|
|
Post by ladyinwaiting on Mar 9, 2009 15:40:52 GMT -5
Regarding the queries by Legal Beagle and Karaj surrounding the breakdown of scores and one's place on the register: THAT IS JUST THE POINT! There has been much said on this board regarding How do they score? How can one appeal if you don't know where you went wrong? There are the defenders of the system who point out that the Bar Exam is much like the OPM testing, etc... There is truth to be found on both sides of those issues.
On the other hand, I just cannot grasp the logic, or the reasons for the secrecy about how many people are on the register and where do YOU (or I) stand. What is wrong with my knowing that there are 715 persons on the register and I rank as #435 or whatever? What governmental necessity overrides the rights of those who went through this gut-wrenching and expensive process, to know just how they landed after all was said and done?
Maybe I am missing something, but I just do not get it.
|
|
|
|
Post by privateatty on Mar 9, 2009 16:15:42 GMT -5
No agency is going to tell you or anyone else anything they don't think they have to. Consideration is never part of the equation. If there is any consensus on this Board on this subject it is that the scoring of the AR is quite possibly arbitrary and susceptible to logical, legal criticism. Who the heck scores it anyway and what do they know? God knows the SI has GOT to have a subjective factor...having gone through it twice, I felt it. They liked me, they didn't like me, they like me....
Maybe those who love to craft polls would like to "flesh out" years of lawyering, type(s) of practice, etc. I know generically that a lack of direct litigation experience has been an issue in the past, but then I also know that it has not necessarily precluded folk(s) from being hired in 2008.
So, ladyinwaiting, to quote the former Pres, "I feel your pain." But I don't think anything will change.
|
|
|
|
Post by carjack on Mar 9, 2009 16:38:23 GMT -5
I agree with PA, anything they say can and will be used against them. Once they tell you your placement, you start wondering why someone ranked 501 or 701 got an opening rather than you. And what happens if they've actually given you the wrong number? They probably already know your rank, so telling you will only give you more ammunition to use against them. If it were my agency, I'd probably go with the "trust me, I've got your best interests at heart" approach. It's why the airlines won't tell you your flight has been cancelled until they have to - it keeps the kvetching down.
|
|
|
|
Post by karaj on Mar 9, 2009 17:15:03 GMT -5
There are the defenders of the system who point out that the Bar Exam is much like the OPM testing, etc... There is truth to be found on both sides of those issues. On the other hand, I just cannot grasp the logic, or the reasons for the secrecy about how many people are on the register and where do YOU (or I) stand. What is wrong with my knowing that there are 715 persons on the register and I rank as #435 or whatever? What governmental necessity overrides the rights of those who went through this gut-wrenching and expensive process, to know just how they landed after all was said and done? Maybe I am missing something, but I just do not get it. I think what bothers me is the apparent complacency with which many are accepting the unfairness of the process. This is not Siberia. Things will not change if we do not have the courage to change them. The Bar exam was different because you got a separate score for the multi State, it was a standardized test, and graded by computer. You got a score or a pass/fail on the essays. That at least told you something. |
|
|
|
Post by privateatty on Mar 9, 2009 17:39:50 GMT -5
There are the defenders of the system who point out that the Bar Exam is much like the OPM testing, etc... There is truth to be found on both sides of those issues. On the other hand, I just cannot grasp the logic, or the reasons for the secrecy about how many people are on the register and where do YOU (or I) stand. What is wrong with my knowing that there are 715 persons on the register and I rank as #435 or whatever? What governmental necessity overrides the rights of those who went through this gut-wrenching and expensive process, to know just how they landed after all was said and done? Maybe I am missing something, but I just do not get it. I think what bothers me is the apparent complacency with which many are accepting the unfairness of the process. This is not Siberia. Things will not change if we do not have the courage to change them. The Bar exam was different because you got a separate score for the multi State, it was a standardized test, and graded by computer. You got a score or a pass/fail on the essays. That at least told you something. I don't hear that. What I hear is "what the heck can you do"? Any lawsuit would be subject to a Motion to Dismiss and frankly, I'm not sure they are violating any statute or regulation. How can you prove damages? I agree that there is a lack of transparency. But that is hardly unique in federal government. |
