Readers' Comments
Total Comments: 11
Page 1 of 2
Page 1 of 2
« Previous | Next »
Background Investigation Finds "Issues" and Appeal Upholds Agency Action
Total Comments: 11
Page 1 of 2
Page 1 of 2
« Previous | Next »
Free Email Newsletter
| Close | Change | YTD | |
| G | $12.7116 | +0.0013 | +3.51% |
| F | $12.1775 | +0.0497 | +2.07% |
| C | $9.4002 | -0.9235 | -43.24% |
| S | $10.4051 | -1.2566 | -47.42% |
| I | $12.2414 | -0.9997 | -50.56% |
| Close | Change | YTD | |
| L 2040 | $11.1768 | -0.8749 | -38.72% |
| L 2030 | $11.4481 | -0.7783 | -34.24% |
| L 2020 | $11.8446 | -0.6618 | -28.86% |
| L 2010 | $13.2444 | -0.3625 | -14.33% |
| L Income | $12.4113 | -0.2200 | -7.86% |
December 2, 2008
Search:
Custom Search
Home | About Us | FAQ's |
Site Map | Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
RSS 
© 2008 FedSmith Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Classic Moves
Army
Tue Feb 12, 2008 8:18 AM
Post Reply
Good to see that agencies havent forgotten the classical stall tactics.
Department of State is the absolute master at this. Rather than risk any chance of appeal, claims, or litigation of any sort, they stall.
A very high percentage of cases contain some sort of derogatory information. When it gets to complex and requires an agency to have a pair and adjudicate, they often stall, knowing that eventually the problem will go away.
Question on posting
FRC-East Cherry Point NC
Tue Feb 12, 2008 9:28 AM
Post Reply
Did the agency later fill the position after dismissing Mr.
Iyer? If so then there should be grounds for reopening
the investigation.
Is it all or nothing?
Retired
Tue Feb 12, 2008 12:52 PM
Post Reply
Suitability related questions were asked on the old SF-171, and were available for the selecting official to review. Then the SF-171 was effectively abolished, suitability related questions where asked on the OF-306.
May the selecting official see the OF-306? It depends upon the agency, but to allow it is controversial. Might not the selecting official essentially make his/her own suitability determination, and just not select the person (depriving the applicant of a chance to appeal the suitability decision)?
However, this presupposes that the questions ONLY pertain to suitability: that either the Federal government is utterly unable to hire the person, or the negative information is TOTALLY irrelevant to the selection process.
However, question 12 seems to provide important information while doing reference checks, and seems relevant in making the final decision--even where the applicant COULD be hired. If there are 10 suitabile applicants, you can still only hire one.
Fed Hiring Process
GOV
Tue Feb 12, 2008 3:07 PM
Post Reply
What if any, oversight committee is responsible for The Federal Hiring Process? Reform is in order. I have seen several instances of cancelled vacancy announcements, and applications never responded to. Why would an agency announce a vacancy only to cancel? Can it be that they are not happy with chosen candidates which, by law they must hire? Perhaps the agency hiring had their sites set on ‘another’ candidate and must run the process again. Furthermore, without any feedback on application status (agency notification of selection or not) the recourse is without a starting point somewhat thanks to "stall tactics" (thanks PERSEC for bringing up this point). In summary: It is my opinion that The Federal Hiring Process is ‘damaged’ within some agencies and lack of oversight and/or the failure of those responsible complicates the issue for the applicant. The application process requires a significant investment in time, at the very least applicants should be notified of their status without any ambiguity. Please reform the Federal Hiring Process!
WHAT ISSUES ??
USMC
Wed Feb 13, 2008 11:19 AM
Post Reply
IN accordance with the LAW:
Both the court and the IRS have to disclose what the issues were.
The issues could be something - that someone said about MR IYVER - that were not true.
But the court and the IRS have to disclose the SO CALL ISSUES. It is call the Freedom of information act.
Also once the job is tentatively offered - this becomes a legal issue. I don't know who is running that court but the court knows that an agency that makes an offer (even if tentative) is binding.
Idoits: Only HRO can make the offer.
And just think - the IRS is in charge of our taxes. UH!
Another IG Investigation matter.
For all the IRS knows - someone made a bad statement about Mr. IYER.
Re: WHAT ISSUES ??
DA
Thu Feb 14, 2008 11:07 AM
Federal Circuit Court made a bad call
Anonymous fof fear of retaliation
Wed Feb 13, 2008 6:53 PM
Post Reply
The Circuit Court's decision states that OPM found that inconsistencies in Iyer's application were as a result of "typographical errors". The Court goes on to say that any [alleged] misconduct occured sufficiently in the past rendering it irrelevant to Iyer's application.
For Iyer to prove his "constructive suitablility determination" theory , the Court required that he demonstrate that OPM delegated to the agency the authority to make the suitability determination. The Court finalizes its opinion by saying that OPM does not delegate authority in cases involving "material, intentional false statements or deception or fraud in...appointment". But the Court earlier stated that Iyer's application involved typographical errors. This hardly constitutes "material, intentional false statements or deception or fraud". So the Court's finding that Iyer failed to prove his "contructive suitablity determination" theory is fallacious.
Hiring Process
USCIS
Wed Feb 13, 2008 8:31 PM
Post Reply
Maybe one of you Federal Managers who read this blog can answer me. Why do Agencies cancell vacancy announcements? I apply to jobs at CIS, some of which I'm overqualified to do, and CIS will cancel them. I don't know why. And, it's not just CIS either. Other agencies do the same thing. What's going on here?
Re: Hiring Process
SSA
Thu Feb 14, 2008 9:00 AM
Re: Hiring Process
DOD
Tue Feb 19, 2008 11:51 AM