You are tentatively eligible for this series/grade but not referred

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work on FOIA and we wouldn't release any of the information that you're looking for. Applicants and ranking scores are never released. We only release the name/resume of the hired person.

I would focus on talking to HR instead. HR can help you more than FOIA.

Thats fine, I don't think I ever asked for ranking scores or anything. We want to know why someone else was referred over my wife. Its easy enough to look at a resume and know if they score above you.

NP. How would you be able to tell that just from looking at a resume?

Exactly how they score things is somewhat subjective. You might feel your wife's experience is more on point, but HR may disagree. Or your wife might have a longer period of experience, but the chosen applicant would have slightly more relevant experience that they valued more than the length. Or there could be any number of combinations or permutations along these lines.

Plus, let's not pretend that any of us would be objective when reviewing the resume of a loved one against that of some stranger.

Two things. One, you aren't supposed to be able to apply preferential treatment to people you know, although yes I know it happens ALL the time. Two, the question has nothing to do with my wifes resume. They have already stated she would have been referred had it not been for another applicant being a military spouse. Actually one more thing, isn't relevant experience or longer experience the job of the hiring authority to decide? That does seem a bit confusing to me. Since no one gets to see these other resumes they decide do not have the "relevant" or length of experience necessary, whose is to say they aren't just holding back more experienced resumes in favor of their own friends and families resumes? The answer is doing exactly what I am doing. Filing a FOIA request. To those who originally asked me what was the point of that, well this is the answer. HR has way too much leeway to toss resumes to the side without anyone ever knowing why. The HA should be the one decided if your experience is relevant or not. Why? Because every position is different. An HR rep could have no idea what is needed to perform a job in a secure facility. The only thing they know is what the announcement says. So if you have a resume that meets all of those experience requirements on the announcement, then how can they just toss your resume aside? They HAVE to go by whats on the announcement and what the hiring authority says they want regarding experience. The only way to know for sure if HR is not playing favorites, is to file a FOIA request.

But you won't be able to tell that from getting the resume of the person who was hired. Say Jane Smith got the job. Her resume would not likely say "Jane Smith -- friend of someone in HR or with hiring authority." Unless you happened to know that Jane Smith was friend's with someone in the office (exceedingly unlikely) you wouldn't have learned anything. And even if she knew someone, that doesn't inherently mean that she was given a preference, never mind an improper one.

The only way that you might learn something is if the person hired was truly and completely unqualified. Then, you might be able to objectively say that something was off. But if the person hired generally had the qualifications and experiences needed for the job, your belief that your wife had better experiences wouldn't really matter.

You seem to think that it is common in the federal government for utterly unqualified people to get hired because of favoritism, but that simply isn't true. Connections can certainly make a difference and can put one qualified person ahead of another (most jobs have a huge number of qualified people apply who could do the job), but that's not something you could tell from a resume and it isn't even something that is necessarily improper, depending on exactly what occurred.

No, I'm not saying the people referred are unqualified. Im saying their excuses for not referring my wife hasn't been about qualifications. They are saying she wasn't referred because Military spouses have preference. That isn't true. Not to mention my wife belongs to the same category as military spouses because she is the wife of a 100 percent disabled veteran. At the very least she should have been referred. The hiring manager at that point decides who they hire. You are right though, you can't tell with a FOIA if someone is a friend of someone else, but you can tell if their qualifications were less than your own. Its not totally unusable information. We are using the tools we have.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
No, I'm not saying the people referred are unqualified. Im saying their excuses for not referring my wife hasn't been about qualifications. They are saying she wasn't referred because Military spouses have preference. That isn't true. Not to mention my wife belongs to the same category as military spouses because she is the wife of a 100 percent disabled veteran. At the very least she should have been referred. The hiring manager at that point decides who they hire. You are right though, you can't tell with a FOIA if someone is a friend of someone else, but you can tell if their qualifications were less than your own. Its not totally unusable information. We are using the tools we have.

Right, and they do not have to justify that decision to the applicants who were not hired. I am sure we are all on the same page -- just checking.

