|
|
Post by masondixon on Mar 21, 2009 12:10:12 GMT -5
Dazed,
Am I understanding you right? Did 550 more people get added to the register the second time around? If you are correct, OPM utilized virtually no initial screening process and tested nearly everyone who applied. In contrast, they only fully tested about 625 candidates who applied in May 2007. OPM only took the first 600+ applications filed in summer 2008. I have assumed all along that only 300 or so more people have been added to the ALJ register. If your information is correct, I also seriously doubt OPM will reopen the application process again this summer. It will leave them only one unresolved workload: the 2007 and 2009 rating appeals.
|
|
|
|
Post by flannery on Mar 21, 2009 12:21:55 GMT -5
Mason Dixon, I believe the 550 figure may be accurate. At the WD, one of the proctors leading people out was asked how many and indicated about 500 were doing the test...Also, this does not necessarily denote "no initial screening process took place." True, although the limit was 600, it took only 35 hours for that many applications to be reached. This suggests they didn't come in in a trickle, but in a torrent. If they were coming in at such a clip, it is not inconceivable that by midnight of the day the 600th was reached, many more than 600 managed to get in before midnight....
|
|
|
|
Post by lawmaker on Mar 21, 2009 17:57:05 GMT -5
PM, I believe your numbers are slightly off. I am an agency person with very good sources. There were over 625 people who made the register in 2007. Approximately 200 were hired by all agencies. This year just north of 550 made the register. It is anticipated 157 will be hired. Throw in another dozen from other agencies like Patriot's Fan, and 170 or so will come off. That still leaves over 800 people on the register this summer. I made the first two certs but was too low to reach. I just missed this cert. I obviously would be reachable if the agency hires 200 next year if OPM does not reopen. Take that into account while I make the following further observations. First, I did hear in the past, and have picked up current rumblings in the present that SSA will ask OPM to again reopen the application process this year. It is not just about numbers; they want more fresh people to pick from. Here are arguments why OPM may not open; first, I have a friend at OPM who absolutely divulges nothing about the methods of scoring, but does say "they hate the ALJ process and would love to get rid of it forever". Second, there are still sufficient names on the register to support 200 more hires next year. This would get OPM through to Oct 2010 when this register ends. If they did reopen, the people in the first two groups had the identical test. If they reopen, many people like myself would retest. Will they give the same questions (AR/WD/SI) again? If so, they have a huge advantage over new test takers; I dont see how that passes legal muster. If they do change questions, you will have a register comprised of people who have had different exams; how is that fair? This would lead to endless litigation. Further, the new testers will only be on the register for less than a year. Also, it forces OPM to re-do the test this year, and then again next year (after Oct 2010). Given how much OPM dislikes this process, and all of the arguments above, I hope when SSA asks for the register to reopen this summer, OPM says, "you have enough qualified people to hire between now and Oct 2010. No new test until after t hat. Just my two cents. OPM staffers may hate the workload. But then which job applications do they enjoy grading? Your acquaintance is probably no different from any other person who is employed. Doesn't really enjoy what they do. It's a job. It's benefits. It's a place to go to during the week. On the other hand, OPM executives are never going to let go of the ALJ testing process because it is one of their most significant sources of funding. And the funding mostly comes from SSA. And they get paid quite a bit every year whether they administer new applications or not. In the 90s and before, OPM administered way more tests than the small amount they have entertained over the past two solicitations. In the prior years, the application was far more complicated. You had to submit writing samples. And OPM conducted the reference checks. The WD and SI were about the same, but administered to far more candidates at opm field offices throughout the country rather than strictly in DC. OPM has little to complain about. It rakes in a lot more money for administering a test that was once a complex and costly test to adminster that was of questionable validity. It now administers a dumbed down and simplified but less costly test that remains of questionable validity. And so it does not deplete its coffers because the dumbed down test is administered to far fewer candidates and made more efficient (but not more reliable) through cost saving measures such as software. And so it makes the ses execs quite happy that they can present nice balance sheets to their execs. I don't believe they hate the ALJ test. They just hate having to do anything other than draw the check from SSA. They will be delighted to keep the dumbed down and watered down version for 2010 and thereafter. The questions for the written part and interviews will change somewhat. But the OPM employees will continue to complain about the terrible overhwhelming workload while the execs laugh into their sleeves. It's a circus. |
|
|
|
Post by dazedandconfused on Mar 21, 2009 19:33:47 GMT -5
Lawmaker; my friend was way up in OPM. In fact a political appointment. As of Jan 20 he was out of government. He was no worker bee. He has never divulged anything about OPMs methodology or how scores were derived. All this person would say is that OPM would love to punt the whole ALJ process to another agency. All the litigation is just a giant headache for them.
