Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Jobs and Careers
Reply to " You are tentatively eligible for this series/grade but not referred"
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Thanks for the reply, but just to add a little extra info, the position my wife is applying for is an HR position. It is in the Intel community and she is actually working the position now which they are turning into a GS position. The exact same position in other building across the same compound using the exact same resume was referred not 1 month prior. That particular position though we knew was going to be more competitive simply because of the in house applicants. This position she IS the in house applicant and is using the same resume. The hiring manager, her boss, loves her, so she has a great chance of getting hired if her resume gets through. I always hear people trying to defend the system as not being shady, yet every person I know who has one of these jobs admits as much if you know them. [b]No way her resume makes it through for a duplicate job but not this one.[/b] The position is literally designed around her qualifications because she IS the SME. We have worked extremely hard to get her resume to show her experience and qualifications and have it ensure it matches the job posting. That work paid off on the duplicate job across the compound. We are just scratching our heads as to why it didn't seem to be enough for this announcement. Something happened, because I don't see that many people applying for this specialized position to out score her to the point of her not even being referred. I guess we will see soon. We aren't going to just let this one slide like we have the others with a, "well that's just how it is" answer. I was more curious if anyone has experience with this sort of reply from USAJOBS. Tentatively eligible but then not referred. What does that even mean? I seems they come up with new and creative ways to deny people all of the time. [/quote] Sorry you are so frustrated, but your statement in bold shows you don’t understand how the federal hiring process works. It is a different posting, so no telling how many candidates applied, what the cutoff for the cert is (99/100? 95/100?) PP explained some of this. There are literally dozens of “ways” in which this posting is different from any other. Your best bet is to contact HR for the position in which she was not referred, see if they will reconsider or at least provide an explanation. It is necessarily something nefarious going on here.[/quote] Its the exact same job. EXACT same job. Different building. Prior to listing these jobs they have a PD that is created that determines what points apply to what position. Both positions were the same. When you work in HR you are often a part of the planning committees for these newly created positions so you know what goes into creating them. Thanks though for your input, although I'm not sure what you were trying to accomplish. [/quote] Again, it is a DIFFERENT POSTING. Doesn’t matter if it is the same job in the SAME building reporting to the SAME manager. Why is this so difficult for you to understand? This new posting, even for the “same” job, could have received 3x as many applications- just one example of how circumstances can be vastly different. I have accomplished an attempt to provide advice which you sought by posting to this forum. Just because you are dissatisfied with the answer doesn’t make this any less true how the process is likely playing out in your case. [/quote] Um ok, so lets say 10000000000 people apply, then what? Who gets preference? What is the cutoff for the number of applications that can be sent forward? Are they making decisions for the hiring manager if all 10000000000 people who applied have the same resume? You see these are the questions you seem to not know how to answer. I would gladly take your advice but you aren't providing any. You are simply saying the posting is different, so therefore she may not be referred even though she has max preference points. So who gets referred in those situations? Someone in HR decides whose resume they like better? An actual person looks at the resumes and decides who they want to refer even if they both have similar qualifications and preference? You see the problem I have with this is how this invisible wall is put up between the applicant and the hiring manager and the ones controlling access to the door to this wall have a variety of rules they can apply as their whim. [/quote] The real problem is that your wife did not claim a preference *at the time of application* that you now feel she is eligible for. I’m not sure why you are blaming everyone else for your mistake; there has not been any incorrect action on the part of HR thus far so I am not sure why you are so combative. No one is applying rules on a whim. The HR person did not know your wife had this preference (if she even does) and others claimed it at the time of application. Simple as that. [/quote] Umm, I haven't blamed anyone here. Maybe you should work on not taking simply questions so personal. And again, since you haven't seen her application, how do you know she didn't claim the preference at the time of the application? Because Im here to tell you, SHE DID. That is why I am here asking questions. Get it yet? This isn't the first application she has submitted. I get it, you think there is no way anyone could possibly fill out these applications properly, but she actually did. Now we know that for a fact. She was denied because they gave military spouses applying preference, even though her application clearly states she is a spouse of a 100 percent disabled veteran and was claiming that preference. HR even acknowledged this and still tried to say it didn't matter because military spouse preference trumped her disabled spouse preference. So my question was, how is this so when the spouse preference clearly includes spouses who are married to 100 percent disabled veterans. [/quote] PP you responded to. I will ignore how incredibly rude you are being to me and others. So your wife applied for Military Spouse Preference and submitted all of the paperwork with her application? Like someone else said, it’s a non-competitive hiring authority and even could have been on a separate, concurrent announcement. Often times positions are announced consecutively under competitive and non-competitive hiring authorities. I think what people are pointing out is that you are assuming that the HR person is doing something wrong or not considering your wife’s preference, when in fact no one knows if she claimed it correctly, is actually eligible for it after review of her claim, or if there was a separate announcement for special hiring authorities altogether. [/quote] *announced concurrently, not consecutively. Post-Christmas brain. [/quote] Ok, but none of you have the announcement so you don't know. So instead of telling me you need more information about the announcement or clarify some of the different scenarios , you just choose to attack me and then say I'm the one being rude. I mean read some of these peoples responses to me. I can't even believe how some of you are acting. Yet you think its me? WTF [/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics