|
Boondock Saint posted:My boss at FEMA told me that apparently of all of the intelligence agencies, this one hires quite a bit and is much easier to get in at entry level. Any truth to this or was he blowing smoke up my rear end? It's true they're hiring a lot right now and a job fair is a good way to get in. If it's an invite-only fair, though, then don't expect to be interviewed at the fair if you aren't called (but there's still time).
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2010 17:13
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 15:41 |
|
|
Bohemienne posted:It is worth noting that some agencies do not post or rarely post openings on USAJobs, so if there's a specific agency/area you're interested in, you'd always do well to check that agency's website too. Just off the top of my head, I know that FBI, NSA, CIA, and DIA work this way. This is true for CIA and NSA jobs; it isn't true for DIA and FBI jobs. Search usajobs for 0132 series jobs to find intelligence vacancies at the latter two organizations. But don't let advertisements on usajobs stop you from checking individual sites for any organization.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2010 19:48
|
|
|
They know you've never had a real job and many organizations will be proud to have you, especially if you clearly demonstrate that you're willing to loudly pretend to know everything about anything anyway.  (kidding, partially)
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2010 01:10
|
|
|
You'll probably get the NGA job.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 26, 2010 22:28
|
|
|
CherryCola posted:Even if that's true, I probably wouldn't start getting a paycheck for another year and a half. My savings are only going to last until October. Not necessarily correct on the hiring event thing. While there are some cases where they are dumping you into a pool for the future, those hiring events are called hiring events because they do have billets to fill. They interview and select people to put into those billets. Hiring managers are there with selection authority. That doesn't mean you got hired, but someone else did. You could have been referred to another office, however, for a phone interview or in-person interview, or indeed for the general pool you mentioned, if you were not considered or selected for the vacant billets they were filling at the event. As for your clearance, yes, it could be 6-18 months for final adjudication of your SSBI. Adjudications are also not taking as long anymore as they once did. Contrary to popular belief this isn't the unobtainable holy grail of federal cleared jobs. Typically it seems like it helps to have a clearance for these jobs because experience comes alongside it; it's the experience that can qualify you. This is not as true for the private sector, where a clearance--while still not the holy grail-- can be slightly more important to already have. edit: to be clear, they are there to fill both future and current needs. If you weren't interviewed for a current need, you are right that you may not be called. Zoo fucked around with this message at 05:10 on Aug 28, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2010 04:56
|
|
|
TLG James posted:So if I'm a Veteran with ~8 years of experience in releated fields with a BS degree I should be fine applying? More than fine. You are well-qualified, if you've graduated.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2010 02:17
|
|
|
CherryCola posted:Sooooo, just got a voicemail from the NGA saying that they want to offer me a job! Holy crap. For you government workers, any chance I'd actually start this job in less than a year? Told you.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 15, 2010 23:07
|
|
|
CherryCola posted:You sure did! Now I just need to make sure I don't run out of money before I actually start getting a paycheck. I might be getting a temporary offer from a contractor which would help if it actually does take a whole year to do my clearance. Does the NGA ever give out interim clearance? Some answers to your various concerns: Yes, you can sometimes work with an interim clearance, but it depends on the office. You should call the HR manager you've been working with and ask -- if he/she doesn't know, see if you can talk to someone in the office you were hired in, if you know which one it is, and they will know. You can't tell them to take their time; the process is out of their hands for the most part. It probably won't actually take as long as you fear, but it could (have you lived overseas? that would make it take longer). If you've been clean, you have nothing to worry about for the clearance. Significant delinquent debt is a common reason for denial, unreported use of illegal drugs, etc. You would have an opportunity to explain yourself. As long as you are honest, there's no problem; modest marijuana use in the past is even okay as long as it was reported on your clearance form. The polygraph will simply gauge you as a criminal or terrorist threat--on a very macro, easily answerable level-- and thus is nothing to worry about either. Tell the polygrapher about your anxiety and he/she will work with you and relax you. So mostly just sit tight and eventually you'll walk in and start work. edit: unfortunately, I probably would not sign that year-long contract elsewhere if I were you, especially if your investigation is likely to be pretty open & shut once it begins, although working while waiting for your clearance is fine (if you can't work with the interim). Zoo fucked around with this message at 05:23 on Sep 19, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2010 05:08
|
|
|
CherryCola posted:Thanks so much for all the advice. This is tricky because the other job that I'm applying for is also something I really want to do...and I don't have any other leads on how I'm going to support myself while my security clearance goes through. So are you saying it's not possible to ask them to delay my assignment for a couple months? They can work with you for your start date (ie, "delay your assignment"), but I thought you were asking whether you can tell them to adjust your investigation pace -- that's what they can't do. The clearances are mostly outside their hands once they submit the investigation. Usually they can't even tell you how far along you are in the investigation process. Speaking of which, re: taking the other job, keep in mind that if it doesn't put you in for the clearance (sounds like it doesn't), that's a huge advantage to sticking to the NGA path, since once it's done, it's done for five years as long as it's active. You mentioned that, but if you want to be a federal intel officer, now is probably the time. You could go the contracting route after a few years if you wanted to experiment with that. But you know which option is best for you better than me. Having more experience certainly wouldn't hurt your odds of getting an offer again if you turned down the job and applied some day later. Turning down the offer shouldn't be a negative mark, but it might raise questions if you're already well into the process. I'm not sure what happens if you turn down the job once your investigation has started. I can't think of how it'd hurt you in the future, apart from having to get offered a job again, but I can't tell you with certainty what it could affect when the investigation comes into play. My personal guess is nothing, but I would definitely ask HR that exact question. By the way, no guarantees, but I would mention the presumably superior salary offer from the private sector job to your NGA HR manager if you get an offer from the private company as well and see if NGA can adjust their offer. Agency/organization HR departments have differing policies, though, and I'm not an NGA'er so I can't be certain of how much leverage you have, but it can work at other similar agencies. You could also try to find some way to not get in the 12-mo contract, or even take the contract if you have to, don't tell NGA anything about it right now (apart from maybe salary renegotiation), and then play it by ear. You never know; your clearance investigation COULD take >12mos, or take 10mos and NGA might be able to allow a start date set to 2mos after that, and then you'd be fine to just switch over. And if not, turn down NGA at that point and explain why (caveat being that, as mentioned, I don't know matter-of-factly whether or not there are consequences for doing this once you have the clearance). Zoo fucked around with this message at 14:56 on Sep 22, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Sep 22, 2010 14:46
|
|
|
Zoo fucked around with this message at 01:19 on Sep 27, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2010 01:17
|
|
|
gmilo posted:I would put the one you could justify in an interview. Don't fly through the questions only putting E only to get to the interview and have it be blatantly obvious you have no idea what you're talking about. Then he/she will never make it through the automated system and will never get to interview consideration. This step is based on a formula. Blatant lying could get you in a rut, but if you're selecting "C" on every answer, you will never cert on any job and never make it to a human. Justify your resume in an interview.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2010 01:10
|
|
|
CherryCola posted:I still haven't heard a peep about my polygraph yet. I was under the impression that the polygraph took place around the same time as the drug and vision test, but could it be that they want to do the BI first so they can find something juicy to ask me? Though, I also read that NGA only gives a partial-scope polygraph...like mostly about whether I'm loyal to the US. That's right (it will be a counterintelligence polygraph and will be about your loyalty to the US; it's a breeze). As for when they call you in for it, it could be that they're waiting on resources. Sometimes there's a backlog. The polygraph will probably come first, but either way eventually someone will call you and give you a start date. The big thing to get out of the way in the waiting game is your background investigation, so you're moving along very well and you're lucky to have your investigator call you and give you the good news like that directly. Zoo fucked around with this message at 16:04 on Nov 13, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2010 15:57
|
|
|
Cjones posted:On the topic of the polygraph, there were a few things I have a question about. You should be able to reveal #1 up-front and not have a problem. Just don't try to hide it, because you're not alone and the only test to fail with that kind of drug use is honesty. They won't mind unless you lie, and one of your friends is bound to reveal you smoked. As you may guess, a huge number of people are in your boat and investigators understand that. It would be more challenging for you if you'd done harder drugs or had a much more severe habit, or if you tried to hide your minor teenage experimentation. As for subversive acts, cause for concern is restricted to real threats. Are the "wrong people" kids with tattoos, dyed hair, and funny clothes? Not a big deal. Be concerned about your chances if the "wrong people" are planning terrorist attacks, sending thousands of dollars to terrorist organizations in Yemen, or openly and in practical terms advocating the overthrow of the US government (not just listening to Black Flag or Immortal Technique on your iPod/in concert). You can discuss any of these concerns up-front and get them out in the open so you can get rid of any unnecessary anxiety. On this test, few goons or nerdier disposition types should have much cause for nervousness.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2010 12:14
|
|
|
Cjones posted:Gotcha, just wanted that stuff clarified. The other thing is that while you aren't doing it by asking these questions, they'll ask whether you've ever researched how to "beat" the polygraph. Not trying to sound like a dweebus, but it just makes life easier if you can honestly answer no -- not because they can read minds obviously, but it's just better if you don't bother. It's an easy set of questions; depending on how nervous you are naturally as a person and/or how much your body reacts to sitting still, you could be out in under an hour.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2010 19:44
|
|
|
Gravel Gravy posted:Maybe it is just my experience but they never asked me that. It was just your standard fare of questions regarding my truthiness and whether or not I ever tried to destroy the US. It depends on the polygrapher and agency.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2010 00:45
|
|
|
Not sure about space issues at NGA, but there's not much movement right now in DoD until the FY11 defense budget is passed (possibly next month if we're lucky, but probably not).
|
|
#
¿
Nov 23, 2010 18:00
|
|
|
No hiring actions, even for FY10, as Happydayz said (this is stupid, yes). Everyone is waiting and I know a bunch of people who interviewed for other jobs in Sept-Oct but are sitting in the dark until the budget is passed. Although there are exceptions for Schedule A or Schedule A-like hires apparently, for at least one organization anyway. I am thinking it won't take until March though. The hold-up for this year's defense bill is Don't Ask, Don't Tell. It'll be up for a vote soon and I wouldn't hold my breath for passage, but even if Congress doesn't remove DADT from the defense bill and thus probably fails to pass the bill in the lame duck, I'd expect it in January. I just hope we get a miracle and it passes in the lame duck so we can avoid any FY11 slicing in the new Congress; that could delay us past January.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 26, 2010 23:10
|
|
|
For the guy who said "UGH" about the CR, believe me, you're not alone. We also have limited business travel, repair projects, and other capabilities crippled until the budget is passed. It certainly affects real peoples' lives. It's nasty like this every election year but much to your lack of surprise, that doesn't really seem to give Congress pause when it comes time to politick around instead of achieve things.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 26, 2010 23:15
|
|
|
psydude posted:It wouldn't surprise me if the current Congress went ahead and passed most of the funding bills before recess as a parting "gently caress you" to the incoming Congress. If that's not the case, I wouldn't expect them to pass anything until after January as the fiscally conservative house goes hack and slash on the budget. While it's not popular to believe that, I agree that it's a possibility (maybe probability) for at least the defense budget. DADT would probably need to be removed, though, unless there are enough votes for it; haven't been keeping up in the last few weeks, so maybe.. The other reason is that the "fiscally conservative" House won't necessarily want to pass a giant omnibus bill as its first act in January. It's best to let the lame duck Democrats have that on their backs. But they also need to resolve the tax problem, blah blah, and time is running short.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 26, 2010 23:50