I too was hoping Pixie was right last yeaer when she said that if you made the cert you could be reached. That may be true for most, but if you are at the back part of the cert, there are mathmatical limitations. Very few people know how the system works behind closed doors. My sources are high, but not that high. Those decisions are made by the top handful of officials. ODAR can almost certainly avoid selecting anyone, and reach many by selecting different cities at different times; but there is almost no way to jiggle the system to reach to the very bottom of the cert. Again, I have picked up the rumor that they will aske to open again this summer. I pray they dont.
|
|
|
|
Post by karaj on Mar 21, 2009 22:23:58 GMT -5
quote author=jagghagg board=general thread=804 post=13131 time=1237650712]
[/quote]
When things like this are said, by someone who appears to be an insider, it buttresses the oft-repeated admonition that once you are on the Register....and certainly when you are on the Cert.... scores don't matter. (Well, they do - just not as much and not in the way a rank score usually matters...) Statements like this are indicative of the fact that ODAR keeps track of who is on the Register and where they are on the Register and they do it because, prior to receiving the Cert, -- heck, prior to requesting it --- they have already identified who they want to hire.[/quote]
JH, this doesn't make sense to me..if ODAR keeps track of who is on the Register, not just the Cert., how come only the people who made the Cert. were offered interviews?
|
|
|
|
Post by jagghagg on Mar 22, 2009 5:30:22 GMT -5
Well, of course, I am not the poster who said that ODAR keeps track of who is on the Register, but it doesn't surprise me in the least. Remember that ODAR is, by far, the greatest consumer of ALJs in the federal sector; SSA buys in bulk while the other agencies take onesies and twosies.... and mostly from ODAR. But ODAR keeps track of who is on the Register because they pretty much PAY for the Register and they'd like to know who is likely to appear on the next certificate of eligibles they request so, as PM said, they can plan their hiring accordingly. I mean, hey, if you could only hire from a list someone else gave you, wouldn't you like to know who was going to be on that list before you even requested it ? Most managers would.
And the reason SSA/ODAR only offered interviews to those people on the Certificate is because those are the only people they can hire. They have no legal basis for interviewing everyone on the Register - nor the interest, as they keep asking to have the Register "refreshed" to get new names - nor the funding, as why pay for the cost of interviewing 700 people when they only need interview 300 ? - and, of course, they have already interviewed probably about 100-150 still on the Register.
