Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

New Federal Employee

Are you thinking of becoming a federal employee? Or, perhaps you have recently joined the federal workplace. Here is a forum to share experience and ask for insight for those already a member of the largest employer in the USA.

To read today's top news stories on federal employee pay, benefits, retirement, job rights and other workplace issues visit FederalDaily.com.

3 Pages123>
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
aftester  
#1 Posted : Tuesday, May 17, 2011 4:44:34 AM(UTC)
aftester

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 3/6/2010(UTC)
Posts: 306

Just FYI of the facts for a GS-12 position...

I finally got my FOIA request back from my agency. They gave me resumes of 2 "vets", 1 retiree, 1 vet:

1. A 10-point pref retiree (looks like he retired recently)
2. A 5-point pref "veteran" (military wasn't on his resume, he must be old and left off his service back in the '70s or '80s most likely)

They both got hired over me, a 10 point Disabled Vet (non-retiree) with 15+ years in my field.

We all used VEOA/VRA/30% authorities.

Both of their names were Hispanic. I'm a non-Hispanic minority.aftester2011-05-17 12:51:55
VetCPA  
#2 Posted : Tuesday, May 17, 2011 4:54:41 AM(UTC)
VetCPA

Rank: Advisor

Groups: Registered
Joined: 2/12/2011(UTC)
Posts: 135


Internal positions: The purpose of VEOA and VRA is to allow a veteran to apply for an internal position. Veterans' preference is not taken into account for internal positions.
External positions: 10-point (<30%) disabled veterans' do not have absolute preference over a 5-point veteran. The selecting official can skip over them. 30% or greater disabled veterans have an absolute preference over 5-point & 10-point (<30% disable) veterans. They cannot be skipped over. If you were all 30%ERs, maybe they were selected based on qualifications.
 
They shouldn't be selecting anyone based on race unless it's the BIA.
sakijo  
#3 Posted : Tuesday, May 17, 2011 4:55:40 AM(UTC)
sakijo

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 7/16/2007(UTC)
Posts: 1,127

Maybe they were more qualified than you?
 
I'm not going to play the race or quota card, but maybe they had specific traits that the hiring authority wanted?  I got my job because I was the "best fit" for the office environment - all the applicants had equal skills.
 
The newest manager we have (not my boss) hires based on education.  There were three applicants; two had collge degrees.  He chose the one with the newer degree (2005) over the one with an older degree (1990-something) and more experience.  He claimed that his pick had a "fresher degree" and therefore, newer information. 
HR Spec  
#4 Posted : Tuesday, May 17, 2011 4:56:28 AM(UTC)
HR Spec

Rank: Rookie

Groups: Registered
Joined: 7/15/2010(UTC)
Posts: 48

You would not be using VRA for a GS12 position, VRA is only valid up to a GS11.  If this was from a DEU announcement then the agency must select within the top 3 individuals, management can select a 5 point vet over a 10 point vet if they are within the top 3.  If this is a merit promotion announcement then your veteran status is just giving you the opportunity to apply as a status candidate.  Management can select anyone they want.  Why did you file a FOIA request in the first place did you feel that your non-selection was discrimination?  Just curious.

aftester  
#5 Posted : Tuesday, May 17, 2011 5:07:49 AM(UTC)
aftester

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 3/6/2010(UTC)
Posts: 306

Thanks for the info, everyone.

You're right HR Spec, It was VEOA and 30% (I was the 30%, not sure if that other 10-point guy was since he was a retiree, but...)

I don't know which one got selected, but if what sakijo says is true, then it's possible the other 10-point retiree got the job since the 5-point guy didn't even list his military experience.

I filed the request because I wanted to learn why they got hired over me as an educational/learning process since my agency won't tell me anything themselves (fairly common).

I do believe they are more qualified than I am in many cases, though they are lacking in other areas where I am more qualified. However, the names did throw me off, I'm wondering if this has to do with the state they live in (I would be from out of state).