|
|
|
Yeah, a government shut down would make the March scenario feasible. But unlike during the Newt fiasco, they don't have the Senate. I guess we'll see.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2010 00:26
|
|
|
CherryCola posted:Man this sucks. So am I right in assuming that even though I have a tentative offer and am just waiting for my clearance adjudication I won't be able to start until all this crap gets figured out? I'm not sure about NGA specifics, unfortunately, and you might be able to get this answer from your HR representative (if he/she isn't a dick). I suspect that since you had your conditional offer already and the ball has been rolling, you're good to go and continue waiting on your adjudication. This is probably the case, because agencies are still having indoc/orientation classes. Start dates could have been set back in FY10 for some people, but I know for certain that many of them at my agency had their start dates assigned after FY11 began.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2010 18:41
|
|
|
The rumor from the Hill right now is that the reason it was restricted to certain feds only (though USPS workers also have a unionized contract, so there's that), exempting congressional staffers explicitly and other Legislative employees, is because it will not go through Congress as the media assume; it will be an Executive Order coming down soon. So this would be why it mentions only the employees the President has that authority over in the Executive Branch. We'll find out. This would also be news to some Representatives, I know, so I'm skeptical... but not strongly so.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2010 00:38
|
|
|
dvgrhl posted:As to Zoo's comment, I don't even know if the President has the authority to send down an Executive order like that. The pay scale is part of the budget, which is set by Congress. I don't see how the President has the authority to bypass Congress and push out what he wants instead. Not sure about this either. The freeze affects Executive employees only, but appropriations still come from Congress.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2010 22:41
|
|
|
Nessus posted:Now the common knowledge is that federal employees make twice what the private sector average, weighted down with tens of millions of part timers on minimum wage and probably excluding non-wage CEO compensation, make! The WaPo did a good article about the people you're talking about who really believe that: Five myths about federal workers. The Washington Post posted:The Congressional Research Service reported in 2009 that private industry pays higher salaries than the government for PhD-level employees in computer science, information science, mathematics, statistics, biological sciences, environmental life sciences, chemistry, economics, and civil, architectural, electrical and computer engineering. In addition, the average private-sector salary in 2010 for a recent college graduate was $48,661. Entry-level federal workers start at $34,075, or $42,209 for candidates with superior academic achievement. Link them to that next time you find someone who says that non-sarcastically. Not that it'll help, probably. :/
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2010 00:46
|
|
|
It will make life easier if you can truthfully answer no when asked, "Have you ever accessed classified information without authorization?"
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2010 03:40
|
|
|
menpoop posted:I obviously have no idea if yall are talking from positions where you'd know this for certain, but this is really unreasonable. These things were literally on the front page of major international newspapers and have been talked about on CNN endlessly. Just loading the Guardian or NYTimes websites would have netted you some information about the cables. They understand that and common sense does prevail, no worries. That's why they're asking would-be employees not to go digging around pointedly. But I mean, there's nothing you can do about the fact that classified info is all over the newspapers (even before Wikileaks). That's different from bookmarking and scouring Wikileaks and crypto.me though. :P
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2010 00:54
|
|
|