|
|
|
|
Post by lawmaker on Mar 22, 2009 12:09:41 GMT -5
Lawmaker; my friend was way up in OPM. In fact a political appointment. As of Jan 20 he was out of government. He was no worker bee. He has never divulged anything about OPMs methodology or how scores were derived. All this person would say is that OPM would love to punt the whole ALJ process to another agency. All the litigation is just a giant headache for them. I too was hoping Pixie was right last yeaer when she said that if you made the cert you could be reached. That may be true for most, but if you are at the back part of the cert, there are mathmatical limitations. Very few people know how the system works behind closed doors. My sources are high, but not that high. Those decisions are made by the top handful of officials. ODAR can almost certainly avoid selecting anyone, and reach many by selecting different cities at different times; but there is almost no way to jiggle the system to reach to the very bottom of the cert. Again, I have picked up the rumor that they will aske to open again this summer. I pray they dont. I'm sure that you lend a sympathetic ear to your friend. But let's take this out of the realm of the personal. OPM is an agency and thus an arm of the executive service, and to that extent charged with administering HR issues for the executive service. Therefore their wish that all litigation should stop is no different than the auto assembly workers wish that the work day would end or that he would win the lottery. Responsible entities are made accountable by such litigation. IF responsible entities were more capable of making less than ambiguous rules and regulations. IF their execs were less susceptible to group think. IF their execs were promoted by something besides OPMs equally dubious SES test and were real decision makers and visionaries rather than mere bureaucrats getting a perk for years worked. IF a lot of things that mattered were done that should have been done (compare FEma during Katrina, compare SSA now with its backlog, compare Treasury today with no staff) Then the agency could have written regs, policies and procedures that are sustainable. And planned for litigation. It is every citizen's duty to challenge arbitrary/capricious, lack of due process or downright unconstitutional. I do not weep for OPM. I do not feel bad about their workload. I am however horrified by the tax waste they have managed to create across the history of this test and the many other test processes they have created. The government is in trouble and they are a significant part of the process. I feel bad as a taxpayer that I pay to fix their messes. I don't feel bad as a taxpayer that we keep catching them at it. |
|
|
|
Post by Pixie on Mar 22, 2009 19:59:24 GMT -5
Pixie told us two years ago that if you got on the Cert, scores didn't matter. That produced a bit of a dustup and she clarified her remarks in her usual poignant style. That thread is worth researching... Yes, I remember that discussion. Back then the scores had just come out, or, more likely, the certificate had been received. Everyone was obsessing over their scores. The ones with the high scores thought they were in, and the ones with the low scores felt there was no hope. I knew better. I knew that the scores really didn't mean much at the certificate level. If ODAR wanted you, it would find a way. I also knew the push was going to be on for candidates with SSA experience. I knew that attorneys, GSs and HODS with good reputations with the agency would have a very good chance, irrespective of their scores. What I didn't know was the number of desirable insiders that couldn't be reached because their scores were too low. I figured there would be a few--maybe 5 to 10--that were just too low to reach, but I had no idea it would eventually be about 30 with scores too low. And many of these had selected all, or almost all, locations. Oh well, I never said pixies know everything. Pix. |
|
|
|
Post by globalpanda on Mar 22, 2009 21:36:31 GMT -5
Also, every time it refreshes, ODAR loses track of where people are on the regsiter. After this next hire, they will have a good idea of where many people are on the register which gives them help in planning future hires. When things like this are said, by someone who appears to be an insider, it buttresses the oft-repeated admonition that once you are on the Register.... and certainly when you are on the Cert.... scores don't matter. ( Well, they do - just not as much and not in the way a rank score usually matters...) Statements like this are indicative of the fact that ODAR keeps track of who is on the Register and where they are on the Register and they do it because, prior to receiving the Cert, -- heck, prior to requesting it --- they have already identified who they want to hire. Interesting thought. Just why do you think the Administration has preselected? Or is it more accurate to say, preselect against? |
|
|
|
Post by jagghagg on Mar 23, 2009 4:49:28 GMT -5
Just why do you think the Administration has preselected? Or is it more accurate to say, preselect against? Did I say that ?  I don't think I said that. I think I said I'd read what PM wrote -- that ODAR keeps track "of where people are" as they are "planning future hires" and that they "lose track" when the Register gets refreshed --- and wasn't surprised by it. Now why would ODAR keep track of where people "are" on the Register ? And certainly it must be specific candidates of whom they are keeping track otherwise they would not ever "lose track," right ? Exactly which people of whom are they "keeping track" ? Why are they keeping track of certain individuals instead of just keeping themselves aware of how many candidates are on the Register ? For what purpose ? To what end ?  You say tomato; I say to MAHto. |
|
|
|
Post by alj on Mar 23, 2009 5:03:10 GMT -5
GP wrote: "Interesting thought. Just why do you think the Administration has preselected? Or is it more accurate to say, preselect against?"
