|
|
Post by okeydokey on Mar 20, 2009 17:08:22 GMT -5
Are we in a lottery?
Take someone who has selected all cites and has a middle score. The odds of getting selected are pretty good, if the person is considered for the "less desirable areas."
On the other hand, take a high scorer who is only considered for one city. The odds of getting selected are one in three.
And not even veterans are guaranteed. If a vet with a score of 85 is competing with two with scores of 55, SSA can choose the lower scorer, only having to do a passover.
And SSA, with a few restrictions can manipulate the system. For example, if there are 150 slots and 450 applicants, and SSA wants number 450 (who chose everywhere), SSA can, through the screening process, put two bums (who did poorly on the interview and the reference check) on the cert with #450 and, walla, 450 is selected.
And, most likely, no-one will know. ODAR is very tight-lipped about the process.
My conclusion is thus:
1. The testing procedures were a lottery (I cannot understand my score and that of my colleagues).
2. The process from register to cert has some semblance of order.
3. The selection process can be fixed (but there is no evidence that it is).
It is complicated.
I have heard that some of the non-selects from the last round have filed EEO/MSPB/VEOA complaints. Maybe we will find out how this works through litigation.
And I am wondering.
|
|
|
|
Post by pm on Mar 20, 2009 18:19:54 GMT -5
Lot of misconceptions in there but I'll just address one. Having a high score and very limited geographic availability does not guarantee you will be in the top three. Your odds of being selected may very well be 0 even if you are on a cert and you may very well not be on a cert at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by alj on Mar 20, 2009 19:49:46 GMT -5
And not even veterans are guaranteed. If a vet with a score of 85 is competing with two with scores of 55, SSA can choose the lower scorer, only having to do a passover. Not exactly. If SSA non selects a VP, it must get advance permission from OPM, or risk having to offer a job to the VP if OPM says no after the fact. |
|
|
|
Post by okeydokey on Mar 20, 2009 20:34:54 GMT -5
How so, PM? I guess I made the unstated assumption that the high scorer had gotten notice .
Specifically,
Assume you are #1 on the list and you have chosen Boston only. Also assume that ODAR has sent you a letter saying you are on the cert. Would you not be on the list for Boston? How could it be otherwise, assuming a selection is made?
|
|
|
|
Post by pm on Mar 21, 2009 10:04:03 GMT -5
How so, PM? I guess I made the unstated assumption that the high scorer had gotten notice . Specifically, Assume you are #1 on the list and you have chosen Boston only. Also assume that ODAR has sent you a letter saying you are on the cert. Would you not be on the list for Boston? How could it be otherwise, assuming a selection is made? If you're talking about the single highest scorer for a city, you are correct. But if you're you're just talking about high scorers in general, there is no guarantee that high scorers generally are going to wind up in the top 3 just because they made the cert. |
|
|
|
Post by jagghagg on Mar 21, 2009 10:39:10 GMT -5
I guess I made the unstated assumption that the high scorer had gotten notice . I would have thought that, by now, all questions assumed presence somewhere on the Certs. Assume you are #1 on the list and you have chosen Boston only. Also assume that ODAR has sent you a letter saying you are on the cert. Would you not be on the list for Boston? How could it be otherwise, assuming a selection is made? And then, under those circumstances, if you're not a preference-eligible vet, your chances are - ostensibly - 1 in 3. And if you ARE a preference-eligible vet, then they'll just wait to pit you against other preference-eligible vets. In reality, it depends on a whole heck of a lot more, to include insider/outsider status and whom you know.  . . . My conclusion is thus: 1. The testing procedures were a lottery (I cannot understand my score and that of my colleagues). 2. The process from register to cert has some semblance of order. 3. The selection process can be fixed (but there is no evidence that it is). It is complicated. Not a lottery in the sense of names being drawn out of a hat. The testing procedures to make the Register were standardized, but with input from SSA. The process from Register to Cert is governed by regulation. And, as to your last conclusion – that the selection process can be “fixed,” I think ( as someone well-known once said,) it all depends on what you mean by “fixed.” I think we are all agreed that the process is manipulated. The benign meaning of manipulate is only to make it work the way it is supposed to. But the implication of saying the process can be “fixed” is that the manipulation is directed toward an end result not contemplated by law, rule or regulation and may, in fact, be prohibited by it. Finally, to your point that there is no evidence of such non-benign manipulation, I would say that, like the X-Files, the evidence is most likely “out there.” Those who know of people who gained as a result of such manipulation are in possession of it – if, indeed, there are --- . . . some of the non-selects from the last round have filed EEO/MSPB/VEOA complaints. Maybe we will find out how this works through litigation. --- then someone should provide them the information they need for litigation. Sitting by and hoping someone does something is of little assistance to those trying to do something. Ah’m jes sayin'….Nonetheless, the best description of the process was OTOB: OK, so since everyone is still worked up 'bout the selection process I though I would clarify exactly how it worked. First, a Cert was requested from OPM. Shortly after it's arrival, the candidates were carefully interviewed. Based on this interview, and considering fully the preferred geographic locations of each individual candidate, a list of appointments was drawn up by staff. As deduced elsewhere on this board, this list was drawn up using Excel. It was a thing of rare and treasured beauty. Next, the list was hand delivered to the OCALJ. After some discussion as to the best method to proceed with, the list was tacked onto the east wall of the office. Next a small potted palm, a large Labrador Retriever, and a bowl of fruit punch were brought into the room. Shortly thereafter a supply of darts was obtained. Someone, we do not remember who, was tasked with throwing the darts at the list. This worked well until the third selection. Shortly thereafter, the Labrador Retriever suffered an unfortunate (and some say, unwanted) piercing. Counsel from OGC was called in to attempt to rectify the situation. OGC provided a list of 47 specific questions to ask the Labrador about the piercing, in an attempt to elicit a full and complete set of facts about the "alleged" work place injury. Meanwhile, in an attempt to expedite the process for remaining 147 candidates, each candidate's name was placed on a slip of paper. All the slips of paper, each with a neatly annotated name, were tossed into the air. This allowed the great Deity of Selection to keep those whom it wanted, from the many names floating around in the rarefied air of the OCALJ office. Those candidates that the deity rejected could then easily be identified since they fell to the flour. OGC then choose that moment to inform us that not that not enough candidates were selected. Further, several names were discovered in the leaves of the potted palm. In order to resolve the issue, OGC determined, based partially on the answers provided by the Labrador, that alternative steps were called for. We gave the list to Millicent and told her to fix the problem. We still haven't figured out why someone ordered a bowl of fruit punch.  |
|
|
|
Post by Legal Beagle on Mar 21, 2009 17:51:33 GMT -5
[ We still haven't figured out why someone ordered a bowl of fruit punch. . To soothe said Labrador's thirst and provide traction should the prcess be changed to throwing the names against the wall to see which ones stuck. |
|
