Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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. No way her resume makes it through for a duplicate job but not this one. 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

What PP said. I've used MSP before and you do need to upload some forms to USAJobs to claim it. I don't see them applying it retroactively because of the rules, but you should get your paperwork in order and upload everything now. I think it would be your marriage license, DD-214 for you (if you're claiming under the service disabled vet category), and the PPP checklist if that's still applicable. If her office/boss does want to hire her they will cancel the job announcement and readvertise so she can apply with the military spouse preference and make the cert.

Looks like that Military Spouse preference is non-competitive. So they chose to hire someone under a different hiring authority rather than through Delegated Examining. It’s perfectly legal, OP.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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. No way her resume makes it through for a duplicate job but not this one. 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

NP here and I think the PP is confused because you stated in another post that another application your wife filled out she didn't check the correct box because she didn't fully understand it. I think the PP thinks that happened with this job.

That could be it. The thread is likely getting confusing because almost everyone posting has the same moniker of "anonymous". This has been a lengthy process, meaning filling out federal job applications. She/We have learned a lot about the ins/outs of trying to put the algebraic puzzle of federal job applications together. We/she have made mistakes in the past. We have learned from them and worked to correct them in future applications. I was trying to give an example of that by stating she WAS actually referred to a very similar (the posting was word for word) job. This job was supposed to be the reward for all the learning from prior mistakes. But again, they got us on something else. Still, I don't think they can legitimately deny her because of the reason they gave. Military spouse preference given to qualified military spouses who are a part of the Priority Program Preference for Military Spouses, get their preference from Executive order 13473, which also includes spouses of 100 percent disabled veterans, which includes my wife. So we will just have to wait and see what they say next.

Your replies are very confusing OP. Perhaps you don’t have the “better way with words” that you claim.

Hey OP, why are you so combative?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is...intense. I understand that your wife’s career has an impact on you and your family, but why are you so involved? “We” got a resume service, “our” fault, “we” made a FOIA request...are you applying for jobs on your wife’s behalf?

What? Why am I so involved? Its my wife, and yes it does have a huge impact on all of us. Its a joint effort. I'm not applying for a job, SHE IS. I'm simply doing my due diligence on her behalf to help find out what is going on. We are a military family. Those terms like We/our are common terminology because everyone in our household is affected by our careers.

My husband has never called my employer asking why I wasn’t selected for a job but you do you. I’m sure they’re eager to work with you.

What? I never called the employer. What you are you talking about? Where did I say I called an employer? We are talking about the federal hiring process. She filled out the application on USA Jobs and together we helped to build her resume. You can't just hire your friends. I know it happens all the time, but there is a process involved and we are ensuring this process, their own rules, are followed. If it hurts your feelings that I as a husband want to get involved and help in the process of appealing their decision then I don't know what to tell you. Seek counseling perhaps? Im sorry your husband doesn't give a crap.

OK maybe you didn’t say you actually called but you are clearly in contact with the agency. You realize USAJOBS doesn’t make the employment decisions? And I already work in federal HR as a GS employee so don’t feel too bad for me.

Ok, I didn't think I had to explain this here, but this isn't an appeal to USAJOBS. There is an appeal process which goes to the agency that refers applications to the hiring authority. THAT is who WE are appealing to . By we I mean I have been helping to dig up information to give her in her reponses to HR. Again, sorry some dirty old husband is getting involved in helping his wife, but thats just how it is.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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. No way her resume makes it through for a duplicate job but not this one. 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

NP here and I think the PP is confused because you stated in another post that another application your wife filled out she didn't check the correct box because she didn't fully understand it. I think the PP thinks that happened with this job.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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. No way her resume makes it through for a duplicate job but not this one. 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Anonymous wrote:Merry Christmas. first person to respond. I think you should take a step back and break from this thread. Then go back and read everything that was posted and take to heart some of the common themes in these responses.

Very unclear about not referring to hire someone because a cert full of qualified spouse preference applicants means they have to hire a new positions.

I don't know all the details of the position, your spouse's expertise and work, how it is being captured on the resume, or how she is answering any of the responses to the questionnaire. But i will reiterate the vacancy announcement can be exactly the same, and depending upon who applies and what they submit, provide in their resume, or status (maybe an ICTAP HR Specialist applied who is being displaced from their job that is moving somewhere else), the process of the screening and cert selection with all the laws and regs applied can give a different result of who is referred.

No matter how much the hiring manager says he/she likes your spouse's work and implies she would love to have her working as a civilian for her, a good civilian HR Specialist knows to never promise anyone a job - because anything can happen (and it's a prohibited personnel practice - HR Specialists who can see what is happening and the electronic paper trail are the ones who typically report to OSC).

Empower your spouse through advice and encouragement to fight her own battles.

Wishing you the best.