|
|
|
Post by pm on Mar 9, 2009 20:10:14 GMT -5
There are the defenders of the system who point out that the Bar Exam is much like the OPM testing, etc... There is truth to be found on both sides of those issues. On the other hand, I just cannot grasp the logic, or the reasons for the secrecy about how many people are on the register and where do YOU (or I) stand. What is wrong with my knowing that there are 715 persons on the register and I rank as #435 or whatever? What governmental necessity overrides the rights of those who went through this gut-wrenching and expensive process, to know just how they landed after all was said and done? Maybe I am missing something, but I just do not get it. I think what bothers me is the apparent complacency with which many are accepting the unfairness of the process. This is not Siberia. Things will not change if we do not have the courage to change them. The Bar exam was different because you got a separate score for the multi State, it was a standardized test, and graded by computer. You got a score or a pass/fail on the essays. That at least told you something. You're assuming the existence of unfairness above and beyond that which exists in any employment situation. This is indeed not Siberia but you have not been imprisoned. I have never seen a perfect employment/hiring situation anywhere at any time. But the OPM/ODAR process ranks in the top 10% of the ones I have seen in procedural fairness. And that's not a compliment to OPM and ODAR, just a reflection of the reality of real world hiring processes. If you are having trouble with this, how have you dealt with hiring situations where you had no clue why you didn't get the job, or with situations in which a tall beautiful young woman was hired despite your superior qualifications? At least with this, you usually have a clue. If your score is 42 and you picked one city, you are gone. |
|
|
|
Post by nylawyer on Mar 10, 2009 15:42:59 GMT -5
I did not ever receive a breakdown of my score, although I made several requests. My question was whether anyone else ever succeeded. Sorry for the confusion- my point was simply that, as I understand it, most of your final score is made up from the application. Since I have no reason to believe I completely tanked either the interview or the written part, I have to assume that my score from my application was pretty bad. Put it this way- nobody on this board is below me on the register. I just have to wonder (since OPM won't flat out tell me) if my score on the application was so ridiculously low that the only reason I moved on to the later rounds was because I put the date of my bar admission on the application, and I really had no shot at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by ladyinwaiting on Mar 15, 2009 8:43:45 GMT -5
In answer to PM's reply of March 9th re the lack of transparency in the ALJ Register: Sorry, PM, but your comparisons to general hiring in the private sector just do not fit. For one thing, I have never NOT been offered a job I went after. So there. More to the point, when you go after a private sector job, you are aware of the ways in which the hiring depends on how well you are liked, sometimes even who referred you, networking, etc. There is no promisein private industry hiring that if you jump through several hoops ringed with fire there is a REGISTER you may be placed on which works BY HIGHEST SCORE referral.
In this Byzantine ALJ hiring process, however, as non-transparent as the scoring is, at the end of the scoring, there is a REGISTER. It is a FEDERAL REGISTER of persons who cared enough and were ambitious and intelligent enough to attempt the difficult process. Persons cared enough to alert supreme court judges and sometimes their managers where they work that a Federal interviewer would probably call them to VERIFY competencies. Unless the applicant was using Uncle Jack or AUntie Mary or their current lover as verifiers, an intelligent applicant would alert the verifier so that a call doesnt come out of the blue and leave the verifier puzzled. Then nine months passes and guess what: NO CALLS to verifiers. BUT, the AR is scored!!!! and it counts as a large part of the overall score!!!! Without verification. So, I guess CREATIVE writing, not legal writing, is the preferred way of handling the AR. Silly me, I thought it should be a concise statement of the important work you have done and how it illustrates your competency.
Then there is the REGISTER. Why would a REGISTER which one has competed to be on, need to be a secret? The answer given by one poster that people would gripe about their rank, or want to know why person #150 got an interview and #30 did not, doesn't quite get there. People are griping anyway, and if one is close enough to know someone's rank and that they got an interview....they probably would know that person's score, too, so they would gripe about that instead. Possibility of griping is only an excuse for lack of transparency if something fishy is going on, don't you think? If not fishy, then at least careless, or maybe even contemptuous?
