I am a term employee, and was a permanent one in 2002. I've been trying to get a perm job since 2003. I understand this person's problem. If you are perm, don't ever take a term or temp job. It's a big mistake. I thought it would be easy to get another perm job and it's not.
Nice try
HR Supv GSA Fri Mar 14, 2008 8:51 AM
Stupid, Stupid, Stupid.
Where was the documentation for federal status?
Human Resources Specialist DHHS Fri Mar 14, 2008 9:00 AM
The Human Resources Specialist for the Army should have caught this before Ms. Robinson was placed on the certificate or list of eligibles. Why wasn't her SF-50 required for this position? This would have shown that she did not have competitive status. As far as Ms. Robinson's jobs go, it is just tough luck. Her temporary appointment can be terminated at anytime anyway and her competitive position was made erroneously. So, to answer your final question, yes, Ms. Robinson should have taken the Army up on their offer.
Re: Where was the documentation for federal status?
HR specialist DOI Fri Mar 14, 2008 10:06 AM
I've seen 2 cases where temp employees doctored their SF-50s to show that they were career-conditional employees. Until the hiring office receives the OPF, it's hard to tell you've got false information. (I don't know if that's what happened in this case, but anything is possible!)
Should have taken the exam
Forestery Technician former Support Services Specialist US Forest Service Fri Mar 14, 2008 9:42 AM
She should have taken the exam. I do understand her position I was a "career" temp for years then had a perm, lost it to downsizing, I am a temp again and its near impossible to get a perm EVEN though I have NON competitive reinstatement eligibility-I only get reinstated into temporary positions so I have been working continuously without a break in service now for two years as a temporary! I am not complaining though at least I am working for decent wages. It would be nice to be a perm again though and have the benefits.
NSPS Selection Process and Temporary Employees
Non-HR Professional Navy Fri Mar 14, 2008 9:47 AM
We recently were inducted into the National Security Personnel System and were trying to fill a positon that had previously been graded at the GS-12 level. We had a candidate who had qualified for and was interviewed for another GS-12 position in our organization who we now wanted to hire for this job. The employee was in a temporary position at another command at a GS-9 level (lower cost of living area and no higher permanent positions available). NSPS provisions allow for an increase of only 5% when 'promoting' an employee within NSPS. Even though this indivudual was not currently in NSPS we could not hire at the equivalent GS-12 level pay. In a desparate 'leap of faith', the employee resigned, we readvertised the job and were able to hire at a GS-12 level pay.
And NSPS is supposed to make it easier to hire the best qualified individual!
Re: NSPS Selection Process and Temporary Employees
worker usda Fri Mar 14, 2008 2:39 PM
sounds like a prohibited personnel practice to me. and anyone on the previous cert that was cancelled should talk to OSC. cancelling an advertisement because the person you wanted did not make the cut. did the leap of faith include advising them to quit to become eligible and then hiring them. doesn't anyone else find this to be a bit "odd?"
Re: NSPS Selection Process and Temporary Employees
Analyst DOD Mon Mar 17, 2008 9:01 AM
The Airforce does it all the time.
Re: NSPS Selection Process and Temporary Employees
Analyst USDA Mon Mar 17, 2008 12:46 PM
That doesn't make it right - just because the Air Force does it all the time!
Hardly an EMERGENCY
HR Specialist NASA Fri Mar 14, 2008 9:57 AM
Since when does incompetence in HR meet the criteria for a 30 day EMERGENCY appointment?
SF75 info should be obtained on an transfer candidate, and reviewed prior to establishing an effective date, much less bringing one on board.
Army does owe her an apology, since she left one job (however temporary it may have been) to take theirs.
The supervisor of the HR specialist needs to remember this at NSPS evaluation time. If the top score is given after this kind of mistake, shame, shame.
Watch out, throwing stones can hurt...
Consultant DVA Fri Mar 14, 2008 2:47 PM
A close read of the article will reveal to the reader a sgnificant comment in one paragraph, which reads...
