I challenged a rejection once. The posting asked for qualifying experience or an advanced degree. I had the advanced degree. They grudgingly changed my status. In my case it helped that the requirements were on black and white, but HR still whined about it. I eventually got the job.
And then everyone clapped.
lol. I had to do this too.
I qualified for the role with my GPA but OPM read My transcript wrong, so I had to appeal the decision and have the colleges registrar explain how to read my transcript along with my GPA.
I also got the job, nearly 10 years ago..
Exact thing happened to my spouse. Contract recruiter calculated gpa by averaging the cumulative gpa at the end of each year. Had to explain that the number printed at the end was the total gpa, and you donāt add the lousy freshman year back in again. This happened AFTER a good interview. CCād the hiring manager. Ended up starting a great Fed career!
I did this once. They agreed I should have been referred but opted not to because āit would be unfair to the others in the candidate pool to add another nowā š¤¦š»āāļø
HR here: That is absolutely incorrect and should have been addressed. You should have been given priority consideration if selections were already made.
HR here: we are not the SMEs of the position, however we are tasked with reviewing each resume against the specialized experience of a job announcement. We are only human and make mistakes- if something like this happens, please elevate this if it is not handled correctly. This could have easily been a grievance.
So why not let the hiring manager who actually is the SME review the resume or consult together on the resumes? It makes zero sense; my team is for specialists with PhDs and we need to review their research papers and academic cv's which is something HR is not qualified to do so. We've had people not get referred even though they're a PhD candidate from a top university.
I canāt answer that, that guidance is from the Master Labor Agreement and I am just following the rules. š Trust me, I wish HR wasnāt responsible. I still have about 80 resumes to try and review this week.
In 30 years of government employment, I have personally seen NUMEROUS errors in this area. I think the other posts here suggest my experience is not occurring in a vacuum. I donāt ask for perfectionā-only competency in a basic decisionā-qualified or not qualified.
This is all dependent on the agency- in my agency we are more likely to add your resume to the list of folks referred if asked and truly qualified, or were referred in the first place.
I cannot speak for anyone else.
Thanks. Again, I didnāt say all were unqualified, but some. And given the posts on this page from myself and others, Iād say there is some type of basic systemic problem in government HR when many many many qualified candidates have to appeal the decision regarding their application because somebody didnāt take the time to carefully read and digest a 3 page resume.
I can understand- I can speak for my team that we work diligently to ensure we have correctly referred/not referred each person. Mistakes do happen and it seems like that has been your experience more so than others.
It also depends on the experience of each person reviewing resumes- I have been around for some time, however it seems there are a bunch of newer folks.
It all comes down to please be sure to reach out and elevate if you do not receive the answer you truly believe you should have.
Taken in aggregate, the Federal government is the nation's single largest employer - so the sheer number of errors will be high.
As the rules dictate a substantial amount of transparency, you can't compare what you read here to the private sector. No one there owes ANY reason or rationale, and they rarely provide it since it poses more of a litigation risk than any benefit to the company. Favoritism? No problem. Nepotism? Sure thing. Bias, harassment, coercion, or discrimination? Check, check, check...
Frankly, as someone who's worked public, private, small company, and Fortune 500... the stuff you don't see in the private sector dwarfs what you see in the public sector. If you think people "don't take the time to read a resume" in Federal HR... well. On average you get a LOT more consideration, reconsideration, due process rights, etc... than any private sector company.
Absolutely. It's also way easier to discriminate, illegally, at any point in the employment lifecycle.
Have also seen plenty in the private sector who are practically retired on the job, or running a side gig and not doing anything productive. Profit does not equal productivity.
YMMV.
Question for you: why does it take so long to get even a referral? I'm sitting at over a month on one application without even a referral decision has been made. Don't get me wrong, I've been a fed for a while and have been through many hirings so I understand it's a process. I'm just trying to figure out how it can take so long to sort through resumes?
As a second question if you take the time to answer the first, what's the average number of applicants you have to sift through? I noticed usajobs started showing number of applicants which is helpful. How many of those generally score high enough in the questionnaire to make it to you and are subsequently sent on to the hiring manager?