The agency made a concerted effort to hire insiders on the last hire, and will do so again this time. While that is certainly permissible, the methods used to reach this goal are what many find impermissible. Therein lies the complaint of preselection.
|
|
|
|
Post by jagghagg on Mar 23, 2009 6:30:23 GMT -5
Ok, Ok....now IF you are gonna suggest this goal of hiring specific people off the Register who are not even yet on a Certificate of Eligibles is "preselection," let us understand what "preselection" is and whether it is prohibited in federal hiring.
Government managers have long-practiced the fine art of pre-selection, the hallmark of which is the use of a legitimate format, such as an excepted appointment authority, as a vehicle to hire the specific person desired by management. Title 5 of the U.S. Code, Section 2302(b)(6) states that no agency should "grant any preference or advantage not authorized by law, rule, or regulation to any employee or applicant for employment (including defining the scope or manner of competition or the requirements for any position) for the purpose of improving or injuring the prospects of any particular person for employment." (Emphasis added.)
Equally important is the admonition found in section 2302(b)(11) which forbids the agency from "tak(ing) or fail(ing) to take any other personnel action if the taking of or failure to take such action violates any law, rule, or regulation implementing, or directly concerning, the merit system principles contained in section 2301.”
Title 5 of the U.S. Code, Section 2301(b)(1) states that “[r]ecruitment should be from qualified individuals from appropriate sources in an endeavor to achieve a work force from all segments of society, and selection and advancement should be determined solely on the basis of relative ability, knowledge and skills, after fair and open competition which assures that all receive equal opportunity.”
If - as PM has outlined - ODAR keeps track of where specific candidates are on the Register as they plan their future hiring goals, and if - as Pixie has observed - ODAR wants to "reach" certain people even though their scores make it difficult, and ODAR actually does reach those people specifically because they are "insiders," then IS that the use of a legitimate format, (such as a multiple hire/selective use of the "three strike rule" and intentional manipulation of the fill process), as a vehicle to hire the specific person desired by management?
Oh, I can hear all the gears whirling now.....PM and Valkyrie, perhaps, usually ... the questions could come fast and furious - why isn't SSA experience a legitimate preference factor ? (I dunno - why should it be ?) Who seyz that insider status is a non-merit factor? (Call me crazy - and many have - but I'm guessing the FPM would.) Why would anyone think that favoring SSA experience would skew the principles of 2301(b)(1) ? Why can't ODAR process the fills in a way which insures they reach whomever they saw on the Register that they wanted no matter where their score places them on the Cert ?
Have at it......
|
|
|
|
Post by flannery on Mar 23, 2009 7:30:11 GMT -5
JH--regardless of one's views on the topic, I think most of us are running on empty at this point, just waiting for the process to end. I doubt you will get too many folks wishing to spar at this stage of things. Plus, there's been so much said on the topic to date, the board could publish a manual on the subject--kind of like your local church cookbook.  |
|
|
|
Post by valkyrie on Mar 23, 2009 7:42:37 GMT -5
Did someone call?
Before this gets too crazy lets just agree that ODAR has no interest in what individuals are on the register, as long as they have a decent cut of people from the inside. This may sound sinister if you choose to forget the history of the ALJ hiring process and the fact that before 2007 ODAR insiders were heavily disfavored in the process by both OPM and ODAR. By the time 2007 came around enough insiders had squeaked through by means of outside experience and/or veteran's points to show that, lo and behold, attorneys with ODAR experience performed exceptionally well as a class without any sign of bias.
So, if certain individual ODAR people don't make a high enough score to make it on a cert, I don't think ODAR cares. However, if ODAR candidates as a class are scored too low to make it on a cert, I think ODAR will care. I really don't think ODAR plays a numbers game with the register in order to reach its people, because they could not get OPM to cooperate. My guess is that the register refreshment requests are based upon the quality of the scores, the range of geographic preference, and the candidates that ODAR has determined undesirable remaining on the register.
