|
For DoD employees the furlough is over, but apparently RIF's are on the table if this sequestration nonsense doesn't get sorted out. http://www.federalnewsradio.com/407/3430538/Report-Thousands-of-DoD-civilians-could-face-layoffs-in-2014 This part of the article had me scratching my head: quote:The Pentagon could be forced to cut 1,500 individuals from Defense agencies, with the majority of dismissals coming from the Defense Contract Management Agency. The Army and Navy could cut more than 2,100 and 2,672, from their respective civilian workforces, according to Bloomberg. Wasn't DCMA hiring like mad awhile back?
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2013 04:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 07:02 |
|
|
Delorence Fickle posted:For DoD employees the furlough is over, but apparently RIF's are on the table if this sequestration nonsense doesn't get sorted out. Well, I got hired with them 4 months ago, along with like 12 other people at our office. Also, a quick look at USAjobs shows that they're still hiring for about 150 positions.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2013 05:42
|
|
|
Are those real positions, or restricted to within-the-agency hires? We're advertising a bunch of positions right now but it's all a zero sum gain because we can't hire anyone who's not already working for us.Delorence Fickle posted:For DoD employees the furlough is over, but apparently RIF's are on the table if this sequestration nonsense doesn't get sorted out. grover fucked around with this message at 11:01 on Aug 26, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2013 10:56
|
|
|
A number of them are, yeah. But there's still a pretty significant amount open to "US Citizens", about 50. And there's an equally significant number that are "from other Federal Agency".
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2013 14:42
|
|
|
Justus posted:Well, I got hired with them 4 months ago, along with like 12 other people at our office. The secret way governments "cut" jobs is just stop offering open positions for a while.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 19:47
|
|
|
sbaldrick posted:The secret way governments "cut" jobs is just stop offering open positions for a while. They expect that during that time, employees will quit/die/retire, and if the pool of employees you're talking about is large enough, this will happen. Assuming the average hiring rate after the cuts is not higher than before, it is a cut.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2013 02:37
|
|
|
Gravel Gravy posted:The clearance was done through DoS originally so hopefully that won't be too big an issue. If you'd be working where I think you'd be working, it should be pretty awesome. Justus posted:Well, I got hired with them 4 months ago, along with like 12 other people at our office. Attrition hiring.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2013 09:22
|
|
|
VideoTapir posted:They expect that during that time, employees will quit/die/retire, and if the pool of employees you're talking about is large enough, this will happen. Assuming the average hiring rate after the cuts is not higher than before, it is a cut. Almost half of all employees in a lot of government agencies will be eligible to retire in the next 3 years, so we're going to end up with a humorous situation where there's a bunch of 20 somethings and a bunch of 50 somethings and nothing inbetween.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2013 17:25
|
|
|
Leif. posted:If you'd be working where I think you'd be working, it should be pretty awesome. What would you guess? Edit: HR lady got back to me on disclosure. I'll be working in Diplomatic Security. So from this package I just received, it looks like the position only requires a secret, and not my TS. Kinda lame. Gin and Juche fucked around with this message at 20:32 on Aug 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2013 19:00
|
|
|
psydude posted:Almost half of all employees in a lot of government agencies will be eligible to retire in the next 3 years, so we're going to end up with a humorous situation where there's a bunch of 20 somethings and a bunch of 50 somethings and nothing inbetween. It's really a bunch of 60 something that won't retire and a bunch of 30 somethings that wish they would so they can get out of the entry level slot and bump up to let in the 20 somethings (this is my life)
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2013 20:04
|
|
|
Actually, you're going to see a shitload of retirements. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/federal-retirements/ My boss retired today. No post retirement job. Just tired of it all at this point I think.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 01:18
|
|
|
Evil SpongeBob posted:Actually, you're going to see a shitload of retirements. My agency is the 2nd highest with retirement eligibles on that chart. I can easily believe it from just glancing around HQ. In my division, we have quite a few people who have been working for over 40 years. We had our division secretary retire earlier this year after 43 years and haven't opened a job announcement for her replacement.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 20:54
|
|
|
Gravel Gravy posted:What would you guess? Ah nevermind, I was guessing INR.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2013 04:38
|
|
|
Leif. posted:Ah nevermind, I was guessing INR. That was my second choice, but glad to have gotten my first. Also the HR rep sent me a list of possible tasks I may end up doing. Surprised that they seem fairly legit, though I'm sure I'll end up getting some food/beverage service experience as well.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2013 19:05
|
|
|
NintyFresh posted:My agency is the 2nd highest with retirement eligibles on that chart. I can easily believe it from just glancing around HQ. Can we drown it in a bathtub yet?