The first question is a two part answer: 1) it varies on the agency, however I know that there can be upwards of 10-20 job announcements that close at one time, and subsequently have applicants to be reviewed. 2) It fluctuates- more often than not (I can only speak for my office), we are very short staffed and have so much other work that also needs to be completed. For an example, I think I was working close to 50 selections 3 weeks ago.
As for the average number of applicants, it can range. The most I have had to go through is 180 I think. With the positions I review resumes for, itās normally 80-100. Other agencies can have hundreds or even thousands of applicants. 180 applicants, on top of my other workload, can easily take 2 weeks.
Well thanks for ruining my ability to blindly hate HR by providing context that explains why these things can take so long! Do you happen to work for a centralized processing center or process your agency's applications in house? My guess is a centralized HR because otherwise I would think you'd try to space out your hirings more, or is it just too hard to try and sync up so many things?
I've seen the applications with over a thousand submissions. I don't envy them a bit. In general how many applicants get auto filtered by the questionnaire, like 5-10%? And I'm assuming the rest you have to read each one looking for the qualifications? Thanks for taking the time to let us peak behind the curtain!
Haha, anytime! š
The agencies I know process their applications in house, including mine. Itās so hard to sync up things- when there is a vacancy, management wants the job announcement immediately, even if itās just one. You can see how that can quickly add up.
I would say it varies based on the amount of applicants per announcement that get screened out- for mine, itās usually in the 5-10% range, sometimes less.
We look through each applicant to first see if you have documentation for the eligibility you selected (ex. You selected 30% as an eligibility, you provide a letter from the VA stating your combined disability rating is 30% or more (note: it *has to be 30% or more, it cannot be more than 10 but less than 30)). Then, we look at your resume for qualifications (specialized experience). Itās honestly way more complicated than it should be.
Iām happy to help anytime! Iām usually providing feedback on posts every day.
So I'm waiting on an application that closed on April 11th to make a referral judgement. If I'm interested in seeing if they're still working the referrals or if they just haven't updated usajobs, should I email the email on the announcement and ask for a status update? I'm trying to temper my impatience with the workload you shared previously, but don't know when I'm being impatient and when it's taking too long. I don't want to be annoying but it's an exciting opportunity and the wait is killing me.
In general, how do the eligibility categories affect referrals? Do they affect referrals or is preference and disability only considered after interviews have been made? I'm not a vet so I don't know how that affects my application versus someone that is a vet and at what point in the process. Also, do you get given a set number of referrals to make and pick the "most highly qualified" of the resumes to forward on, or do you just forward all the acceptable resumes and let the hiring manager decide?
Finally, your thoughts on resume length? I know a fed resume is frequently much longer but I don't know if you have a preference for length, or see a preference by hiring officials?
Thanks and sorry for bugging you again!
Iām happy to answer you!
I would say if you donāt hear anything by the end of this upcoming week to email the team box. Depending on the announcement you applied to, there could be a ton of applicants to sift through.
The only eligibility category that could affect a referral status would be VEOA. They are subject to a cut off score (for every vacancy, we can refer up to 10 promotional candidates, if you select VEOA as an eligibility and you are outside of the 10 applicants, you would be below the cutoff.
When resumes get to management, eligibilities do not come into consideration, every resume must be looked at.
No resume length per se, I would ensure all the information on your resume accurately reflects the experience you received, and also reflects the specialized experience if you truly have it.
Federal resumes can be as long as you need it to be- so management is not going through a ton of pages, maybe keep it under 10 if possible. š
I am a oit tech in the customer service role, I was once disqualified from a position for not having a year off experience with service now. I still love using that joke for how well we are evaluated.
My advice to people is to always make your specialized experience the top bullet on your resume. Make sure that you have 52 weeks of it. I even bold and highlight mine. The staffers actually love it because itās one less resume they have to go hunting for it in, and it pretty much guarantees Iāll at least be qualified. Havenāt figured out the trick to getting an interview every time yet, but as long as you follow the guidelines in the job announcement there really isnāt any reason you canāt qualify every time.
HR here: I would tend to agree with you, however please do not copy and paste the specialized experience. We are required to send your resume to management, however they are not keen on that.