OP, it does sounds like (from what you have said) that your wife should have been referred, at least by my understanding. I hope you and she find a satisfactory outcome.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, if the posting were to be relisted and she were to be referred but not get the job, what would you guys do with that information? Would the next step be filing an FOIA to try to find out why she wasn't the one hired, or asking for the justification?

If the management involved wants her for the job, but she is not referred, can they not inquire as to why the 100% disability spouse was not deemed equivalent for the referral process?

If she was referred and not hired then there really isn't much you can do. There are a different set or rules for the ones who do the hiring. I assume someone can inquire about her not being referred, we do not know yet, but we are examining all of our options, to include speaking with a JAG officer. Because so far it sounds like they didn't refer her because they are saying military spouse preference blocks anyone who isn't a government employee already from even being referred. I don't think that is true based on my research so far. Not to mention the fact that the spouse of a 100 percent disabled veteran is included in the same category.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think my agency would go back and reconsider an incomplete or incorrect application but I would imagine that is at each agency’s discretion. However once they start doing it for one person they have to reconsider people all the time and then you’re back at square one. You said your wife works in HR, she doesn’t know anyone in the staffing office that she can call and ask questions if she’s confused?

Sorry for the multiple responses too, I just keep rereading what you said and think I need to clarify. Her application was in no way incorrect or incomplete. She would have been referred if they would have included her into the military spouse category. They just aren't including her into the category when she does in fact belong in that category. Its a little different to say someone filled out the application the wrong way or left it incomplete. In that case I totally agree. Furthermore, I just need to know if one category trumps another category as far as the referral process. Whether or not she clicked the right block for her category is irrelevant if we just know that.

I know that you don’t believe in this case that her application was incorrect and that’s fine. In my office, if HR made an error in processing the application then they would and have corrected that error by adding someone to a cert or referring them.

Also you keep using the term “hiring authority” but a hiring authority is the law or reg that allows someone to be appointed to a position. The selecting official is the person who decides which applicant they want to choose. Just a point of clarification. HR looks at the applications before the selecting official to determine if they’re complete, apply OPM’s qualifications, rank applicants in accordance with Delegated Examining or merit promotion policies, adjudicate preference, and so on. The selecting official cannot be expected to do all of that on their own.

I think when I say hiring authority I was confusing it with the terminology used by HR which is hiring official, if that makes more sense. Are you saying that if HR makes a mistake they can correct the error by referring them after the fact? Thats one thing I want to know. I think more importantly I want to know if military spouse preference actually does block any other applicants from being referred, because everything I've read so far on OPM's site says the exact opposite.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
No, I'm not saying the people referred are unqualified. Im saying their excuses for not referring my wife hasn't been about qualifications. They are saying she wasn't referred because Military spouses have preference. That isn't true. Not to mention my wife belongs to the same category as military spouses because she is the wife of a 100 percent disabled veteran. At the very least she should have been referred. The hiring manager at that point decides who they hire. You are right though, you can't tell with a FOIA if someone is a friend of someone else, but you can tell if their qualifications were less than your own. Its not totally unusable information. We are using the tools we have.

Right, and they do not have to justify that decision to the applicants who were not hired. I am sure we are all on the same page -- just checking.

OP, it does sounds like (from what you have said) that your wife should have been referred, at least by my understanding. I hope you and she find a satisfactory outcome.

Ok, can you just explain why you think my wife shouldn't have been referred? It would help knowing what your line of thinking is. I am not talking about whether or not she gets the job or not if referred, I'm talking about getting referred to begin with. The person who actually does the hiring will never see her resume because someone in HR decided that while her resume was more than good enough to merit a referred status, she was blocked by a military spouse preference. The rules according to OPM says military spouse preference does not outweigh any other preference, it simply lets them be considered like everyone else. It gives them an opportunity to be referred to the people who actually do the hiring. I'm not arguing that. I'm glad they have an option to use to help get their resumes on a desk. What I'm arguing is where are the rules that say military spouse preference block other applicants? Once we get that far then we can argue the fact that my wife belongs in the same category as military spouses because of my 100 percent disabled status which is clearly laid out in the documents included in her application. My DD214, my VA letter, some SF form that I don't recall, etc etc.

[Anonymous]

Disregard that last post I guess. I thought you said she should NOT have been referred.

