as an ALJ). Your info suggests that it is. My state (WA) allows pro tem service as an ALJ after 5 years 'legal experience.'

[pm]

Sept 11, 2008 5:29:01 GMT -5 @jagghagg said:

Sept 10, 2008 22:58:20 GMT -5 @sgl said:

As for JAG, it's a good enough idea, but I'm not really in a financial position to join the military for the next 4 years (not to mention the physical requirements).

Finally - as for SSA experience --- given the high percentage of ALJ candidates who made it who HAVE SSA experience, I would say the tide has turned from SSA not wanting it to actually preferring it. COSS Astrue reported to Congress through the GSA that SSA would prefer to be able to easily hire ALJ candidates with agency-specific experience. That, in and of itself, should settle that kind of debate.

[/i] [/quote]

The issue is not and has never been whether SSA values SSA experience. SSA loves SSA experience and always has. That is one reason SSA has been agitating for their own register for more than 20 years, so that they can give more weight to agency experience.

The issue is whether OPM values SSA experience, which is a completely different topic.

[morgullord]

No one represents the United States in SSA ALJ hearings.

As for OGC: They believe that ALJs are, for the most part, idiots (despite court remand rates indicating otherwise); they think that much the worse of ODAR attorneys who work for the ALJs.

Before certain readers leap to the attack, I will remind them that I have experience working with OGC attorneys and have my information first-hand.

[pm]

Sept 10, 2008 17:16:36 GMT -5 @sgl said:

Where can I find a listing of these 6 categories?

Decision making
Interpersonal skills
Oral communication
Writing
Judicial analysis
Judicial management

[ruonthelist]

sgl: I think that you have gotten a lot of good advice on this thread, to which I just want to add one thing: the ALJ selection process is a moving target. For example, the six categories on the current AR that pm listed above do not fit precisely with the five categories that were on the Supplemental Qualification Statement in the nineties. The treatment of administrative agency experience is different than it used to be. The issue of subject matter experience has been controversial for decades. And, as long as OPM continues to run the hiring system, there will always be circumstances in which OPM and the hiring agencies have different priorities and agendas.

If there were a perfect ALJ candidate career path for the selection system as it exists today, and if you identified and followed that perfect path, when you had your 7 years of qualifying experience the path that you followed might no longer be the perfect one because the rules might have changed in the meantime. The ALJ selection system changed between when I finished law school and when I became an ALJ, and it has changed further since I became an ALJ.

I don't mean to suggest that you should despair. After all, over a hundred people just got hired under rules that didn't exist when they were accumulating their qualifying experience, so it obviously can be done. I do suggest that you accept the uncertainty inherent in the system as you make your career plans. The precise weighting given to particular jobs and the lists of KSAs may change, but if you look for jobs that give you a variety of experience (at least some of which involves litigation), with a clear progression of increasing responsibility as your career proceeds, you will probably be on the right track, no matter how OPM or the hiring agencies tinker with the system in the future.

Best of luck,
RU