I was getting "not reffered" f for announcements that I am clearly qualified for.
So I did an experiment: I started adding the specialized experience word for word as cited in the announcement under the particular position it applies. My referral rate jumped to 100% and I interviewed for most of them.
I suck at phone interviews so that's where I lost most of them.. is there any regulation that says something along the lines of "if I were to request an in-person interview it needs to be granted?"
Itās possible the scenario of requesting an in person interview may be a reasonable accommodation.
I am not well versed in that area, HR is broken up into different sections (Recruitment and Placement, Benefits, Employee Relations etc). This question may be more suited for someone in ER.
I tried this and just got an email back restating what was in the not referred email. Don't expect op's situation to occur even if you are very qualified.
HR here: This is untrue and I am sorry this was your experience. If you do not receive an answer this is acceptable, please elevate it.
I can only speak for myself in that I am passionate about what I do and want to help others in their career, not hinder them.
Thatās solid adviceābut how can they elevate it with only one HR email in the announcement? Itās not like agencies have a publicly available HR org chart with contact info.
So, when you get a response from that email, an HR Specialist answering the email should put their contact information on it (itās a requirement for me). From there, you can look them up/their chain of command.
If you get an email back and no contact information is listed, email them back requesting that information. If you donāt get a response, call the number on the announcement. Do whatever you need to do in order to get in touch with someone.
The best piece of advice I could ever give is to be your own advocate.
HR here: please do this if you strongly believe you should have been referred. Iād rather admit I made a mistake rather than you be left out of an opportunity.
You can send an email to the contact at the bottom of the job announcement and state something like this (please be nice, there are humans that answer, no AI š):
āCan you please take a second look at my resume for job announcement x? I believe my resume reflects the specialized experience of the positionā.
Even better, you can send your resume to the team box that you uploaded to USA Jobs and highlight the areas which reflect the specialized experience of the position you applied to.
- The specialized experience is different per each job announcement (JOA), it can be found in the qualifications section of the JOA.
Sometimes you will find that you are eligible and qualified for one JOA in the same series, but not for another JOA in the same series. HR reviews each resume against the specialized experience of the JOA.
Is it even an HR person making a mistake or is it all just up to an AI that scans your resume and isn't "I" enough to know nuances to experience, knowledge, lateral skills, etc? I assume that AI is in charge of scanning the applicants, no?
Well to be fair companies have been using software to scan resumes and letters for key words to sort applicants for decades, so I can see why people think that. We just didn't call it AI back then.
First, your system eligibility ("tentatively eligible") is based on your assessment questionnaire responses. Second, is the manual review of the resume to confirm done by HRS.
Not AI, no, and there is nothing screening your resume at the first "tentatively eligible" stage - it is 100% based on your answers to the application questions.
There are simple scoring formulas in USA Staffing for each announcement that rate you as eligible (or BQ/HQ/Q) based on how you answer the questions or screens you out if you don't meet the requirements.
Example: Position requires a Bachelor's Degree in Cybersecurity but you answer "No" to the degree question - automatically ineligible because you said you don't have the requirements.
The 2nd part is always done manually by a person.
The first initial scan is from the system and will code applicants out for not selecting any eligibilities/applicants saying they do not have the minimum qualifying experience/stuff like that. There is no AI system scanning eligibility documents/resumes. HR does all of that.
I tried this for a GS9 position that paid less than I was making doing the same exact job as a contractor; same org, same team. Had two years GS9 equivalent grade, masters, military background, and other experience that would qualify me for a GS11. The HR person was the biggest "wanker" I had ever talked to and said I had no relevant experience only qualified for GS7. He was external to the agency. Took a different position in a different agency. My "why did you leave" out processing cited that guy by name.
Same here. I was a GS-14 and applied for a GS-13, and I was eminently qualified in all respects.
Didn't get referred - contested it. Got referred, got interviewed, got hired.
My wife got rejected as ineligible for a science writing job at NIH because she only had a PhD in biology and not journalism lol. Wtf is a PhD in journalism and why would it have anything to do with writing reports for NIH
Applied for a lateral for a position Id been in for a bit, and was told I was ineligible. I had sent communication to HR & hiring manager and it began a review and then just nothing.