"application originally left blank -{WAS THIS DONE ON PURPOSE? BASED ON FOLLOWING IT APPEARS SO}- whether her current position was temporary or permanent. When Army asked about her status, Robinson checked both the "temporary" and "career" -{LYING ON THE APPLICATION}- boxes on the form.
She knew the position was not open for temps so it appears she purposely left that little item off the record; however, after getting caught and asked about it she lies and checks both boxes, probably hoping to win the case she just lost if it came up.
HR probably did not get the info until they selected her and requested the screens from the losing command.
She was not only stupid, but appears to be a fraud and a liar as well. Similar to other fraud tactics: withold, confuse, blame the other guy and hope to win.
She deserved to lose and no one owes her anything.
My length of employment will be 10 years on the date my term is up. If it is not renewed I will be retiring. Do terms have the same retirement benefits as permanent employees? If so, any advise regarding annuties/health ins. etc. I do particapate in the TSP.
Re: Term Employee
HR specialist DOI Mon Mar 17, 2008 9:17 AM
Terms usually get the same benefits as permanent employees. If you're contributing to TSP, you should be in one of the retirement systems - probably FERS if you started working as a term after 1984. This information will be on your SF-50 (Notification of Peronnel Action), Block 30. Verify this with your HRO, then think about signing up for a retirement seminar!
Temp vs Perm
Social Worker Public Health Service Mon Mar 17, 2008 9:04 AM
This is just another indication of government bull. I do not know whose bright idea it was to exclude temps from applying for perm jobs. Don't most temps want to be perms eventually? So much gov't red tape.....some little nerd must sit in a dark, out the way room somewhere thinking of ways to disrupt the lives of people and gets away with it. I don't condone lying on an application but then again, there are ways to not have to volunteer all the info where you are answering truthfully but not telling the whole story. In this women's case, she should have been allowed to apply for the job. It isn't like people are breaking down the door to work for the gov't. Don't we read all the time that the baby boomer retirements will open a void in our system? Maybe if the system would have been fair in the first place this lady would have been able to apply. There is nothing said whether or not she was a good employee to begin with.
Re: Temp vs Perm
Worker DoD Mon Mar 17, 2008 9:35 AM
Maybe you should familiarize yourself with the provisions of Title 5 of the US Code and 5 CFR 300--the governing regulations for applying for Federal positions. This has nothing to do with your sarcastic and insulting comments about some little nerd trying to disrupt your life. And you're a Social Worker???
Re: Temp vs Perm
Social Worker Public Health Service Mon Mar 17, 2008 12:03 PM
Here is my reply to "Worker". No doubt there is some ridiculous policy out there that justifies such behavior. My question is why do we need a policy to prevent people who are temps from applying for perm jobs? What is your answer, wiseguy? Just because I am a Social Worker does not mean that I cannot have an opinion or is there some policy in your Title 5 of the US Code and 5 CFR 300? I have earned my right to ask for I have given 36 years of service as well as being a veteran as well! Also, it is not my life that is being disrupted, it is that person who has been working as a temp and when a perm job opens up, gosh I can't apply because of some policy. Yes, I am a Social Worker and I am for the fair treatment of people in general....what is your excuse?
Re: Temp vs Perm
Worker DoD Mon Mar 17, 2008 3:02 PM
I guess I expected a more rational attitude or reasonable behavior from someone who claims to be a social worker. You are a very angry person. Be that as it may, we all have regulations to follow and if they are not followed you may not get what you want. It's very simple. I'm sure there are regulations and policies you must adhere to in your work. Don't follow them, suffer the consequences.
Re: Temp vs Perm
Prof Small College Mon Mar 17, 2008 6:28 PM
Social Worker; Title 5 is not policy, it is federal law.
