Anonymous wrote:
This, plus if the friend can help write the cert, they can stack the odds in OP's favor by weaving in a few specific experience reqs that OP has but are maybe not very commonly found in one person, then have it stay open for just a short period of time. So for a program analyst position, prior experience with say, elephant training, brain surgery, and bond trading. Yeah, sure there might be one other person with that particular skill set, but odds are good that it would go to OP. It would be the job description that would make most people think, huh? And those in the know would say, oh they found someone.

And cross your fingers they don’t find a Vet with nearly the same experience. We all think Veterans deserve preference in theory, but we also hope none apply that are even slightly less qualified when we want a job!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree with not counting your chickens— even assuming your friend is right that the hiring official would like to hire you it’s not that unusual to have to cancel an opening because the people coming thru the cert as highly scored aren’t the people the hiring officer thinks are right for the job.

Whether a job is challenging varies a lot across the fed govt but in general there is a lot more challenge and responsibility than most people expect.

Also coming to the feds late in your career is a great time— work 10 years/until you are 57 and you have retiree health benefits for life, which might be almost as valuable as your pension. Compare that to the increasing risk of age discrimination over that same time period and to me, for a single parent (with less room for error) it’s a no brainer to move.

You better hope that no one finds out about that, because both of you would be gone in a second. No, a millisecond.

That’s not true at all.

The announcement needs to go out for open and fair competition. Then HR has to review the resumes. It only matters if the hiring official gets the resumes (assuming OP even makes the cert and he agency doesn’t have some mid-point between HR and the hiring official like mine does) and then if there is someone else clearly more qualified. There shouldn’t be anyone clearly more qualified if OP makes the cert.

All this said, I’ve seen people who literally lost the job that was announced for them. A veteran got through or someone else was just clearly better qualified. Most interviews are panel interviews so more than one person needs to agree. Of course people are brought in on purpose, but just as often people lose the jobs they think they’re certain to get.

OP if your friend thinks that you’d be hired, they should be helping you understand how to frame your resume and interview style to get the job in a fair open competitive environment.

We all know nepotism happens in the Government, just like anywhere people work, but it’s not as straightforward as in private industry.

This, plus if the friend can help write the cert, they can stack the odds in OP's favor by weaving in a few specific experience reqs that OP has but are maybe not very commonly found in one person, then have it stay open for just a short period of time. So for a program analyst position, prior experience with say, elephant training, brain surgery, and bond trading. Yeah, sure there might be one other person with that particular skill set, but odds are good that it would go to OP. It would be the job description that would make most people think, huh? And those in the know would say, oh they found someone.

No question fed, but I have to echo the others in saying it is not as easy as a hiring official wanting you or thinking you have a good shot. Unless it is an excepted service position or you are in a very specialized occupational series, it is very likely that someone with some sort of preference or special hiring authority will outscore you in the application process. Actually making the cert is by far the hardest part, and it is the reason why so many people are forced to stay contractors despite being willing to give up the higher salary.

Contractor PP above outlined the stability aspect well and I agree with him as a long-time contractor.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've worked in the corporate sector and as a federal contractor for most of my career, and may have the opportunity to take a government job for the first time. A close friend is recruiting me for a position within his agency and he seems confident that I have a good shot at the position.

On one hand, as a single 46 year old mom with kids, I love the idea of having a stable fed job with a pension. But the stability and pension are the only advantages that I'm seeing. At my current job, I'm paid slightly more (guessing the fed job would be 15-20K less), and the commute is better, but the main reason I hesitate to take a fed job is being forced to stay within the government just to get a pension. I enjoy working and hope to work for 15-20 more years, but I'm ambitious and hard-working, and the idea of being stuck in a bureaucracy isn't that appealing. I like the option of being able to move around to different positions and challenges with different people (in a new job) if I want to.

So here's my question: given my preference for dynamic, challenging environments, but then my need for stability/retirement income as a single mom, would it make sense for me to consider this fed job? Would the pension be worth it at my age? I know age discrimination is real, but I also know that corporations and private firms desperately want women in leadership positions, so I also think being an older woman can be an advantage. Appreciate advice from anyone who's been on either side of this decision.