But in all honesty, after talking with a few people who had worked at that office, it was a blessing in disguise that I didnt get hired in.
I did the same!
I, unlike the vast majority of my colleagues, do not have a college degree. Ā So they didnāt consider me, despite experience+education being an acceptable path. Ā I pointed at my license to practice as acceptable proof.
On far too many occasions, Iāve seen our HR reject people that were actually eligible among other basic mistakes. It doesnāt hurt to challenge it, these HR people are not making hiring decisions anyway.
Our leadership is getting very frustrated with HR, as they are not properly vetting applicants. Some qualify, others don't. No consistency or objectivity. Totally subjective. Totally sucks.
I can understand the frustration. Not one specialist rate and rank (review resumes) the same, the process is subjective in nature. We try the best we can but cannot be perfect all the time.
I'm in my current position after challenging the status. In this case they used a very draconian definition for something and disqualified about 90% of the applicants on a national hiring event so I probably would have been changed to eligible anyway but I'd like to think I helped them realize how stupid their wording was. I was already a Federal employee so I was in a position to easily argue with them. I feel bad for those who don't know they can, or how.
I challenged one once. It was for a GS-13 on my team. I was not referred because they said I didnāt have the 52-week time in grade, despite being a GS-12 for four years. Challenger worked, got interviewed, and got the job.
Wish I did this last year. Had an offer for a gs 11 position but didn't take it for personal reasons. Instead, I took a gs 7 and kept applying to more local positions in the 11 slot that were open to the public. Suddenly I'm told I'm not qualified since I'm a gs7, although I was qualified 6 months earlier when I didn't have the 7 job.
I once didnāt get referred because my resume mentioned leading teams in Hazardous Material incidents and the advertisement talked about leading teams in HazMat incidents. When I contacted HR I was told that only used the term HazMat 2 times and used Hazardous Material the other 8, so they could only count the 2 that had the same wording (HazMat) as the job listing. I was not reconsidered and was told to ābe more clear next timeā.
Former coworker was very enthusiastic about a lateral move but was not referred for the position, even though she was EXTREMELY qualified for the position. She challenged the 'Not Referred ' status, got referred, and then ended up getting the position. She's now the happiest she has ever been in her career.
Same here. Sent emails to 4 ineligible determinations in the past 3 months and am yet to receive a response. YMMV depending on the agency. Mine is IRS internal applications.
Always challenge if you think you qualify. I applied for a job that I was/have been already doing. I was doing the same job for the previous 5 years and they posted a position a little further away, but the locality pay was more so it was worth the drive. My resume didnāt even make it to my supervisor. I contacted the HR rep assigned and she said my resume didnāt reflect any work experience. I think I just did the job resume from usajobs and it put my work history in reverse chronological order. They didnāt even read my resume. Looked at my first job that I had down and moved on. Now mind you I worked a lot of part time jobs and had been doing it for years. That might be why it was in reverse order. Started 10 years ago, but only worked Saturdaysā¦ my federal job I had only work for 4 years. Always challenge!!!
As a hiring manager I've had to ask HR if maybe there were more candidates that applied. I once received 10 additional resumes.
It works on both ends.
The last job we posted received 58 resumes for a GG11. 80% were 12 or higher. A couple were 14's. That's another topic lol š
Happened to me. I challenged my ineligible because I was officially acting in the position when I applied. They, escalated it for review and gave me a summary of how I was eligible. Hassle, but they probably have thousands of resumes to read.
This has happened to me as well. Ā It got escalated, eventually, followed by non-stop apologies. Ā I turned down being referred after that though. The thought of potentially working in a place Ā so disorganized was just off putting. Ā I mainly was pointing out a flaw in the how they asked their pre-screen question and that likely led a lot of potential candidates being deemed ineligibleĀ
I once got qualified but not best qualified, not referred. Challenged it (quite the process). Told again not best qualified. Got on the phone with HR and talked to her to find out why. The position was a first level supervisory position. I had no experience as a supervisor but had been a team lead. The key to getting the HR woman to change her mind was to tell her that my supervisor had often designated me as acting in his absence. I never really thought I'd actually DONE anything in that role. She said that didn't matter, it showed his trust in me.