I am already a status candidate but these guys weren't -- their jobs are all private sector according to their resumes. (update: the retiree has military credentials in the resume, I just meant his last job was private sector).aftester2011-05-17 14:54:26
Federal Games  
#6 Posted : Tuesday, May 17, 2011 5:46:32 AM(UTC)
Federal Games

Rank: Advisor

Groups: Registered
Joined: 1/2/2011(UTC)
Posts: 165

"Veterans getting hired over disabled vets"

After reading the title of your post, I have to admit I was a little upset that this could happen. But then I went back and reasoned that at least the most important priority was met, and that priority was that a veteran was hired for the federal job. While you being a disabled veteran probably deserved your federal job more than just a regular veteran, it is important that at least a veteran was hired for the federal job. Keep applying and your federal job will be just around the corner.
boxkicker  
#7 Posted : Tuesday, May 17, 2011 6:07:13 AM(UTC)
boxkicker

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 8/10/2010(UTC)
Posts: 1,349

What agency?
VetCPA  
#8 Posted : Tuesday, May 17, 2011 8:49:57 AM(UTC)
VetCPA

Rank: Advisor

Groups: Registered
Joined: 2/12/2011(UTC)
Posts: 135



I'm of the opinion that the people who advocate Veterans Preference, over and over, are not veterans. I think they are non-veterans with an agenda to dishonor us and provoke negativity.
I'm suspicious that many of the posts are from one person as well.VetCPA2011-05-17 16:57:20
computerscott2  
#9 Posted : Tuesday, May 17, 2011 7:55:06 PM(UTC)
computerscott2

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 6/24/2009(UTC)
Posts: 1,835

"People are People so why should it be,
You and I should get along so awfully,"
Just a lyric from a song. You know what? It is getting sad how in these tough times we have the "grass is greener on the other side" phenomenon taking over the board. It is quite comedic that:
1) Some Non-vets feel like they are discriminated against in favor of vets
2) Some vets feel like they are being discriminated against in favor of non-vets
and now we even have:
3) Some "disabled" vets are now claiming that the are being discriminated against in favor of non"disabled" vets
How microbial can we make this discussion? Left handed vets getting discriminated against in favor of right handed vets? Vets from the south being next?
C'mon people. Times are tough. Is there nepotism? Yes. Is it as widespread as some people would like to have you believe? No. Is every hiring decision going to please everyone? NO! For every 1 person selected you will probably have anywhere from 2-10 who feel that they were discriminated against because they didn't get the job. Not because they didn't:
1) Spellcheck their resume and documents
2) Grammar check the same
3) Have someone else read them to see if they made sense (not since or scents)
4) Prepare for the interview
5) Show initiative in any of their previous jobs
6) Attempt to improve themselves through education or leadership type activities.
It is a lot easier to blame someone else than take a look at your own actions.
aftester this isn't directed at you, but I knew (and have been expecting) this discussion was going to be opened by someone, you just happened to be the first one to do it.
I understand the wanting to know why a person was not selected. If you have the contact of the SO, you may want to politely ask if they have some time to discuss your non selection and if they had any ideas to improve your application/interview. I have posted on this topic before and the correct ways to approach the SO. If they don't want to talk, that is their priority. So remember this acronym: SWSWSWSW or SW4, which means: Some will, Some won't, so what, someones waiting to hire you.
JayhawkFan  
#10 Posted : Wednesday, May 18, 2011 3:34:48 PM(UTC)
JayhawkFan

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 2/28/2010(UTC)
Posts: 684

computerscott2, veterans preference is the law, and according to the law, no non-disabled 5 pointer should ever be picked over a disabled vet. I say you have a good case and should file a petition with the MSPB. 

tucker515  
#11 Posted : Wednesday, May 18, 2011 5:39:08 PM(UTC)
tucker515

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 5/10/2009(UTC)
Posts: 1,290

The law says no such thing. The passover rules apply to a non-veteran being selected over a veteran.  There is nothing to prohibit a 5 point vet being selected over a 10 point vet- assuming the 5 point vet is within reach on a certificate.

I am sorry, but I do not have the time to respond to private messages. I will not respond to them.
Eddoyle82  
#12 Posted : Wednesday, May 18, 2011 8:56:55 PM(UTC)
Eddoyle82

Rank: Groupie

Groups: Registered
Joined: 4/18/2011(UTC)
Posts: 102

Was the cert an external? If it was then the 30% SC VEt goes to the top category and cannot be passed over for anyone other than another 30% vet. If it was internal none of it matters, they can hire whoever they want. As far as the 30% rule look up a boob called the Delegated Examining Operations Handbook. It reads like so...