Hahah, this is hilarious.

Sorry, you are falling for their PR. They are desperate to appear to pay lip service to equality. I would not count this as an advantage.

BTW, I believe the present value of the pension is like $20k/yr (you have to put aside $20k in a CD like investment now to ensure risk free annuity payment in the future) so the compensation you are getting is no better than the Fed job except it’s in cash.

For my math, I expect at least a $40k bump to be worth leaving my Fed job, b/c at 50 I put a premium on stability and immunity from age discrimination.

Not to mention regardless of whether it is true or not there are far fewer leadership positions then people wanting to fill them so you're being very optimistic to assume you would be selected.

Anonymous wrote:I was a federal contractor for 20 years and never made the leap to be a fed. I was reorganized out of a job in the recession (it came later to the contracting sector than the rest of the economy but it arrived nevertheless).

I know lots of people over 50 who start over and have success. I wasn't one of them and have struggled since. My two pals who jumped to federal jobs are doing just fine.

For those who start over at 50, are they making the same or more?

I was a federal contractor for 20 years and never made the leap to be a fed. I was reorganized out of a job in the recession (it came later to the contracting sector than the rest of the economy but it arrived nevertheless).

I know lots of people over 50 who start over and have success. I wasn't one of them and have struggled since. My two pals who jumped to federal jobs are doing just fine.

Anonymous wrote:I've worked in the corporate sector and as a federal contractor for most of my career, and may have the opportunity to take a government job for the first time. A close friend is recruiting me for a position within his agency and he seems confident that I have a good shot at the position.

On one hand, as a single 46 year old mom with kids, I love the idea of having a stable fed job with a pension. But the stability and pension are the only advantages that I'm seeing. At my current job, I'm paid slightly more (guessing the fed job would be 15-20K less), and the commute is better, but the main reason I hesitate to take a fed job is being forced to stay within the government just to get a pension. I enjoy working and hope to work for 15-20 more years, but I'm ambitious and hard-working, and the idea of being stuck in a bureaucracy isn't that appealing. I like the option of being able to move around to different positions and challenges with different people (in a new job) if I want to.

So here's my question: given my preference for dynamic, challenging environments, but then my need for stability/retirement income as a single mom, would it make sense for me to consider this fed job? Would the pension be worth it at my age? I know age discrimination is real, but I also know that corporations and private firms desperately want women in leadership positions, so I also think being an older woman can be an advantage. Appreciate advice from anyone who's been on either side of this decision.

I'm now a 50 yr old Federal employee but spent nearly half my career as a contractor at a large consulting company. You can have both a dynamic, challenging environment and the stability, flexibility, and a retirement income as a Federal employee. In your case, your salary maybe less, but all the other benefits (vacation, sick leave, lower health care costs, TSP, pension, etc) often make up the difference. And in terms of a dynamic/challenging environment, I often see that it is up to the individual to decide how they perform their job. They can just follow the same old routine but even mundane tasks as a Fed can be improved in some way. Processes can be better, faster, more efficient. Hopefully, your boss would be in a position to want someone to always look for these improvements and support you to make changes. It's not always the case, but at least in my agency, staff are encouraged to take on as many challenges that they can....there are the slackers though that are fine with the status quo. Depending on your agency, it may take time to change, but I've noticed as more of the boomers are retiring and Gen X is taking over, things are moving at a faster pace.

I am a federal contractor and have been so at my agency for 27 years now. My wife is a civil servant at another agency. While it is true that I make about 10-20% more than I would if I were a fed, I see quite a lot of benefits from the fed side that are beneficial, especially since you are a single parent.

