How many on your SI panel?

[jcse]

When I got to the SI, I was told the third panel member was not there. I was asked to sign a consent or to "reschedule" my SI. The latter was not an option, as I had just spent 2 nites in DC, having taken the WD a few days prior. Afterward, I started to wonder whether the lack of the 3d panel member will affect my SI score? Did this happen to anyone else?

[samone]

Yes it did and I am wondering the same thing.

[arlene25]

It happened a lot at the last SI as well, I don't think it impacts your score at all! good luck

[hopeful]

I signed the same form and am not too worried about it. I think OPM is just having difficulty getting the panels together with the desired members.

[lawlord]

Happened to me also. I did give thought to the panel's composition but didn't give any thought to its impact on my score.

[happy]

I'm an ALJ now, so I'm not really sweating it, but this happened to me, as well. In hindsight, I wished I had not agreed to the 2-person panel because I got the distinct impression that one of them did not like me and felt that his score would then have greater weight as half the total rather than just a third. If I had had it to do over again, I would not have. However, I was in DC already and so did not have to worry about the cost of making a second trip to come back for a three-person interview.

All in all, it does not appear to have been catastrophic to my chances. Although my score was not among the highest, it was obviously high enough to make the certificates (I was selected off of the second).

[vietnamveteran]

I had two. I did not give it a thought. One my way out I passed another interview where there were three. I think the one missing was the attorney and I think that may have been beneficial to me. Overall I think it went well. I did ask one member whether he was the ALJ and he said by the rules he could not tell. I don't know why. The interview went about 40 minutes.

[privateatty]

I had the same thing happen to me last year. The two persons who interviewed me (stupidly I signed the waiver) were cold, rude and borderline nasty. I was so taken aback (my first interview EVER) that I stumbled. Every attempt I made (mostly non-verbal) to "bridge the gap" was met by non-responsive stares. I later learned through this Board that this was a "Structured Interview" and not to take it personally, but at the time I did. I left the room feeling very hurt, despite the fact that I have been a bare-knuckles litigator for over 25 yrs. Go figure.

This year will be different. (I am a Vet "re-tread".) I will go in there like I go into the courtroom. I will forget trying to establish a rapport with these folks. They don't want to hear it and I question whether or not they could feel it.

[deltajudge]

8-)Welcome to OHA/ODAR, they are only interviewing you because they have to under the present circumstances.

[privateatty]

DJ:

This was OPM, not OHA/ODAR. The latter were quite nice and professional.

[traceb]

I'm very VERY worried about my SI. It is scheduled for Friday, the 16th of January. Bad timing. I'm not even sure I can get a place to stay and it looks like the airlines have jacked ticket prices up. My last trip broke me, Christmas is coming. . .

Waaah, Waaah, Waaah.

[deaddisco]

I had two instead of 3 and I'm now an ALJ.

the structured interview was well....structured. the interview is designed to throw you off some. just answer the questions, stay professional and keep plowing through

[jcse]

Traceb, do not worry. I had not been on an interview in years and, at least in my case, the SI was a breeze compared to the WD. As a man I work with said, stop whining and just go do it..remember you are not being interviewed for the Supreme Court, or a cabinet office, or even for a top law firm...the worst part of all of it is waiting for your score!

[zero]

It doesn't sound like the waiver of the third panel member is anything to worry about.