Re: Temp vs Perm
Social Worker Public Health Service Tue Mar 18, 2008 8:44 AM
Ha, ha, ha. Worker, now you are trying to be a shrink, implying that I am an angry person. You don't even know me. If you did, you would know that I am a very nice person. However, you are missing the point. There are sometimes policies that do not make sense and if people like me did not question them, then they would never be changed. I have been on the policy making end before and over time, we changed policies because they did not work or do any good. And yes, I work for the gov't and there are rules and regulation and I do follow them. But, I have also made my case on occassion about certain frivolous policies and at times, they do get changed. And to the Prof, just because it is law, does it neccessarily make it right? It was once law that women couldn't vote and I can site others but I am running out of characters. I am just making a point and you all have the right to make yours.
Job
Concerned defense Mon Mar 17, 2008 9:16 AM
Appears the individual tried to get a job without a sponsor.
Question: Was the individual, who got the job, more qualified.
THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD DO AWAY WITH TEMP POSITIONS
WORKER DON Mon Mar 17, 2008 11:49 AM
A individuals temporary position is just that - TEMPORARY & you can be termated at a drop of a hat & that is why everyone wants to be a career employee (ALL FEDERAL EMPLOYEES KNOW THIS).
OR was This employee doing such a good job at her position that someone decided to prevent her from going to a new position?
OR was someone attempting to hire one of there good old boys into the position, & making sure that this women was not elgible for this position. QUESTION: WHY WAS THIS JOB NOT OPEN FOR TEMPORARY PERSONNEL & EVERYONE ??
I have never heard of a job announcement saying that TEMPORARY Employees were NOT elgible to apply.
It sounds like another IG INVESTGATION TO ME - CALL THE HOT LINE NOW.
DO THESE INDIVIDUALS & HRO THINK THIS IS A JOKE. EEO should have stepped in - OH I forgot - EEO does not get involved until they need to cover up for HRO & management.
SHAME SHAME SHAME: FEDERAL EMPLOYEES ARE NOT STUPID - We see the light & many of us have gone thru this.
Re: THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD DO AWAY WITH TEMP POSITIONS
Adminstrator VA Mon Mar 17, 2008 4:53 PM
I have been on one term appointment or another for 20 years. There are numerous VA jobs that I can't apply for because they are open to "Status Candidates" only (meaning career). After 20 years, I have no status.
Re: THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD DO AWAY WITH TEMP POSITIONS
HR VA Tue Mar 18, 2008 9:17 AM
Where exactly do you work? Based on the lack of knowledge displayed it certainly is not in the HR or EEO fields.
Before pretending, try studying the law and actually get to know the rules and regulations.
The reason this person did not succeed is because she thought, as do so many others, that she could ignore the rules and requirements and write her own ticket. Fortunately, the people that know the requirements caught her fraud and fixed it.
In spite of the belief that some people have that they are "owed" something and will do whatever it takes to get it, there are laws, rules, and requirements that exist that say otherwise.
By the way, someone should report this to the IG so the IG can tell her the same thing. But, they could also take a dim view of the fraud thing and start a criminal investigation on the matter.
Oh, look how gree the grass is over there.
Follow the Rules
Civilian Navy Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:53 PM
If the position was opened to John Q Public, then the applicants do not need "status" to apply. If the announcement was done as a merit promotion announcement, then the area of consideration is determined by the hiring official/agency and the applicant would need appointability in order to be hired. A temporary appt does not give you status under a merit staffing announcement. She apparently knew this and that is why she "forgot" to complete the necessary information which should/would have excluded her from being referred. It doesn't matter if you don't agree or feel sorry for her, she was not qualified to be appointed.
Re: Follow the Rules
Worker any agency Wed Mar 19, 2008 11:08 AM
AND there are usually reasons why a position must be announced under merit promotion, i.e. no "outside hire" positions (can't add any more bodies) for example. If the division is at staffing ceiling, they can't take on any new people and a temp to a perm is often a "new" person when counting FTEs. Agencies don't usually announce merit promotions to exclude temps. It's usually got to do with either the position itself (HAS to be merit promotion) or existing staffing.
Term
CIS
Fri Mar 14, 2008 8:26 AM
I am a term employee, and was a permanent one in 2002. I've been trying to get a perm job since 2003. I understand this person's problem. If you are perm, don't ever take a term or temp job. It's a big mistake. I thought it would be easy to get another perm job and it's not.