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2013 02:57
|
|
|
NintyFresh posted:My agency is the 2nd highest with retirement eligibles on that chart. I can easily believe it from just glancing around HQ. Do you think that they're still effective in their jobs? It seems like any agency with so many people who've been in that long will become incredibly top-heavy.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 21:54
|
|
|
The answer is no, we have have two guys in my department who between them have 92 years of service (48 and 44).
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 16:29
|
|
|
sbaldrick posted:The answer is no, we have have two guys in my department who between them have 92 years of service (48 and 44). Jesus H Christ...even freakin 4 star generals are required to retire after 40 years service unless specifically appointed to serve longer. I know general officers are more akin to SES and thus not really comparable with GS but still those motherfuckers need to 
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 17:29
|
|
|
Seamonster posted:Jesus H Christ...even freakin 4 star generals are required to retire after 40 years service unless specifically appointed to serve longer. I know general officers are more akin to SES and thus not really comparable with GS but still those motherfuckers need to Yeah, okay I'm happy that I work for an up or out ( with an out for age, TIC, and TIG)
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 04:00
|
|
|
sbaldrick posted:The answer is no, we have have two guys in my department who between them have 92 years of service (48 and 44). I don't get why people in that position don't just retire. They're under the old pension system, right? Why stay at work when they can earn most of their salary off fishing or doing something else?
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 04:53
|
|
|
more friedman units posted:I don't get why people in that position don't just retire. They're under the old pension system, right? Why stay at work when they can earn most of their salary off fishing or doing something else? Their job is their identity and the only foundation for their self-worth.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 05:02
|
|
|
Baby's first NOR and referral to hiring manager. 1 for 1 so far with 9 other applications in processing. Only took them a month since the application closed...
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 08:41
|
|
|
sbaldrick posted:The answer is no, we have have two guys in my department who between them have 92 years of service (48 and 44). 
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 10:50
|
|
|
VideoTapir posted:Their job is their identity and the only foundation for their self-worth. It is for one of them, all he does it go to work, go to a poo poo dinner for dinner and go to a bar. The other one has a wife that's 12 years younger and he can't retire till she does.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 16:15
|
|
|
NintyFresh posted:My agency is the 2nd highest with retirement eligibles on that chart. I can easily believe it from just glancing around HQ. My agency also exceeds the average listed on that chart. I have one colleague who was hired at the age of 19 and worked for the department under its first Secretary. My Branch Chief refuses to retire and has not put any internal guidance/policies/etc. in writing in the past 10 years or so, if not longer. She's a walking encyclopedia and as a result would be a huge loss (truth be told) to our agency if she were to go, but only due to her approach at job security.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 22:04
|
|
|
That sounds about right for 75% of federal managers I've dealt with across two agencies.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2013 15:10
|
|
|
Yet if she were to retire, nothing would change. It's not like your branch would go "Oh no, Shelia's gone. Everyone go home." I hate managers like that. Your job as a manager is to train others to take over your job. It's not like you're getting fired with the government if you do your job. Most of the time, when an employee retires on Friday, everyone has forgotten you by Monday. On a separate note, I want this guy's SES job. http://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...b3a8_story.html
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2013 17:25
|
|
|
psydude posted:That sounds about right for 75% of federal managers I've dealt with across two agencies. At least for State, if you're dealing with Foreign Service managers, this is normally not the case. We rotate every 1-3 years and, at least overseas, something the OIG looks for is SOPs and other written documentation on performing major job responsibilities. I've not done a domestic tour yet though so I don't know how well that holds up in CONUS.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2013 17:34
|
|
|
Womacks-JP-23 posted:Baby's first NOR and referral to hiring manager. 1 for 1 so far with 9 other applications in processing. Complaining about one month between closing and referral  I applied as a Secretary Honors Program Policy Fellow with DHS back in November 12 2012. App closed November 29, 2012 with no updates since. Other highlights include a job with General Services Admin. I applied to back May 21 of this year, just updated today saying the announcement was cancelled.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2013 18:16
|
|
|
TCD posted:At least for State, if you're dealing with Foreign Service managers, this is normally not the case. I was strictly under CS managers, so I don't know how FS rolls in that regard.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2013 19:48
|
|
|
Evil SpongeBob posted:On a separate note, I want this guy's SES job.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 01:50
|
|
|
Feed Me A Cat posted:Complaining about one month between closing and referral Why don't you just call them up and ask what the status of those openings are?