|
|
|
|
Post by pm on Mar 15, 2009 9:24:09 GMT -5
In answer to PM's reply of March 9th re the lack of transparency in the ALJ Register: Sorry, PM, but your comparisons to general hiring in the private sector just do not fit. For one thing, I have never NOT been offered a job I went after. So there. More to the point, when you go after a private sector job, you are aware of the ways in which the hiring depends on how well you are liked, sometimes even who referred you, networking, etc. There is no promisein private industry hiring that if you jump through several hoops ringed with fire there is a REGISTER you may be placed on which works BY HIGHEST SCORE referral. In this Byzantine ALJ hiring process, however, as non-transparent as the scoring is, at the end of the scoring, there is a REGISTER. It is a FEDERAL REGISTER of persons who cared enough and were ambitious and intelligent enough to attempt the difficult process. Persons cared enough to alert supreme court judges and sometimes their managers where they work that a Federal interviewer would probably call them to VERIFY competencies. Unless the applicant was using Uncle Jack or AUntie Mary or their current lover as verifiers, an intelligent applicant would alert the verifier so that a call doesnt come out of the blue and leave the verifier puzzled. Then nine months passes and guess what: NO CALLS to verifiers. BUT, the AR is scored!!!! and it counts as a large part of the overall score!!!! Without verification. So, I guess CREATIVE writing, not legal writing, is the preferred way of handling the AR. Silly me, I thought it should be a concise statement of the important work you have done and how it illustrates your competency. Then there is the REGISTER. Why would a REGISTER which one has competed to be on, need to be a secret? The answer given by one poster that people would gripe about their rank, or want to know why person #150 got an interview and #30 did not, doesn't quite get there. People are griping anyway, and if one is close enough to know someone's rank and that they got an interview....they probably would know that person's score, too, so they would gripe about that instead. Possibility of griping is only an excuse for lack of transparency if something fishy is going on, don't you think? If not fishy, then at least careless, or maybe even contemptuous? Well, I guess if you have always been offered the jobs you want in the private sector then that proves that private sector hiring decsions are always perfectly made. There is no promise that you will be hired by the feds no matter what your score is. Interesting that you think that verifiers verify competencies. I doubt that is true. They simply verify that the facts upon which you base your alleged competencies are true. The purpose of having verifiers is to try to keep people honest. It doesn't mean they have to be contacted. And sorry you haven't figured this out yet, but creative writing is a big part of writing almost any type of legal test. If you are on the register, why is it your business as to who else is on the register? Answer - it is not. Why is it your business as to what their scores are? Answer - it is not. OPM doesn't care whether you gripe or not. They probably think that you have no right to know someone else's name and score. If you think this information should be public knowledge then put your money where your mouth is and give us your name and score. |
|
bern
New Member
Posts: 10
|
Post by bern on Mar 15, 2009 12:09:03 GMT -5
You know, I've applied for several state government jobs and the process is similar. You take an exam, you get ranked, you get a relative score based on some calculations you don't really understand. However, they send you a candidate number, which you can use to look up your ranking online. The number doesn't reveal your name or any personal information but does give you a glimpse into where you actually landed in the big picture. I'm not understanding why this can't happen here. I don't get what the big deal is. Moreover, I don't get why so many people are being so defensive about something that is of no personal consequence to them. Why so offended about people wanting to know where they stand? I know at least one state (mine) that does this routinely.
|
|
|
|
Post by privateatty on Mar 15, 2009 12:57:53 GMT -5
You know, I've applied for several state government jobs and the process is similar. You take an exam, you get ranked, you get a relative score based on some calculations you don't really understand. However, they send you a candidate number, which you can use to look up your ranking online. The number doesn't reveal your name or any personal information but does give you a glimpse into where you actually landed in the big picture. I'm not understanding why this can't happen here. I don't get what the big deal is. Moreover, I don't get why so many people are being so defensive about something that is of no personal consequence to them. Why so offended about people wanting to know where they stand? I know at least one state (mine) that does this routinely. I agree with bern. It would hardly leave OPM open to litigation (which, I assume, is their chief concern, given their track record). Giving us a number of 1 to 600 (or however many folks are on the Register) with that number who are could hardly be considered an unreasonable request. They must know that that their scoring of the AR is hardly scientific and that probably is scored by some folk who did not appreciate, nor fully understand, some jobs, accomplishments or what a federal or state jury trial may entail. For that reason alone it makes sense that they would not want to release the breakdown of scores. How is litigation experience weighted versus being a clerk to a U.S District Court Judge? General counsel's office to a solicitor's office? Etc. etc. |