Nice try
GSA
Fri Mar 14, 2008 8:51 AM
Stupid, Stupid, Stupid.
Where was the documentation for federal status?
DHHS
Fri Mar 14, 2008 9:00 AM
The Human Resources Specialist for the Army should have caught this before Ms. Robinson was placed on the certificate or list of eligibles. Why wasn't her SF-50 required for this position? This would have shown that she did not have competitive status. As far as Ms. Robinson's jobs go, it is just tough luck. Her temporary appointment can be terminated at anytime anyway and her competitive position was made erroneously. So, to answer your final question, yes, Ms. Robinson should have taken the Army up on their offer.
Re: Where was the documentation for federal status?
DOI
Fri Mar 14, 2008 10:06 AM
Should have taken the exam
US Forest Service
Fri Mar 14, 2008 9:42 AM
She should have taken the exam. I do understand her position I was a "career" temp for years then had a perm, lost it to downsizing, I am a temp again and its near impossible to get a perm EVEN though I have NON competitive reinstatement eligibility-I only get reinstated into temporary positions so I have been working continuously without a break in service now for two years as a temporary! I am not complaining though at least I am working for decent wages. It would be nice to be a perm again though and have the benefits.
NSPS Selection Process and Temporary Employees
Navy
Fri Mar 14, 2008 9:47 AM
We recently were inducted into the National Security Personnel System and were trying to fill a positon that had previously been graded at the GS-12 level. We had a candidate who had qualified for and was interviewed for another GS-12 position in our organization who we now wanted to hire for this job. The employee was in a temporary position at another command at a GS-9 level (lower cost of living area and no higher permanent positions available). NSPS provisions allow for an increase of only 5% when 'promoting' an employee within NSPS. Even though this indivudual was not currently in NSPS we could not hire at the equivalent GS-12 level pay. In a desparate 'leap of faith', the employee resigned, we readvertised the job and were able to hire at a GS-12 level pay.
And NSPS is supposed to make it easier to hire the best qualified individual!
Re: NSPS Selection Process and Temporary Employees
usda
Fri Mar 14, 2008 2:39 PM
Re: NSPS Selection Process and Temporary Employees
DOD
Mon Mar 17, 2008 9:01 AM
Re: NSPS Selection Process and Temporary Employees
USDA
Mon Mar 17, 2008 12:46 PM
Hardly an EMERGENCY
NASA
Fri Mar 14, 2008 9:57 AM
Since when does incompetence in HR meet the criteria for a 30 day EMERGENCY appointment?
SF75 info should be obtained on an transfer candidate, and reviewed prior to establishing an effective date, much less bringing one on board.
Army does owe her an apology, since she left one job (however temporary it may have been) to take theirs.
The supervisor of the HR specialist needs to remember this at NSPS evaluation time. If the top score is given after this kind of mistake, shame, shame.
Watch out, throwing stones can hurt...
DVA
Fri Mar 14, 2008 2:47 PM
A close read of the article will reveal to the reader a sgnificant comment in one paragraph, which reads...
"application originally left blank -{WAS THIS DONE ON PURPOSE? BASED ON FOLLOWING IT APPEARS SO}- whether her current position was temporary or permanent. When Army asked about her status, Robinson checked both the "temporary" and "career" -{LYING ON THE APPLICATION}- boxes on the form.
She knew the position was not open for temps so it appears she purposely left that little item off the record; however, after getting caught and asked about it she lies and checks both boxes, probably hoping to win the case she just lost if it came up.
HR probably did not get the info until they selected her and requested the screens from the losing command.
She was not only stupid, but appears to be a fraud and a liar as well. Similar to other fraud tactics: withold, confuse, blame the other guy and hope to win.
She deserved to lose and no one owes her anything.
Term Employee
SBA
Fri Mar 14, 2008 3:44 PM
My length of employment will be 10 years on the date my term is up. If it is not renewed I will be retiring. Do terms have the same retirement benefits as permanent employees? If so, any advise regarding annuties/health ins. etc. I do particapate in the TSP.