[Anonymous]

Yes, what I meant was the reverse -- I was agreeing with you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think my agency would go back and reconsider an incomplete or incorrect application but I would imagine that is at each agency’s discretion. However once they start doing it for one person they have to reconsider people all the time and then you’re back at square one. You said your wife works in HR, she doesn’t know anyone in the staffing office that she can call and ask questions if she’s confused?

Sorry for the multiple responses too, I just keep rereading what you said and think I need to clarify. Her application was in no way incorrect or incomplete. She would have been referred if they would have included her into the military spouse category. They just aren't including her into the category when she does in fact belong in that category. Its a little different to say someone filled out the application the wrong way or left it incomplete. In that case I totally agree. Furthermore, I just need to know if one category trumps another category as far as the referral process. Whether or not she clicked the right block for her category is irrelevant if we just know that.

I know that you don’t believe in this case that her application was incorrect and that’s fine. In my office, if HR made an error in processing the application then they would and have corrected that error by adding someone to a cert or referring them.

Also you keep using the term “hiring authority” but a hiring authority is the law or reg that allows someone to be appointed to a position. The selecting official is the person who decides which applicant they want to choose. Just a point of clarification. HR looks at the applications before the selecting official to determine if they’re complete, apply OPM’s qualifications, rank applicants in accordance with Delegated Examining or merit promotion policies, adjudicate preference, and so on. The selecting official cannot be expected to do all of that on their own.

I think when I say hiring authority I was confusing it with the terminology used by HR which is hiring official, if that makes more sense. Are you saying that if HR makes a mistake they can correct the error by referring them after the fact? Thats one thing I want to know. I think more importantly I want to know if military spouse preference actually does block any other applicants from being referred, because everything I've read so far on OPM's site says the exact opposite.

Yes I am saying that if HR made an error in processing the application it can be remedied. I don’t know enough about this job posting or hiring authority to say whether or not a military spouse can “block” anyone else. I have a feeling that what they’re doing is above board but they’re not explaining it well. I would recommend calmly and politely talking to a supervisor and asking them to explain what’s going on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work on FOIA and we wouldn't release any of the information that you're looking for. Applicants and ranking scores are never released. We only release the name/resume of the hired person.

I would focus on talking to HR instead. HR can help you more than FOIA.

Thats fine, I don't think I ever asked for ranking scores or anything. We want to know why someone else was referred over my wife. Its easy enough to look at a resume and know if they score above you.

NP. How would you be able to tell that just from looking at a resume?

Exactly how they score things is somewhat subjective. You might feel your wife's experience is more on point, but HR may disagree. Or your wife might have a longer period of experience, but the chosen applicant would have slightly more relevant experience that they valued more than the length. Or there could be any number of combinations or permutations along these lines.

Plus, let's not pretend that any of us would be objective when reviewing the resume of a loved one against that of some stranger.

Two things. One, you aren't supposed to be able to apply preferential treatment to people you know, although yes I know it happens ALL the time. Two, the question has nothing to do with my wifes resume. They have already stated she would have been referred had it not been for another applicant being a military spouse. Actually one more thing, isn't relevant experience or longer experience the job of the hiring authority to decide? That does seem a bit confusing to me. Since no one gets to see these other resumes they decide do not have the "relevant" or length of experience necessary, whose is to say they aren't just holding back more experienced resumes in favor of their own friends and families resumes? The answer is doing exactly what I am doing. Filing a FOIA request. To those who originally asked me what was the point of that, well this is the answer. HR has way too much leeway to toss resumes to the side without anyone ever knowing why. The HA should be the one decided if your experience is relevant or not. Why? Because every position is different. An HR rep could have no idea what is needed to perform a job in a secure facility. The only thing they know is what the announcement says. So if you have a resume that meets all of those experience requirements on the announcement, then how can they just toss your resume aside? They HAVE to go by whats on the announcement and what the hiring authority says they want regarding experience. The only way to know for sure if HR is not playing favorites, is to file a FOIA request.

But you won't be able to tell that from getting the resume of the person who was hired. Say Jane Smith got the job. Her resume would not likely say "Jane Smith -- friend of someone in HR or with hiring authority." Unless you happened to know that Jane Smith was friend's with someone in the office (exceedingly unlikely) you wouldn't have learned anything. And even if she knew someone, that doesn't inherently mean that she was given a preference, never mind an improper one.

