Gov't Entity is Hiring 850 ppl in the next 30 days...

The Office of Equal Opportunity and Civil Rights is hiring 850 people in the next 30 days. These awesome job opportunities are available right now. Please share with your colleagues, family and friends. The following positions have been posted on USA Jobs http://usajobs.gov/ and are currently open:

- Administrative Specialist, GS-301-09/11/12, 13, 14, 15

- Supervisory Administrative Specialist, GS-301-14, 15

- Accountant, GS-510-09/11/12, 13, 14, 15

- Supervisory Accountant, GS-510-14, 15

- Management & Program Analyst, GS-343-09/11/12, 13, 14, 15

- Supervisory Management & Program Analyst, GS-343-14, 15

- Information Technology Specialist, GS-2210-13

- Social Science Research Analyst, GS-101-09/11/12, 13, 14, 15

- Supervisory Social Science Research Analyst, GS-101-14, 152

- Information Technology Specialist, GS-2210-09/11/12, 14, 15

- Supervisory Information Technology Specialist, GS-14, 153

- Health Insurance Specialist, GS-107 (GS-9/11/12; GS-13; GS-14; and GS-15)

- Supervisory, Health Insurance Specialist, GS-14 and GS-15
and more........

Other Job Opportunities:
-Peace Corps-Program Support Assistant-DC
-Peace Corps-Executive Secretary-DC

 

Good post Happy, but tell me... I've applied for at least 50 gov't positions in the last 5 years and never hear anything back except for the "sorry you didn't meet the criteria" letters.

What's the trick?

 

I truly wish I had the answers for that. It's definitely not as easy as it seems to get into the govt with all of the folks that are always applying. It’s almost easier to get in via a govt contractor and then hope to get picked up by the govt client. I hate to be useless (which I seem to be in this instance <smile>) but perhaps persistence pays off? Fingers are crossed if you apply again, 850 positions seems like quite a big number. Good luck!

 

You need to know someone on the inside

 

I used to work for the government and did hiring. The government uses a scoring system which ranks applicants based on certain criteria.

Each of the criteria have points assigned to them. These criteria include the requirements for the job as well as social criteria.

The social criteria points would include military service, handicapped, disabilities, minority, female, etc.

We were once hiring for an accounting position. We had a white male apply with 20 years of accounting experience, UVA BS in Accounting and a Wharton MBA. We also had a bus driver apply with no accounting experience and did not graduate from high school. The bus driver was female, minority, military veteran, disabled, former civil service and a few other social criteria.

We had to offer the bus driver the position rather than the accountant since she had more points than the accountant. She could never do the job so we eventually moved her into a support role in the group and had to start the hiring process all over again.

Because of this approach, if you are a white male you really have a small chance of getting the job offer.

 

Interesting post... as a Recruiter for a govt contractor, and as someone that has worked for govt contractors for over 10 yrs... one would think (by reading your post) that the faces of the govt would be significantly different than what I've seen when visiting the many client locations that I've been to.

I'm not at all interested in debating the govt scoring system that is indeed in place (to comply with the current DoL, EEOC and for contractors - the OFFCP regulations), but its not so simple as you put it. My SIL is a Sr. HR Specialist for NIH... she would beg to differ. My husband is a Manager (that frequently hires) with the FBI... he would beg to differ. Nonetheless, with so many folks filtering through the govt openings and applying, it’s a quite a process. I have quite a few contacts within the govt that are analyst or COTRS and from the years of me knowing them, unless they’ve lied about their past and have done dramatic physical changes - they were neither a minority, female, served in the armed forces or handicap… but they still got the job.

To the original poster, it’s hard, I know, but if you find a job of interest - please apply and best of luck!

 

The hiring panels can request exceptions to the scoring process based upon certain facts but that is subject to review by the DOL so most civilian agencies try not to press the scoring system since it would indicate bias. This being said, my example is an extreme and the worst example that I saw in government service. Most of the time, the applicants were adequately qualified for the postings. If two candidates are equal on the qualifications for the job then the additional points in the system will direct the decision to one of the candidates.

This is no different then what occurs elsewhere in our society with the exception that once a federal employee passes their one year anniversary with the government it is almost impossible to fire that employee.