|
|
|
Post by privateatty on Mar 15, 2009 13:14:40 GMT -5
In answer to PM's reply of March 9th re the lack of transparency in the ALJ Register: Sorry, PM, but your comparisons to general hiring in the private sector just do not fit. For one thing, I have never NOT been offered a job I went after. So there. More to the point, when you go after a private sector job, you are aware of the ways in which the hiring depends on how well you are liked, sometimes even who referred you, networking, etc. There is no promisein private industry hiring that if you jump through several hoops ringed with fire there is a REGISTER you may be placed on which works BY HIGHEST SCORE referral. In this Byzantine ALJ hiring process, however, as non-transparent as the scoring is, at the end of the scoring, there is a REGISTER. It is a FEDERAL REGISTER of persons who cared enough and were ambitious and intelligent enough to attempt the difficult process. Persons cared enough to alert supreme court judges and sometimes their managers where they work that a Federal interviewer would probably call them to VERIFY competencies. Unless the applicant was using Uncle Jack or AUntie Mary or their current lover as verifiers, an intelligent applicant would alert the verifier so that a call doesnt come out of the blue and leave the verifier puzzled. Then nine months passes and guess what: NO CALLS to verifiers. BUT, the AR is scored!!!! and it counts as a large part of the overall score!!!! Without verification. So, I guess CREATIVE writing, not legal writing, is the preferred way of handling the AR. Silly me, I thought it should be a concise statement of the important work you have done and how it illustrates your competency. Then there is the REGISTER. Why would a REGISTER which one has competed to be on, need to be a secret? The answer given by one poster that people would gripe about their rank, or want to know why person #150 got an interview and #30 did not, doesn't quite get there. People are griping anyway, and if one is close enough to know someone's rank and that they got an interview....they probably would know that person's score, too, so they would gripe about that instead. Possibility of griping is only an excuse for lack of transparency if something fishy is going on, don't you think? If not fishy, then at least careless, or maybe even contemptuous? Well, I guess if you have always been offered the jobs you want in the private sector then that proves that private sector hiring decsions are always perfectly made. There is no promise that you will be hired by the feds no matter what your score is. Interesting that you think that verifiers verify competencies. I doubt that is true. They simply verify that the facts upon which you base your alleged competencies are true. The purpose of having verifiers is to try to keep people honest. It doesn't mean they have to be contacted. And sorry you haven't figured this out yet, but creative writing is a big part of writing almost any type of legal test. If you are on the register, why is it your business as to who else is on the register? Answer - it is not. Why is it your business as to what their scores are? Answer - it is not. OPM doesn't care whether you gripe or not. They probably think that you have no right to know someone else's name and score. If you think this information should be public knowledge then put your money where your mouth is and give us your name and score. Allege competencies? Please. I hardly think an AR is a Complaint. Why would you think they are alleging competencies? Seems to me that would be a DR violation at the least. Probably violates personnel law, although I'm hardly the one to opine on that. A couple of my Judge verifiers opined on my competency (I hesitate to use the plural as that may be considered immodest). Whether or not OMNI reported it, and of so, correctly, is beyond my ken. Again. |
|
|
|
Post by karaj on Mar 15, 2009 14:44:07 GMT -5
Moreover, I don't get why so many people are being so defensive about something that is of no personal consequence to them. Why so offended about people wanting to know where they stand? I know at least one state (mine) that does this routinely. I've been wondering if there aren't OPM trolls on some of these threads, maybe even the AR graders themselves..  ? |
|
|
|
Post by ishmael on Mar 15, 2009 15:57:59 GMT -5
Moreover, I don't get why so many people are being so defensive about something that is of no personal consequence to them. Why so offended about people wanting to know where they stand? I know at least one state (mine) that does this routinely. I've been wondering wonder if there aren't OPM trolls on some of these threads, maybe even the AR graders themselves..? Who do you have in mind karaj?  |
|
|
|
Post by alj on Mar 15, 2009 18:48:57 GMT -5
I doubt anyone from OPM would take the time to read this board, but SSA management probably has a go at it on a regular basis.