Veterans’ Preference rule

OPM retains exclusive authority to:


• Make medical qualification determinations pertaining to preference eligibles (you must submit your pass over request with supporting documentation to OPM’s Strategic Human Resources Policy Division); and

• Grant or deny an agency’s request to pass over a preference eligible with a compensable service-connected disability of 30 percent or more. You must submit to the OPM Human Capital Officer for your agency a completed SF-62, Agency Request to Pass Over a Preference Eligible or Object to an Eligible along with supporting documentation explaining the reasons for requesting the pass over (5 U.S.C. § 3318 (b)(2)).

"If the Devil knocks on enough doors, someone will invite him in for tea."
totj  
#13 Posted : Wednesday, May 18, 2011 8:57:42 PM(UTC)
totj

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 12/29/2010(UTC)
Posts: 285

This thread is going to make Proud *eterans head implode.
Eddoyle82  
#14 Posted : Wednesday, May 18, 2011 9:14:17 PM(UTC)
Eddoyle82

Rank: Groupie

Groups: Registered
Joined: 4/18/2011(UTC)
Posts: 102

They are a hydra two more will grow in its place! Evil Smile I am just trying to help the guy who seemed to have a legit concern, one I myself have had to struggle thru, so I can empathize.
"If the Devil knocks on enough doors, someone will invite him in for tea."
martyb  
#15 Posted : Wednesday, May 18, 2011 9:15:41 PM(UTC)
martyb

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 11/3/2006(UTC)
Posts: 3,507

Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
totj wrote:
This thread is going to make Proud *eterans head implode.
 
I suspect the structure of his head is already pretty thin & weak, so it wouldn't take much to make that happen...
Forum trolls to 0%
tucker515  
#16 Posted : Wednesday, May 18, 2011 9:38:27 PM(UTC)
tucker515

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 5/10/2009(UTC)
Posts: 1,290

Again- passovers only apply with a preference eligible is "passed over" in favor of a non-preference eligible. Both 10 point vets and 5 point vets are preference eligibles. Pay attention to (b)(1).

See 5 USC 3318-
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/5/usc_sec_05_00003318----000-.html

§ 3318. Competitive service; selection from certificates




 

(b)
(1) If an appointing authority proposes to pass over a
preference eligible on a certificate in order to select an individual
who is not a preference eligible, such authority shall file written
reasons with the Office for passing over the preference eligible. The
Office shall make the reasons presented by the appointing authority part
of the record of the preference eligible and may require the submission
of more detailed information from the appointing authority in support
of the passing over of the preference eligible. The Office shall
determine the sufficiency or insufficiency of the reasons submitted by
the appointing authority, taking into account any response received from
the preference eligible under paragraph (2) of this subsection. When
the Office has completed its review of the proposed passover, it shall
send its findings to the appointing authority and to the preference
eligible. The appointing authority shall comply with the findings of the
Office.


(2) In the case of a preference eligible described in section 2108 (3)(C)
of this title who has a compensable service-connected disability of 30
percent or more, the appointing authority shall at the same time it
notifies the Office under paragraph (1) of this subsection, notify the
preference eligible of the proposed passover, of the reasons therefor,
and of his right to respond to such reasons to the Office within 15 days
of the date of such notification. The Office shall, before completing
its review under paragraph (1) of this subsection, require a
demonstration by the appointing authority that the passover notification
was timely sent to the preference eligible’s last known address.


(3) A preference eligible not described in paragraph
(2) of this subsection, or his representative, shall be entitled, on
request, to a copy of—

(A) the reasons submitted by the appointing authority in support of the proposed passover, and

(B) the findings of the Office.




(4) In the case of a preference eligible described in
paragraph (2) of this subsection, the functions of the Office under this
subsection may not be delegated.







I am sorry, but I do not have the time to respond to private messages. I will not respond to them.
Eddoyle82  
#17 Posted : Wednesday, May 18, 2011 9:48:45 PM(UTC)
Eddoyle82

Rank: Groupie

Groups: Registered
Joined: 4/18/2011(UTC)
Posts: 102

I have read yhis before a time or two, please pay attentyion to the part of your post I pulled out.
 