Re: Term Employee
DOI
Mon Mar 17, 2008 9:17 AM
Temp vs Perm
Public Health Service
Mon Mar 17, 2008 9:04 AM
This is just another indication of government bull. I do not know whose bright idea it was to exclude temps from applying for perm jobs. Don't most temps want to be perms eventually? So much gov't red tape.....some little nerd must sit in a dark, out the way room somewhere thinking of ways to disrupt the lives of people and gets away with it. I don't condone lying on an application but then again, there are ways to not have to volunteer all the info where you are answering truthfully but not telling the whole story. In this women's case, she should have been allowed to apply for the job. It isn't like people are breaking down the door to work for the gov't. Don't we read all the time that the baby boomer retirements will open a void in our system? Maybe if the system would have been fair in the first place this lady would have been able to apply. There is nothing said whether or not she was a good employee to begin with.
Re: Temp vs Perm
DoD
Mon Mar 17, 2008 9:35 AM
Re: Temp vs Perm
Public Health Service
Mon Mar 17, 2008 12:03 PM
Re: Temp vs Perm
DoD
Mon Mar 17, 2008 3:02 PM
Re: Temp vs Perm
Small College
Mon Mar 17, 2008 6:28 PM
Re: Temp vs Perm
Public Health Service
Tue Mar 18, 2008 8:44 AM
Job
defense
Mon Mar 17, 2008 9:16 AM
Appears the individual tried to get a job without a sponsor.
Question: Was the individual, who got the job, more qualified.
THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD DO AWAY WITH TEMP POSITIONS
DON
Mon Mar 17, 2008 11:49 AM
A individuals temporary position is just that - TEMPORARY & you can be termated at a drop of a hat & that is why everyone wants to be a career employee (ALL FEDERAL EMPLOYEES KNOW THIS).
OR was This employee doing such a good job at her position that someone decided to prevent her from going to a new position?
OR was someone attempting to hire one of there good old boys into the position, & making sure that this women was not elgible for this position. QUESTION: WHY WAS THIS JOB NOT OPEN FOR TEMPORARY PERSONNEL & EVERYONE ??
I have never heard of a job announcement saying that TEMPORARY Employees were NOT elgible to apply.
It sounds like another IG INVESTGATION TO ME - CALL THE HOT LINE NOW.
DO THESE INDIVIDUALS & HRO THINK THIS IS A JOKE. EEO should have stepped in - OH I forgot - EEO does not get involved until they need to cover up for HRO & management.
SHAME SHAME SHAME: FEDERAL EMPLOYEES ARE NOT STUPID - We see the light & many of us have gone thru this.
Re: THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD DO AWAY WITH TEMP POSITIONS
VA
Mon Mar 17, 2008 4:53 PM
Re: THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD DO AWAY WITH TEMP POSITIONS
VA
Tue Mar 18, 2008 9:17 AM
Before pretending, try studying the law and actually get to know the rules and regulations.
The reason this person did not succeed is because she thought, as do so many others, that she could ignore the rules and requirements and write her own ticket. Fortunately, the people that know the requirements caught her fraud and fixed it.
In spite of the belief that some people have that they are "owed" something and will do whatever it takes to get it, there are laws, rules, and requirements that exist that say otherwise.
By the way, someone should report this to the IG so the IG can tell her the same thing. But, they could also take a dim view of the fraud thing and start a criminal investigation on the matter.
Oh, look how gree the grass is over there.
Follow the Rules
Navy
Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:53 PM
If the position was opened to John Q Public, then the applicants do not need "status" to apply. If the announcement was done as a merit promotion announcement, then the area of consideration is determined by the hiring official/agency and the applicant would need appointability in order to be hired. A temporary appt does not give you status under a merit staffing announcement. She apparently knew this and that is why she "forgot" to complete the necessary information which should/would have excluded her from being referred. It doesn't matter if you don't agree or feel sorry for her, she was not qualified to be appointed.
Re: Follow the Rules
any agency
Wed Mar 19, 2008 11:08 AM