My wife gets a lot more flexibility and much higher leave. For example, my wife gets 26 days of annual leave per year plus 5 days of sick leave (this is the highest level after 15 years of service). As a contractor, I have worked for 7 contracts/jobs and 7 employers (not always overlapping) over my 27 years. That usually means my leave accrual and balance change from job to job. I have had as little as 15 days of PTO and as much as 25 days. But I only had 25 days for about 4 years when I returned for my second stint at the same contractor and had over 10 years experience with them. Additionally my wife has the option every year for her annual bonus for her great reviews, to take the bonus in annual leave or cash. Some years, especially when she had health issues or when the kids were little, she took the bonus in annual leave and that gave her an additional 5 days of annual leave that year. Another benefit is that even if my wife retires, as long as we are covered by her health insurance for the last 5 years of her career, all of us are guaranteed health insurance for life (for the kids, until age 26) under the same plan that we currently have. Even if she pre-deceases me, I can pay the premiums and I am assured of continuing with the same health insurance I currently have. If I leave my job for any reason, including retiring myself, I lose my health insurance. Once she retires, she is guaranteed health insurance. Also the federal government is far more lenient about taking leave than most private employers. I've been at employers where it is frowned upon to take leave at certain times and you can hurt your career options by taking leave at certain times or for certain amounts. As a contractor, your contract is often task-based and if you can't meet deadlines due to taking leave, then it hurts not only you, but the contract and perhaps the semiannual or triannual bonus, you can't take leave until the contract metrics are completed. This doesn't happen with civil servants. While I have a lot more flexibility than at a lot of private sector employers, I don't have as much flexibility as the civil servants where I work or at my wife's agency. Also, we can both flex our hours to some extent. I have to work 80 hours during a two week pay period, but I can work just about any 80 hours as long as I don't miss commitments (like meetings or deadlines). My wife has the same with the exception that she has to declare by Friday what her schedule for the following week is. But that flexibility has been very helpful in dealing with the many days off from school and vacations and illnesses. All of this flexibility is very helpful when you have children, especially if your children are young enough that they can't be home by themselves.

I've known several single parent civil servants and the benefits and flexibility have been very important and useful to them. If I were in your shoes, I would apply and try for the position, but only you know enough of the specifics of your life to tell for sure what is the best option for you.

Anonymous wrote:I've worked in the corporate sector and as a federal contractor for most of my career, and may have the opportunity to take a government job for the first time. A close friend is recruiting me for a position within his agency and he seems confident that I have a good shot at the position.

On one hand, as a single 46 year old mom with kids, I love the idea of having a stable fed job with a pension. But the stability and pension are the only advantages that I'm seeing. At my current job, I'm paid slightly more (guessing the fed job would be 15-20K less), and the commute is better, but the main reason I hesitate to take a fed job is being forced to stay within the government just to get a pension. I enjoy working and hope to work for 15-20 more years, but I'm ambitious and hard-working, and the idea of being stuck in a bureaucracy isn't that appealing. I like the option of being able to move around to different positions and challenges with different people (in a new job) if I want to.

So here's my question: given my preference for dynamic, challenging environments, but then my need for stability/retirement income as a single mom, would it make sense for me to consider this fed job? Would the pension be worth it at my age? I know age discrimination is real, but I also know that corporations and private firms desperately want women in leadership positions, so I also think being an older woman can be an advantage. Appreciate advice from anyone who's been on either side of this decision.

Hahah, this is hilarious.

Sorry, you are falling for their PR. They are desperate to appear to pay lip service to equality. I would not count this as an advantage.

BTW, I believe the present value of the pension is like $20k/yr (you have to put aside $20k in a CD like investment now to ensure risk free annuity payment in the future) so the compensation you are getting is no better than the Fed job except it’s in cash.

For my math, I expect at least a $40k bump to be worth leaving my Fed job, b/c at 50 I put a premium on stability and immunity from age discrimination.

Anonymous wrote:Does the federal worker pension program include healthcare? TBH at this point in my life I would do almost anything to ensure access to quality healthcare after my working years.

Yes, but you have to have worked 5 years in Government directly prior to your retirement.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree with not counting your chickens— even assuming your friend is right that the hiring official would like to hire you it’s not that unusual to have to cancel an opening because the people coming thru the cert as highly scored aren’t the people the hiring officer thinks are right for the job.