The only way that you might learn something is if the person hired was truly and completely unqualified. Then, you might be able to objectively say that something was off. But if the person hired generally had the qualifications and experiences needed for the job, your belief that your wife had better experiences wouldn't really matter.

You seem to think that it is common in the federal government for utterly unqualified people to get hired because of favoritism, but that simply isn't true. Connections can certainly make a difference and can put one qualified person ahead of another (most jobs have a huge number of qualified people apply who could do the job), but that's not something you could tell from a resume and it isn't even something that is necessarily improper, depending on exactly what occurred.

No, I'm not saying the people referred are unqualified. Im saying their excuses for not referring my wife hasn't been about qualifications. They are saying she wasn't referred because Military spouses have preference. That isn't true. Not to mention my wife belongs to the same category as military spouses because she is the wife of a 100 percent disabled veteran. At the very least she should have been referred. The hiring manager at that point decides who they hire. You are right though, you can't tell with a FOIA if someone is a friend of someone else, but you can tell if their qualifications were less than your own. Its not totally unusable information. We are using the tools we have.

But you won't really be able to tell that in most cases. Assuming the person is reasonably qualified, you will at most be able to tell that you think your (or your wife's) qualifications were better than that person. But it is most likely not going to be something that is obvious or that a hiring manager couldn't come up with a reasonable explanation for why she preferred that person. There could be any number of valid/legal reasons that they could have chosen the other person given that every posting gets many qualified people and they have to pick and choose among them.

You may be using the tools you have available, but you are going to be able to put this information to exceedingly minimal use.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work on FOIA and we wouldn't release any of the information that you're looking for. Applicants and ranking scores are never released. We only release the name/resume of the hired person.

I would focus on talking to HR instead. HR can help you more than FOIA.

Thats fine, I don't think I ever asked for ranking scores or anything. We want to know why someone else was referred over my wife. Its easy enough to look at a resume and know if they score above you.

NP. How would you be able to tell that just from looking at a resume?

Exactly how they score things is somewhat subjective. You might feel your wife's experience is more on point, but HR may disagree. Or your wife might have a longer period of experience, but the chosen applicant would have slightly more relevant experience that they valued more than the length. Or there could be any number of combinations or permutations along these lines.

Plus, let's not pretend that any of us would be objective when reviewing the resume of a loved one against that of some stranger.

Two things. One, you aren't supposed to be able to apply preferential treatment to people you know, although yes I know it happens ALL the time. Two, the question has nothing to do with my wifes resume. They have already stated she would have been referred had it not been for another applicant being a military spouse. Actually one more thing, isn't relevant experience or longer experience the job of the hiring authority to decide? That does seem a bit confusing to me. Since no one gets to see these other resumes they decide do not have the "relevant" or length of experience necessary, whose is to say they aren't just holding back more experienced resumes in favor of their own friends and families resumes? The answer is doing exactly what I am doing. Filing a FOIA request. To those who originally asked me what was the point of that, well this is the answer. HR has way too much leeway to toss resumes to the side without anyone ever knowing why. The HA should be the one decided if your experience is relevant or not. Why? Because every position is different. An HR rep could have no idea what is needed to perform a job in a secure facility. The only thing they know is what the announcement says. So if you have a resume that meets all of those experience requirements on the announcement, then how can they just toss your resume aside? They HAVE to go by whats on the announcement and what the hiring authority says they want regarding experience. The only way to know for sure if HR is not playing favorites, is to file a FOIA request.

But you won't be able to tell that from getting the resume of the person who was hired. Say Jane Smith got the job. Her resume would not likely say "Jane Smith -- friend of someone in HR or with hiring authority." Unless you happened to know that Jane Smith was friend's with someone in the office (exceedingly unlikely) you wouldn't have learned anything. And even if she knew someone, that doesn't inherently mean that she was given a preference, never mind an improper one.

The only way that you might learn something is if the person hired was truly and completely unqualified. Then, you might be able to objectively say that something was off. But if the person hired generally had the qualifications and experiences needed for the job, your belief that your wife had better experiences wouldn't really matter.