|
|
|
|
Post by ladyinwaiting on Mar 17, 2009 3:55:47 GMT -5
Re: PM and Private Atty's responses to my posting re why no transparency as to one's place on the register: Creative writing may be a part of all legal tests; Good reading comprehension trumps creative writing for everything legal: Where did I say I wanted to know anyone else's name or number on the register? I SAID: Why can't I know how many persons are on the register and WHAT IS MY STANDING. PERIOD. Oh, dear, can it be that OPM and the FED GOV requires high scorers to do creative reading as well as creative writing? |
|
|
|
Post by jagghagg on Mar 17, 2009 6:38:08 GMT -5
Re: PM and Private Atty's responses to my posting re why no transparency as to one's place on the register: Creative writing may be a part of all legal tests; Good reading comprehension trumps creative writing for everything legal: Where did I say I wanted to know anyone else's name or number on the register? I SAID: Why can't I know how many persons are on the register and WHAT IS MY STANDING. PERIOD. Oh, dear, can it be that OPM and the FED GOV requires high scorers to do creative reading as well as creative writing? Lady-in-Waiting, in case you haven't read enough on this board yet ( and I do believe you will), it is best to wade through certain poster's remarks and sift out those that are snide to get to the grit. Going back through this portion of the thread that you began, I see you actually have your answer, albeit not one you deem appropriate ( AND not that you would be wrong on that point!): On the other hand, I just cannot grasp the logic, or the reasons for the secrecy about how many people are on the register and where do YOU (or I) stand. What is wrong with my knowing that there are 715 persons on the register and I rank as #435 or whatever? What governmental necessity overrides the rights of those who went through this gut-wrenching and expensive process, to know just how they landed after all was said and done? Maybe I am missing something, but I just do not get it. No agency is going to tell you or anyone else anything they don't think they have to. Consideration is never part of the equation.. I agree with PA, anything they say can and will be used against them. Once they tell you your placement, you start wondering why someone ranked 501 or 701 got an opening rather than you. ___________________________________ The bottom line is that OPM doesn't tell you because they don't have to. You are right: there is no reason you shouldn't know the total number of candidates ON the Register nor should you be denied the current rank number at which you sit. That information should be yours for the asking and, failing that, it should be yours through a FOIA. But - as you can see - the federal government is notorious for failing to respond to simple questions and there is a phenomenal delay in getting responses to FOIAs. The unfairness which PM suggests does not exist in any employment situation actually does exist. It isn't right. It just is. ( And there are those of us are not complacent about it.) |
|
|
|
Post by valkyrie on Mar 17, 2009 8:47:55 GMT -5
Fair and snide have nothing to do with any of this.
1. None of have been under any obligation to apply for this job.
2. The amount of time and money any of us have invested in this job is irrelevant under the laws and regs, as it is all voluntary.
3. Anyone who is horribly stressed by this process needs to remember that they can pull out at any time.
4. Statistically we all have a minimal chance of making it all the way through this process to a job offer.
5. The only thing that OPM owes any of us is equal consideration. OPM is allowed to make mistakes. That's why there is an appeal process.
6. There is a major difference in priority between a FOIA request and a formal discovery request. Every govt agency has a primary mission that does not include responding to FOIA requests. Yes, they must respond to FOIA requests eventually, but they have a few other priorities.
This is a situation in which the laws of supply and demand apply. There is a large supply of candidates willing to put serious effort into getting a Federal ALJ position. Therefore, OPM does not see the need to make the process particularly "candidate friendly." Note that there is a massive difference between "candidate friendly" and "fair and equal." People are not expressing a desire to "fix" the system, they are expressing a desire to make the system more "candidate friendly." This is not a priority of OPM, and unless they are having problems attracting and hiring good candidates, it should not be a high priority.
The proof is in the pudding folks. Nobody on this board has ever suggested that the candidates already hired were in any way poor candidates. The candidates that have yet to achieve success are not necessarily bad candidates. Just remember the Golden Rule of HR, "Everyone is expendable."
|
|
|
|
Post by jagghagg on Mar 17, 2009 9:45:10 GMT -5
Valkyrie, all LadyInWaiting asked was why it was so hard for her - or anybody else - to find out what her rank is on the Register and how many are ON the Register. She's not asking about the quality of candidates; she's not asking about litigation; she's not asking about "consideration;" -- she just wanted to know why her ranking -- hers and hers alone --- could not be transparent to her. Federal process paid for by taxpayer money means it is a reasonable question. It should take neither a FOIA nor a discovery request to receive that information. You and PM have turned a simple question into a miasma of snide comments and lectures.
|
|
|
|
Post by valkyrie on Mar 17, 2009 12:29:39 GMT -5
I don't see how my reply is snide, let alone a "miasma." I don't think Ladyinwaiting has unreasonable questions. I sympathize with everyone's frustration with the unknowns of the process. Its not a worthwhile experience until success is achieved. I just think that any expectation that OPM will try and make this process easier for the candidates is unrealistic. Our tax dollars fund OPM's mission to hire quality employees for the federal govt within the established regs. Until they fail to do that, we really don't have an argument about how they do it.
|
|
?