(2) In the case of a preference eligible described in section 2108 (3)(C) of this title who has a compensable service-connected disability of 30 percent or more, the appointing authority shall at the same time it notifies the Office under paragraph (1) of this subsection, notify the preference eligible of the proposed passover, of the reasons therefor, and of his right to respond to such reasons to the Office within 15 days of the date of such notification. The Office shall, before completing its review under paragraph 
 
No one can pass over a 30% SC Vet unless they go to OPM for an official request to do so, and last I heard it has been years since they approved one. If a 30% SC VET makes qualified they are put to the top category of an external list and cannot be passed over for anyone other than another 30% SC VET. If they try to pass them over on that external list and fail to notify the vet of their intent within15 days then said vet has an actionable case to report to the VETS section of Department of Labor. (Been there done that). Once DOL finds merit the same vet has the right to be compensated for the violation of their civil rights. 30% SC Vets are a seperate and protected calls of workers and are not lumped in with other 10 pt vets. Other 10 pt vets get no advantage other than points over another vet.
"If the Devil knocks on enough doors, someone will invite him in for tea."
HR Spec  
#18 Posted : Wednesday, May 18, 2011 9:55:18 PM(UTC)
HR Spec

Rank: Rookie

Groups: Registered
Joined: 7/15/2010(UTC)
Posts: 48

Eddoyle82,
 
You are incorrect.  You may select another preference eligible veteran over a 30% this includes those who may only have 5 point preference.  It happens all the time, as we say in the HR world, a vet is a vet meaning you can select any eligible veteran as long as they are within the first 3.  The below information is taken directly from OPM's vet guide.
 

The "Rule of Three" and Veteran pass overs

Selection must be made from the highest three eligibles on the certificate who are available for the job--the "rule of three." However, an agency may not pass over a preference eligible to select a lower ranking nonpreference eligible or nonpreference eligible with the same or lower score.

Example: If the top person on a certificate is a 10-point disabled veteran (CP or CPS) and the second and third persons are 5-point preference eligibles, the appointing authority may choose any of the three.

Example: If the top person on a certificate is a 10-point disabled veteran (CP or CPS), the second person is not a preference eligible, and the third person is a 5-point preference eligible, the appointing authority may choose either of the preference eligibles. The appointing authority may not pass over the 10-point disabled veteran to select the nonpreference eligible unless an objection has been sustained.

Eddoyle82  
#19 Posted : Wednesday, May 18, 2011 9:59:55 PM(UTC)
Eddoyle82

Rank: Groupie

Groups: Registered
Joined: 4/18/2011(UTC)
Posts: 102

Check out the executive order from Obama in November FY-10. There is no longer a rule of three. He did away with it. This same order details exactly what i am talking about.
"If the Devil knocks on enough doors, someone will invite him in for tea."
Eddoyle82  
#20 Posted : Wednesday, May 18, 2011 10:03:05 PM(UTC)
Eddoyle82

Rank: Groupie

Groups: Registered
Joined: 4/18/2011(UTC)
Posts: 102

Delegated Examining Unit

Veterans preference (30% disabled, 5 point, 10 point) applies to DEU announcements. Prior to 1 Nov 10, human resources would take all the applications from qualified candidates, give them numerical scores, rank order them, add the 5-or 10-point preference and reorder the applications. Vets with 30% or more disabilities would be moved to the top of the list. Then the top three names would be referred to the hiring authority. If a veteran rose to the top of the list, a non-veteran could not be hired over the veteran without approval from the Office of Personnel Management – which seldom, if ever, gives approval. Likewise, if the top name on the list was a 30+% disabled veteran and the second name was a 10-point veteran, the hiring authority had to hire the 30% vet over the 10 point vet. This process was commonly called “the rule of three”.

All of this changed on Nov 1, 2010. The “rule of three” was replaced by a process called category rating. You need to understand the category rating process so that you can appreciate how your veteran’s preference is applied.

Before the job is announced, the hiring authority and human resources work together to define levels of qualifications that will be used to categorize applicants. Normally there are three levels – called categories. These can have different names but conceptually they are Best Qualified (top), Well Qualified (middle), Qualified (bottom). Remember, those applicants who are not qualified were screened out before applicants are placed in categories.

The categories not only have names (Best Qualified, Well Qualified, Qualified), but also have criteria associated with them. These criteria are defined at all three levels and are based on the competencies required in the job. Tables one through three show you the progression of how these categories and scoring criteria are developed.

"If the Devil knocks on enough doors, someone will invite him in for tea."
Rss Feed  Atom Feed
Users browsing this topic
Guest (2)
3 Pages123>
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.


This page was generated in 0.790 seconds.