The rumors that we have heard indicate that ODAR candidates as a class were scored lower than ODAR anticipated. However, roughly a third of the new ALJs came from ODAR backgrounds, which must have been satisfactory, because the register was reopened by ODAR's request. It would have been a lot easier for ODAR to reach more of its own people if it had chosen not to request a reopening of the register.
|
|
|
|
Post by privateatty on Mar 23, 2009 7:52:10 GMT -5
JH--regardless of one's views on the topic, I think most of us are running on empty at this point, just waiting for the process to end. I doubt you will get too many folks wishing to spar at this stage of things. Plus, there's been so much said on the topic to date, the board could publish a manual on the subject--kind of like your local church cookbook. I respectfully disagree with some of this and agree with one part: the 2009 class of posters cannot approach the degree of solidarity achieved in 2007-2008. Many of those folks have become judges and are no longer posting regularly. I am sure that a good many of them were "un-masked" at training; there has been circumstantial evidence to that effect. However, the "sparring" you apparently are growing tired of is second nature for many of us. Personally, I've been doing it ever since I could hold a fork at the dinner table. jagghagg's post is certainly not "sparring", rather it is the first post that I can recall on this Board that lays out the statutory basis for choosing an ALJ. However, I think it is also important to point out that at the time of the interview with SSA, there will be scores of folks whom, because of their score, will have a reasonable expectation of getting hired and won't because of two thumbs down at their interview. This could be based upon the perception that they would not produce sufficient decisions, that their personalities bespeak of someone who may be "troublesome" to management, or that they lack sufficient judicial demeanor, whatever that is. Those folks, to the degree that they are improperly passed over, are the ones to whom my sympathies go to. |
|
|
|
Post by flannery on Mar 23, 2009 8:03:21 GMT -5
PA, I wasn't saying JH was "sparring". I only meant that she would probably not get that many people who would want to throw their two cents in at this late stage of the game. "Have at it" implies you are anticipating you will get a lot of flack and all I'm saying is that at this point in the process, I don't think there's a lot of extra energy to go around. I hope I've made it clear in my posts, I wish the best to everyone and, like you, my sympathies go to anyone if they were passed over, be it "illegally" or otherwise. So I think we are all on the same team at this point, just watching and waiting... If I am fortunate enough to be selected, there's not one poster on this board that I wouldn't be happy to meet--though I don't think I'd want to "unmask" myself! (A rabbit for a judge? ) |
|
|
|
Post by flannery on Mar 23, 2009 8:15:54 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Legal Beagle on Mar 23, 2009 8:22:06 GMT -5
Go Flannery! An Elder Bunny you now are!!
|
|
|
|
Post by barkley on Mar 23, 2009 8:47:16 GMT -5
[ However, I think it is also important to point out that at the time of the interview with SSA, there will be scores of folks whom, because of their score, will have a reasonable expectation of getting hired and won't because of two thumbs down at their interview. This could be based upon the perception that they would not produce sufficient decisions, that their personalities bespeak of someone who may be "troublesome" to management, or that they lack sufficient judicial demeanor, whatever that is. I just wanted to add that one could receive two thumbs down (if that is what happens) for reasons other than personality and demeanor. There are some aspects of the job which would lend themselves to legitimate inquiry. |
|
|
|
Post by privateatty on Mar 23, 2009 9:30:03 GMT -5
[ However, I think it is also important to point out that at the time of the interview with SSA, there will be scores of folks whom, because of their score, will have a reasonable expectation of getting hired and won't because of two thumbs down at their interview. This could be based upon the perception that they would not produce sufficient decisions, that their personalities bespeak of someone who may be "troublesome" to management, or that they lack sufficient judicial demeanor, whatever that is. I just wanted to add that one could receive two thumbs down (if that is what happens) for reasons other than personality and demeanor. There are some aspects of the job which would lend themselves to legitimate inquiry. Sure, at this stage, you can be bounced for poor reviews, previous busts, IRS woes, smelling like a barn animal, a professed inability to use the computer, ignorance about basic ODAR functioning, arrogance, stupidity,and basically any reason you wouldn't hire this person. |
|
I don't think I said that. I think I said I'd read what PM wrote -- that ODAR keeps track "of where people are" as they are "planning future hires" and that they "lose track" when the Register gets refreshed --- and wasn't surprised by it. 