Whether a job is challenging varies a lot across the fed govt but in general there is a lot more challenge and responsibility than most people expect.

Also coming to the feds late in your career is a great time— work 10 years/until you are 57 and you have retiree health benefits for life, which might be almost as valuable as your pension. Compare that to the increasing risk of age discrimination over that same time period and to me, for a single parent (with less room for error) it’s a no brainer to move.

You better hope that no one finds out about that, because both of you would be gone in a second. No, a millisecond.

That’s not true at all.

The announcement needs to go out for open and fair competition. Then HR has to review the resumes. It only matters if the hiring official gets the resumes (assuming OP even makes the cert and he agency doesn’t have some mid-point between HR and the hiring official like mine does) and then if there is someone else clearly more qualified. There shouldn’t be anyone clearly more qualified if OP makes the cert.

All this said, I’ve seen people who literally lost the job that was announced for them. A veteran got through or someone else was just clearly better qualified. Most interviews are panel interviews so more than one person needs to agree. Of course people are brought in on purpose, but just as often people lose the jobs they think they’re certain to get.

OP if your friend thinks that you’d be hired, they should be helping you understand how to frame your resume and interview style to get the job in a fair open competitive environment.

We all know nepotism happens in the Government, just like anywhere people work, but it’s not as straightforward as in private industry.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does the federal worker pension program include healthcare? TBH at this point in my life I would do almost anything to ensure access to quality healthcare after my working years.

It does- insurance options are fantastic. You need to be qualified for and take the retirement in order to have access.

+1

OP, you get no benefits as a contractor, how is this even a question? Do you know anything about the job, at all? This is the first thing you would know.

Unless OP's friend is the selection official, getting a Fed job is far from sure thing. We get a lot of apps for every.single.opening.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does the federal worker pension program include healthcare? TBH at this point in my life I would do almost anything to ensure access to quality healthcare after my working years.

It does- insurance options are fantastic. You need to be qualified for and take the retirement in order to have access.

+1

OP, you get no benefits as a contractor, how is this even a question? Do you know anything about the job, at all? This is the first thing you would know.

Anonymous wrote:Agree with not counting your chickens— even assuming your friend is right that the hiring official would like to hire you it’s not that unusual to have to cancel an opening because the people coming thru the cert as highly scored aren’t the people the hiring officer thinks are right for the job.

Whether a job is challenging varies a lot across the fed govt but in general there is a lot more challenge and responsibility than most people expect.

Also coming to the feds late in your career is a great time— work 10 years/until you are 57 and you have retiree health benefits for life, which might be almost as valuable as your pension. Compare that to the increasing risk of age discrimination over that same time period and to me, for a single parent (with less room for error) it’s a no brainer to move.

You better hope that no one finds out about that, because both of you would be gone in a second. No, a millisecond.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've worked in the corporate sector and as a federal contractor for most of my career, and may have the opportunity to take a government job for the first time. A close friend is recruiting me for a position within his agency and he seems confident that I have a good shot at the position.

On one hand, as a single 46 year old mom with kids, I love the idea of having a stable fed job with a pension. But the stability and pension are the only advantages that I'm seeing. At my current job, I'm paid slightly more (guessing the fed job would be 15-20K less), and the commute is better, but the main reason I hesitate to take a fed job is being forced to stay within the government just to get a pension. I enjoy working and hope to work for 15-20 more years, but I'm ambitious and hard-working, and the idea of being stuck in a bureaucracy isn't that appealing. I like the option of being able to move around to different positions and challenges with different people (in a new job) if I want to.

So here's my question: given my preference for dynamic, challenging environments, but then my need for stability/retirement income as a single mom, would it make sense for me to consider this fed job? Would the pension be worth it at my age? I know age discrimination is real, but I also know that corporations and private firms desperately want women in leadership positions, so I also think being an older woman can be an advantage. Appreciate advice from anyone who's been on either side of this decision.

Also if you are in DC you have lots of options for moving to different agencies as a fed. It’s getting in that is tough. I would take the security in a heartbeat. If you plan to work until your 60s it is a much safer place.

+1

No contest.