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 05:51
|
|
|
Womacks-JP-23 posted:Why don't you just call them up and ask what the status of those openings are?  mostly. Having it be stuck at "application received" for this long seems like a good sign they're out of money and putting the application process in a holding pattern as long as they can.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 18:43
|
|
|
I took an online test for an IRS contact representative position. I think I did pretty well on the Q/A session but the data entry was marred by some poor (read: hilariously bad) responses to keystrokes and I hosed up one or two instances. Should I send an email about this or would it reflect poorly on me? I can grin and bear it if giving notice wouldn't help me but I'd hate to think I missed out on an opportunity because I got too flustered trying to bang in a letter to catch a full zip code.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2013 08:27
|
|
|
Tremendous Taste posted:I took an online test for an IRS contact representative position. I think I did pretty well on the Q/A session but the data entry was marred by some poor (read: hilariously bad) responses to keystrokes and I hosed up one or two instances. Should I send an email about this or would it reflect poorly on me? I can grin and bear it if giving notice wouldn't help me but I'd hate to think I missed out on an opportunity because I got too flustered trying to bang in a letter to catch a full zip code. Huh, I applied for one of those positions. Haven't received any notice of a test to take... that seems like a bad sign. Good luck with your application, though!
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2013 04:28
|
|
|
Gonna be a lot of unhappy folks with this development. http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...889d_story.html
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2013 04:24
|
|
|
Hmm, I am finally at the six-month-mark given that I started Spamming federal applications in March. Nothing has yet popped up from the Long Game, though I will remain optimistic. Particularly since I have gotten at least a dozen "forwarded to hiring official" messages mixed in with the dozens of "just kidding, position cancelled" and "why did you even apply?" messages. As for the Secret Service Special Agent thing, I did pass the written test. I had moved across the country in the meantime, though, so though I would have taken the physical test three weeks ago normally, they are still working on rescheduling it for me. I am not complaining about the extra weeks I have had to actually get myself in good enough shape to have a chance to pass, though. (I did say I could fly back into Seattle to take the test, incidentally, the Agent I worked with was the one who was all "oh no, that is dumb, we can move the test for you;" much more accommodating than I was expecting)
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2013 21:52
|
|
|
 Passed the Customs written test with a 97, now I get to wait for OPM to totally gently caress up the task of processing my electronically submitted documents. Got an e-mail from CBP with attached PDFs that I filled out so I could print them, scan them, and upload them to OPM's dumb USA Test Manager site. Favorite part was one of the documents was not even listed under the dropdown category box despite having a designator all over the documents themselves. "Other" document category is the lucky winner!
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2013 22:22
|
|
|
How irrational is it to just quit out of every application that requires you to make an entirely new profile, including entering all of your education and work history using drop-down menus for which shortcut keys do not even work? I understand that "spending an hour doing something annoying now could mean an amazing new future," but when you feel like you have a 25% chance of ever even hearing back about the job, let alone the 0.02% chance of actually getting it, it feels as poor a use of time as playing the lottery.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2013 22:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 07:02 |
|
|
Quarex posted:How irrational is it to just quit out of every application that requires you to make an entirely new profile, including entering all of your education and work history using drop-down menus for which shortcut keys do not even work? If you're using that time to apply to things with a better chance of success I'd say that's the most intelligent thing to do, and it punishes the offenders by ensuring that the smartest candidates aren't applying for their job.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2013 01:48
|
|