 

wow, what's America coming to when a white male can't get a fair shake? where's YOUR affirmative action clause??!!

sorry- that was tongue in cheek and completely sarcastic.

if it makes you feel any better- as a black, female, military veteran, i would HATE to get a job because of those reasons and not because i am just as qualified as the white male who applied against me. that said- racial and gender diversity within businesses- goverment or otherwise- that are currently dominated by white males DOES count for something- again, when other qualifications are equal.

the scenario you described is a rare one- and it's unfortunate for BOTH applicants. the guy could do the job ends up going elsewhere and likely excels, and the unqualified person who gets the job fails miserably and gets reassigned which is lousy for their esteem as well. and at the end of day, the company STILL doesn't have a qualified body in the position. that's lousy management if you ask ME- and i'm sorry but not even gvmnt recs would MAKE you hire a completely unqualified person- SOMETHING had to fit about the bus driver besides her non-white guy status and other "gotta give em a shot" requirements... what made her think she was qualified if she CLEARY had ZERO quals for that job?? why would someone apply if they don't know ANYTHING about that job?

maybe the white guy was an abrasive know it all who would be difficult to work with, while she was a motivated go getter who seemed like the kind of person you could mold into a fit. maybe he was FAR overqualified and would have been mind numbed by the job, while she looked forward to the challenge and showed an aptitude to excel. maybe his salary requirements- with all those accolades and experince backing him up- were too high, and she was willing to take the salary offered. maybe everyone felt the way YOU did- that she wasn't qualified and got the job on the "gotta give em a shot" rules, they treated her as such, and she did ultimately fail at it- there's more reasons someone doesn't do well at a job besides their ability to or NOT to do the task- a negative environment can break a person as well.

maybe i should be geting ready for work instead of typing diatribes and hypotheticals on a message board....

 

Noted. The reference to white male is that with those charateristics you get zero points in the system. Any other characteristics you get points. So with two equal candidates on the requirements for the job then the offer must go the person with the most points. That is all that I am saying.

The government and commerical business is full of white males and they are not hurting in general (although the layouffs of males far outweighs the layoffs of females in this recession - mostly due to the industries impacted by the recession - industrial vs healhcare for instance).

The reason for my response is that if you are applying for a federal job and you feel like you are "qualified" but never get a call back or an office visit then you should know that there are other factors which impact the decision process.

This is not a comment that white males don't get a fair shake but I am hoping to educate about how things really occur.

For instance, I currently work in the commercial space and we have strict requirements for the percentage of our employees and executives who must meet certain criteria (female, minority, etc.). If we have equal applicants for a position we will always ensure that at a minimum we are meeting the ratios of demographics so that we are not out of line with our demographic percentages.

This is becoming increasingly difficult since it is very hard to find certain minorities with the skill sets we need. For instance, finding a highly skilled hispanic accountant is very rare due to the demographic on college campuses since there are not many hispanics enrolled at large universities in accounting so the total population of available candidates prevents us from meeting our goal of having a certain percentage of hispanics working for us.

I personally believe that the best candidate should always get the job regardless of sex, race, creed, etc. since their subsequent evaluations and performance will be based on how well they perform in the job.

 

1,2 3 on your points that i emboldened- and by the way i LOVE this debate!

1) I can't think of any situation where the MAJORITY, the star bellied sneech, gets points for being "the most likely to succeed."

2) then maaaybe yo uneed to recruit elsewhere! smaller colleges with a higher population of hispanics. use head hunters who specialize in findiong minority jobs. they ARE out there if you look in the right place.

3) yyyeah, kumbaya, lol that doesn't work and never will. ppl aren't color/gender blind- it matters, good or bad, and it always will. good looks, weight management, hygiene, personal presentation- ppl are a package, not a piece of paper- otherwise no one would DO interviews- you would look at the education and experience and choose from there. just because you have the right education or experience- that doesn't automatically mean you are a fit for a job. other life experience can matter, diversity can matter, what kind of wrok environment you are comfy in matters (hi vs. low pressure, self directed vs. strictly managed, etc.) so other factors HAVE to come into play before picking a team fit.

case in point- i know a PM who looked at a resume and on paper the guy was a dream for the technical portion. in PERSON however he was anything but. the PM saw this and did NOt want to hire him, but was overruled since the resume was soooo impressive. personailty didn't fit the customer service aspect of the job. abrasive demeanor didn't fit the team coordination aspect of the job. lack of work ethic didn't fit the self directed aspect of the position. he didn't last and was fired. well- reassigned since it was the government. and for those wondering- YES, white guy, no points... lol

so you can't judge a book by it's cover- OR by its resume!

 

So true!

 

Redon,

You raise interesting points.

I would like to think that we are open minded and not allowing personal perceptions to enter into the hiring process. In fact, when we interview on campus we have no idea of who the candidate is other than what shows up on their resume.

Several years back we merged with another accounting firm and the leaders of the two firms came together for a meeting. Of the 26 execs in the room 14 were male and 12 were female. 7 of the men came from one firm and 7 from the other firm.

One of the execs noted that all of the men from one firm parted their hair right to left and the men from the other firm parted their hair left to right. Everyone had been hired on campus by the firms.

I was shocked but it was true. This speaks volumes about how people actually hire.

 

you hit the nail on the head.