You seem to think that it is common in the federal government for utterly unqualified people to get hired because of favoritism, but that simply isn't true. Connections can certainly make a difference and can put one qualified person ahead of another (most jobs have a huge number of qualified people apply who could do the job), but that's not something you could tell from a resume and it isn't even something that is necessarily improper, depending on exactly what occurred.

No, I'm not saying the people referred are unqualified. Im saying their excuses for not referring my wife hasn't been about qualifications. They are saying she wasn't referred because Military spouses have preference. That isn't true. Not to mention my wife belongs to the same category as military spouses because she is the wife of a 100 percent disabled veteran. At the very least she should have been referred. The hiring manager at that point decides who they hire. You are right though, you can't tell with a FOIA if someone is a friend of someone else, but you can tell if their qualifications were less than your own. Its not totally unusable information. We are using the tools we have.

But you won't really be able to tell that in most cases. Assuming the person is reasonably qualified, you will at most be able to tell that you think your (or your wife's) qualifications were better than that person. But it is most likely not going to be something that is obvious or that a hiring manager couldn't come up with a reasonable explanation for why she preferred that person. There could be any number of valid/legal reasons that they could have chosen the other person given that every posting gets many qualified people and they have to pick and choose among them.

You may be using the tools you have available, but you are going to be able to put this information to exceedingly minimal use.

I guess it won't matter much then, we did it anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think my agency would go back and reconsider an incomplete or incorrect application but I would imagine that is at each agency’s discretion. However once they start doing it for one person they have to reconsider people all the time and then you’re back at square one. You said your wife works in HR, she doesn’t know anyone in the staffing office that she can call and ask questions if she’s confused?

Sorry for the multiple responses too, I just keep rereading what you said and think I need to clarify. Her application was in no way incorrect or incomplete. She would have been referred if they would have included her into the military spouse category. They just aren't including her into the category when she does in fact belong in that category. Its a little different to say someone filled out the application the wrong way or left it incomplete. In that case I totally agree. Furthermore, I just need to know if one category trumps another category as far as the referral process. Whether or not she clicked the right block for her category is irrelevant if we just know that.

I know that you don’t believe in this case that her application was incorrect and that’s fine. In my office, if HR made an error in processing the application then they would and have corrected that error by adding someone to a cert or referring them.

Also you keep using the term “hiring authority” but a hiring authority is the law or reg that allows someone to be appointed to a position. The selecting official is the person who decides which applicant they want to choose. Just a point of clarification. HR looks at the applications before the selecting official to determine if they’re complete, apply OPM’s qualifications, rank applicants in accordance with Delegated Examining or merit promotion policies, adjudicate preference, and so on. The selecting official cannot be expected to do all of that on their own.

I think when I say hiring authority I was confusing it with the terminology used by HR which is hiring official, if that makes more sense. Are you saying that if HR makes a mistake they can correct the error by referring them after the fact? Thats one thing I want to know. I think more importantly I want to know if military spouse preference actually does block any other applicants from being referred, because everything I've read so far on OPM's site says the exact opposite.

Yes I am saying that if HR made an error in processing the application it can be remedied. I don’t know enough about this job posting or hiring authority to say whether or not a military spouse can “block” anyone else. I have a feeling that what they’re doing is above board but they’re not explaining it well. I would recommend calmly and politely talking to a supervisor and asking them to explain what’s going on.

Thats the plan. They keep closing the case though after their brief explanations that only bring more questions. These are her words that I have a problem with "For this vacancy announcement, multiple qualified Priority Program Preference for Military Spouses were referred to the hiring official. By law, qualified Priority Program Preference for Military Spouses block all new appointments to the Federal government, which this would have been a new appointment for you." My problem is finding the rules about this "law". Yet to find it. So again, even though my wife does fit into the same category as the military spouse preference applications, they are coming up with this law that they are saying prevents her from even being referred.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think my agency would go back and reconsider an incomplete or incorrect application but I would imagine that is at each agency’s discretion. However once they start doing it for one person they have to reconsider people all the time and then you’re back at square one. You said your wife works in HR, she doesn’t know anyone in the staffing office that she can call and ask questions if she’s confused?