I appreciate your response, but I guess I'm looking for actual information on the hiring process. But to be clear, no one promised her a job, and no HR specialists has even talked to her until she appealed their decision not to refer her. We were both blown away when she wasn't referred to this job and I came here looking for answers. I'm really not sure why everyone is so torn up over me being the husband trying to find answers to some questions to help my wife appeal the decision some HR rep made when they didn't refer her. Why is this such a bad thing? This is quite literally just a forum and I'm must asking questions and doing research. To say something like, have your spouse fight her own battles is just, I mean I don't even know how to respond to this. Not a single person has been able to even come close to answering the original questions I posted, its like one person after the next trying to deflect and accuse me of something. I actually found the information about Executive order 13473 myself. What it doesn't really tell you is if the different categories included in this Executive order has a higher priority over another. I don't expect anyone here to answer that.

Its no wonder everyone thinks this stuff is shady, and its no wonder the President is working to take this process out of the hands of OPM. Honestly, after 20 years of my own military service and hearing the stories and talking to GS employees about their experiences, and even my own experiences at applying for some of these jobs, I am amazed its been allowed to go on this long. My last update is here for information purposes for those like me looking for answers. I will post the final conclusion once we get it for the record and for anyone else searching. But I honestly don't think this is the best place for people like to me to ask questions.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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. No way her resume makes it through for a duplicate job but not this one. 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is...intense. I understand that your wife’s career has an impact on you and your family, but why are you so involved? “We” got a resume service, “our” fault, “we” made a FOIA request...are you applying for jobs on your wife’s behalf?

What? Why am I so involved? Its my wife, and yes it does have a huge impact on all of us. Its a joint effort. I'm not applying for a job, SHE IS. I'm simply doing my due diligence on her behalf to help find out what is going on. We are a military family. Those terms like We/our are common terminology because everyone in our household is affected by our careers.

My husband has never called my employer asking why I wasn’t selected for a job but you do you. I’m sure they’re eager to work with you.

What? I never called the employer. What you are you talking about? Where did I say I called an employer? We are talking about the federal hiring process. She filled out the application on USA Jobs and together we helped to build her resume. You can't just hire your friends. I know it happens all the time, but there is a process involved and we are ensuring this process, their own rules, are followed. If it hurts your feelings that I as a husband want to get involved and help in the process of appealing their decision then I don't know what to tell you. Seek counseling perhaps? Im sorry your husband doesn't give a crap.

OK maybe you didn’t say you actually called but you are clearly in contact with the agency. You realize USAJOBS doesn’t make the employment decisions? And I already work in federal HR as a GS employee so don’t feel too bad for me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is...intense. I understand that your wife’s career has an impact on you and your family, but why are you so involved? “We” got a resume service, “our” fault, “we” made a FOIA request...are you applying for jobs on your wife’s behalf?

What? Why am I so involved? Its my wife, and yes it does have a huge impact on all of us. Its a joint effort. I'm not applying for a job, SHE IS. I'm simply doing my due diligence on her behalf to help find out what is going on. We are a military family. Those terms like We/our are common terminology because everyone in our household is affected by our careers.

My husband has never called my employer asking why I wasn’t selected for a job but you do you. I’m sure they’re eager to work with you.

What? I never called the employer. What you are you talking about? Where did I say I called an employer? We are talking about the federal hiring process. She filled out the application on USA Jobs and together we helped to build her resume. You can't just hire your friends. I know it happens all the time, but there is a process involved and we are ensuring this process, their own rules, are followed. If it hurts your feelings that I as a husband want to get involved and help in the process of appealing their decision then I don't know what to tell you. Seek counseling perhaps? Im sorry your husband doesn't give a crap.

Did your qualifying disability occur while you were on active duty?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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. No way her resume makes it through for a duplicate job but not this one. 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

So an update for those looking for answers like me. I won't keep arguing with the ones who just want to say suck it up and move on, or seem offended that anyone would ever dispute someone working in HR. PS, again MY WIFE WORKS IN HR.

Anyway, we were told this morning that the reason why my wife wasn't referred is because she did not have Priority Program Preference for Military Spouses, and that when a military spouse applies which has this preference it means all other preferences are essentially null and void. We were told that multiple military spouses with this preference applied for this job, but again they stated that according to the law military spouse preference blocks all new appointments to the Federal government, which this would have been a new appointment for her.

The only problem with this is that the law is based on Military Spouse under Executive Order 13473 which also includes the spouses of 100 percent disabled veterans, which I am. So according to my understanding, and anyone can correct me if I am wrong since we now know why they did not refer her, spouses of 100 percent disabled veterans are included in the same category as priority preference spouses. The exact wording of the executive order reads as such.

You are eligible for this hiring category if you:

Are the spouse of a member of the Armed Forces serving on active duty who has orders
specifying a permanent change of station (not for training). Limited to the geographic area as specified in the permanent change of station
orders. This includes the surrounding area which people reasonably can be expected to travel daily to and from work.

OR Are a spouse of a 100 percent disabled service member injured while on active duty;

OR Are the un-remarried widow or widower of a service member who was killed while performing
active duty.

We have responded to HR with this explanation and are awaiting their response.