seo posted:Anyone have any stories about the NSF Cyber Service Scholarship-For-Service program? Is that the one that seems to funnel people into DHS cybersecurity jobs? If so, I know someone who had a very good and very fortunate experience through it; got his degree through it, came on board to DHS, and is now doing quite well. Not sure if this is the same program, but in any case, getting help paying for education is a good idea as it is, but doing it to join a discipline in government (cyber/cybersecurity) that currently has strong growth and stability prospects is even better.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2010 17:09
|
|
|
JacksLibido posted:Anybody have any info on being an FBI or CIA agent? I've been reading up on some of the career paths but they don't really say what it's like day to day. What do you mean, "agent"? In your case, you are probably hoping for either an analytical career path, or a career in the "field" (better to use the term collector). In either scenario, your best bets are networking and blanket applying. In other--also, pretty much all-- cases, you'll need to network (you probably know that). The CIA and NSA post their vacancies on their individual web sites only; the FBI posts its vacancies both on its web site and via USAJobs. I'm not sure where you're flying out of and don't want to know, but you should be able to network there to some mild extent. It would be a good idea to have someone who works for one of these organizations look over your resume before you submit it anywhere; really, that would be crucial. Becoming an analyst or working in collection will require the same networking and/or luck process, with the collection community having a slightly more insular nature than the analytical community. This is not my area of expertise, so don't take the next clause as hard reality, but I would imagine your canned experience as an EWO would assist in finding a collection-related (and potentially field-related) job. Check nsa.gov and cia.gov (mostly nsa). Even people who work at those types of places will tell you to do that, so don't take it as a "hey, gently caress off" generic answer. Lastly, always watch for job fairs. If you're interested at all in the analytical side, scroll up to Happydayz's post about the DIA hiring event and apply by... this Friday. With intelligence experience, it's pretty much the best way to get into the IC humanly available.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 3, 2011 23:06
|
|
|
JacksLibido posted:Thanks for the info! I still have a few years left on my contract so the job fair wouldn't work for me just yet, but after reading a few of these threads it looks like the application process is long enough that I'd better start at least looking at what kind of job I want. I really don't know enough about the different jobs to be able to say if I'm looking for an analyst job or one in collection, do you know of any sites or forums where I could find a better break down or some lifestyle info? If you're not looking for being stuck behind a desk, analysis is out, so that's easy for you. Finding forums, due to the nature of the jobs, probably isn't practical. As for when to start, yeah, start a year out or so. edit: you might get some vague insight by googling around for forums related to military analysis & collection jobs (Army should have a few collector jobs), but I don't know MOS/AFSC/etc codes off hand and, of course, you probably understand that the people on those forums can be of questionable competence--and that the military's monkey analogs to these jobs can be pretty different from the real thing, though many collection type positions are filled primarily by military officers and not civilians (that's not an area of deep knowledge for me tho) Zoo fucked around with this message at 09:36 on Jan 4, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2011 08:47
|
|
|
The successful entry-level people I've seen in the last year or so have often come from internships (sometimes little-known programs like PALACE ACQUIRE). Those of you dead set on getting into intelligence could also consider the military, but that's not recommended as a jobs program, even though it's often treated that way -- let's just put it that way.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2011 15:20
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:I've been considering it (doing research on the various OTS forums), but with the budget cuts and lovely economy it's not really as easy as it used to be, at least not for commissioning It would offer you the years of experience needed to qualify for beyond entry-level; that's where it helps (and networking potential). Beyond that, well, yup, you're just joining the military.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2011 16:02
|
|
|
The intern programs vary based on organization. Don't let USSS discourage you; he may or may not be right about USSS, though since he works for them I'd estimate that he's right. The general rule in getting into government jobs is that you should always "give it a shot" (well, the real general rule is a little something about who-you-know and what-not, but you get what I mean).