Sorry for the multiple responses too, I just keep rereading what you said and think I need to clarify. Her application was in no way incorrect or incomplete. She would have been referred if they would have included her into the military spouse category. They just aren't including her into the category when she does in fact belong in that category. Its a little different to say someone filled out the application the wrong way or left it incomplete. In that case I totally agree. Furthermore, I just need to know if one category trumps another category as far as the referral process. Whether or not she clicked the right block for her category is irrelevant if we just know that.

I know that you don’t believe in this case that her application was incorrect and that’s fine. In my office, if HR made an error in processing the application then they would and have corrected that error by adding someone to a cert or referring them.

Also you keep using the term “hiring authority” but a hiring authority is the law or reg that allows someone to be appointed to a position. The selecting official is the person who decides which applicant they want to choose. Just a point of clarification. HR looks at the applications before the selecting official to determine if they’re complete, apply OPM’s qualifications, rank applicants in accordance with Delegated Examining or merit promotion policies, adjudicate preference, and so on. The selecting official cannot be expected to do all of that on their own.

I think when I say hiring authority I was confusing it with the terminology used by HR which is hiring official, if that makes more sense. Are you saying that if HR makes a mistake they can correct the error by referring them after the fact? Thats one thing I want to know. I think more importantly I want to know if military spouse preference actually does block any other applicants from being referred, because everything I've read so far on OPM's site says the exact opposite.

Yes I am saying that if HR made an error in processing the application it can be remedied. I don’t know enough about this job posting or hiring authority to say whether or not a military spouse can “block” anyone else. I have a feeling that what they’re doing is above board but they’re not explaining it well. I would recommend calmly and politely talking to a supervisor and asking them to explain what’s going on.

Thats the plan. They keep closing the case though after their brief explanations that only bring more questions. These are her words that I have a problem with "For this vacancy announcement, multiple qualified Priority Program Preference for Military Spouses were referred to the hiring official. By law, qualified Priority Program Preference for Military Spouses block all new appointments to the Federal government, which this would have been a new appointment for you." My problem is finding the rules about this "law". Yet to find it. So again, even though my wife does fit into the same category as the military spouse preference applications, they are coming up with this law that they are saying prevents her from even being referred.

I Google searched this for you in 2 seconds: https://www.dcpas.osd.mil/Content/Documents/PPP-Program%20S.pdf. What they’re doing is completely legal according to the rules of this program. I know you are mad someone successfully outgamed you and your wife using a preference technicality, but it is what it is. Imagine how it feels to be those of us who are long-term contractors and literally cannot get referred because of various preference and special hiring authorities. You know your wife *can* be referred, so suck it up, move on, and keep it trying.

[Anonymous]

OP, another possibility is that the people with existing or prior appointments block new appointments, within the Priority Program Preference for Military Spouses. That is, maybe those referred also already had employment records with the fed gov, and those (even within the PPPMS) without prior standing were knocked out of the pool.

[Anonymous]

PP's link needs to not have a period as part of it at the end.

https://www.dcpas.osd.mil/Content/Documents/PPP-Program%20S.pdf

OP, it looks like the military spouse program still references "best qualified" candidates from the pool -- see below (from the above link). I wonder if they considered best qualified applicants to exclude new appointments, as they judge they need someone familiar with how certain government systems work from the inside.

How they phrased it to you would have been an awkward interpretation, but that might be it.

HOW DO I EXERCISE PREFERENCE THROUGH PROGRAM S?

When you register in Program S and are referred for a job vacancy, your preference applies if you are rated among the “best?qualified” candidates for the position according to the recruiting agency’s established competitive criteria. This means that a preference eligible military spouse who is rated best qualified blocks the selection of other competitive candidates. However, in cases where veterans preference applies, candidates with veterans preference cannot be passed over to select best?qualified military spouses. Since spouse preference is not applicable to positions that are being filled through non?competitive procedures, Program S is also not applicable in those situations.

[Anonymous]

I know she was referred for the position through a different posting before, but they might just have more (and more qualified) applicants to this posting. If so, even as a military spouse applicant, she might be blocked because she is not in the "best qualified" group of military spouse applicants.