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2011 22:08
|
|
|
psydude posted:I know the CIA does this for certain - you do two summers with them as a paid intern and when you're done you're basically guaranteed a job there. The major national level intelligence agencies all do this. Surprisingly, you generally apply on their web site (though of course, as usual, don't expect a response soon or at all). DIA's is here. You would want to investigate the master's in intelligence program, which pays you pennies to go through a master's program at a government-run, regionally accredited intelligence school, following which you start a permanent position. This degree doesn't make you Mr. Intelligence Analysis, but it helps with your career later down the line; at about mid-level. A clearance is still required but you know by now that luck and waiting are part of any of these opportunities at all. There are NSA programs for all levels of education. In particular, NSA internships are for real; it's relatively common for them to bring on interns, even during high school (less common), and they will really keep you forever. But luck, timing, GPA, math/physics degrees, etc. Although definitely don't be afraid of having a liberal arts degree. If you can sell yourself and timing, etc., is right, you are still a potential candidate. In all cases, unless you've bombed in a big way, you're more or less guaranteed a job. It will suck seeing luckier people come in with GG-11 at a place like DIA with bare-bones qualifications while you languish at -9 equivalency, but you will indeed get your permanent position. In this environment of cutbacks, that's where your priority should be. The Air Force intern program I pasted above, PALACE ACQUIRE, is also a good way to get a job. You start out low, but you are essentially assured a position when finished (though sometimes it may not be in the location you want; many people end up in DC or San Antonio). It's a competitive program, but it does have intelligence and other positions. I have not gone through this program, but few people seem to know about it and I do know five people--that number is precise, because I can recall names of PALACE ACQUIRE former interns-- who've had great success with it. I think it's a three-year program. While three of them are still "languishing" at ~GS/GG-11 a year after completion (not too bad however) and one is a -12 equivalent with a master's degree (could do better, could do worse), one required only nine years to land a senior position in a major intelligence agency, albeit part of that is testament to her capabilities. This isn't so much because the program is so good, I'd guess, but more just because it's a way to get your foot in the door and that's what matters. There are also programs like the cyber-for-service DHS program discussed briefly up-thread, which I'm not qualified to drop knowledge on. Someone else might know about it. But there are programs; that's the takeaway. edit: didn't notice that Xandu linked to some of those already; just more fuel for your fire. Zoo fucked around with this message at 22:28 on Jan 22, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2011 22:13
|
|
|
CherryCola posted:Anyway, sorry for posting in this thread all the time. It just sucks being in adjudication where there's literally nothing else I can do. At least with the investigation, I was actually getting phone calls from people and had my own tasks to do. Your anxiety is perfectly normal (this is an understatement), though your congressional idea is probably a little over the top for some people. :P
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2011 02:29
|
|
|
psydude posted:Hey, do you know where I can find information on those intelligence agency funded scholarships for grad school? I knew about the internships, but I haven't found anything on that. DIA's is here. CIA has its own as well, but DIA's is the only one I feel authoritative (accurate) discussing. They won't pay you much, but they'll put you through and give you a job afterward. I don't think it's a very long program, either.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2011 02:47
|
|
|
People have done worse deeds to get jobs, surely!
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2011 02:28
|
|
|
fivetwo posted:The U.S. Marshals Service is apparently hiring in June. To be clear, you mean they don't get LEAP pay, right? Whereas at the the other organizations you do? Or do you mean they offer lower pay grades than DoJ generally?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2011 00:03
|
|
|
fivetwo posted:They get LEAP like everyone else, but their highest pay grade (12) is less than the highest for the other agencies (13). Oh, OK, I had no idea about the highest pay grade thing. That's ridiculous, yeah (IMO), even with LEAP. Oh well. I do see a lot of Marshal jobs on USAJobs right now, too, but I'm a higher pay grade than a -12; and no LEA or Justice experience anyhow, just like to gently caress around with the idea of trying to cross over. DEA has low-balled the friends I've known to try to cross over (we're in DoD as GGs/GG equivalents). One was offered a job, but he's a -13 in DoD and they offered him something like an -11... and it required moving to Des Moines. I don't think that was an 1811 though.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2011 00:23
|
|
|
fivetwo posted:Don't get me wrong, Marshals can move up to GS-13, but they have to promote, whereas FBI/DEA/SS/ATF get it as the automatic progression for all agents. ah, makes much more sense now. That's what you mean by journeyman. And yeah, 1811 would be awesome, although it looks like a couple people (and an 1811) chimed in to reveal that it isn't all that.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2011 16:55
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 15:41 |
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:Varied between postings. For the Border Patrol it was as low as 70, for a DoS position I applied for it was 97 (and that was for Detroit, places people would actually want to live were 98-100 or above [veteran's preference only]). Detroit has a high cost of living adjustment, though, interestingly (I assume it has expensive areas somewhere). It's higher than DC's, iirc. Though we're screwed over in DC because it factors in Baltimore in the COLA percentage, which is why we're artificially low compared to the actual sky-high cost of living here. sigh
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2011 23:54
|
|