I've challenged a handful and always managed to get the initial decision overturned. Problem is it always took so long that the hiring was completed and someone was working by the time it was reversed.
Yep. They usually let go through if you challenge. I applied for my old job I retired from. Said I wasn't qualified. Lol. Challenged and hired again as rehired annuitant. Bottom line. They can do what they want to do. They'll say they can't do it then turn right around and do it.
Couldn't give a reason. She didn't know why. It was actually a lower graded job that I had in past, then supervised that position. But I didn't qualify. Lol. After I was hired back I had opportunity to go back into the supervisor position at higher grade although they were no longer supervisors. Leaders but not officially. Directs the section. You know how that goes. Need the supervisor slots elsewhere. After quite a few more years of working there I said it's time to go. Loving retirement this time around.
It seems that they throw applications out for the dumbest reasons these days. The latest we've been seeing is people not writing out that they work 40 hours per week...boom...kicked out. Federal HR needs some reform.
I have done this successfully too.
It was ridiculous that I had to even try. It was lateral in same job series & they said I wasnāt eligible for the series which I was currently in & had been for over 10 years. š«
But Iāve done it & it worked.
So I have had this experience a few different times. In one case I went from ineligible to selected in a week and in other cases I was eventually rated eligible but not selected without an interview. I feel that in a lot of cases where this happens the hiring manager has a candidate in mind already.
I received an email stating that I am qualified for the position I applied for but the HR employee will not be referring me to continue in the hiring process for the position. No reasons stated why? I'm guessing they probably don't understand my resume. I have STRONG experience over a decade for the job. It's so silly that people picking the qualified pool of individuals have no idea what the job even entails, but still feel qualified to tell me that I'm not even allowed to interview.
There are a ton of reasons why this could happen. Maybe there were more qualified vets than vacancies, so no point moving on with non-vets. Etc.
Since there's no reason stated, it's also silly to extrapolate that the people looking at your resume didn't know what the job entailed.
Also - even in the private sector it's very rare for the recruiter or HR person to understand what the job truly entails. You...know that...right?
Also in the private sector when hiring for a very specialized role the group of individuals that are hiring very often are the ones determining if they want to speak to an individual about the position. You...know that.....right?
Yes, I do - but so what? You didn't specify what job you applied for - could have been a customer service rep or a one-in-a-million role...
Regardless, that's not how Federal hiring works. That's why they have to check this stuff FIRST. That's often how folks get tossed early in the process. It's not that you're not the best candidate, but someone else has higher preference for the job - and maybe enough of those that there's no point considering you at all. You didn't get to see the pool / competition, so your decade of experience might have been amazing - or maybe the average was 15 years.
Maybe the others were military vets. Maybe a military spouses. Maybe the parent of someone who died for their country. Maybe someone who did years overseas as a Peace Corps volunteer. Lots of options.
Well. whoever you are with the most amazing STRONG decade of experience ever in apparently a super duper specialized role/function - better luck next time.
Soo... according to your post history you:
>...have 13 years of tax experience and my CPA, but did take 3 years off and have been running my own business (not tax related)
Unless your 13 years was in a very narrow and esoteric section of the tax code or other niche...that's not uncommon for them at all. They also have negotiated practices that require them to consider internal employees first for bargaining unit positions - see page 50 (article 13) of [https://www.jobs.irs.gov/sites/default/files/nho\_documents/2022-National-Agreement.pdf](https://www.jobs.irs.gov/sites/default/files/nho_documents/2022-National-Agreement.pdf) ...and most accounting (0512) or other tax-related positions are bargaining unit.
Not saying that's actually what happened in YOUR situation, just another example of other things that come into play. Better luck next time - seriously, *not* being sarcastic.
It actually is quite an esoteric area of the tax code, which is why I stated that the HR people likely don't understand it. And apparently that was SO OFFENSIVE to you that you stalked me. Weird, but ok.
ACTUALLY, I wasnāt offended. I was genuinely trying to help, since you didnāt seem as familiar with what can go into the hiring process especially at an agency like that. They have an obligation to look at internals first, and while itās esoteric itās rare they have NO ONE on staff who has any experience at all. Or maybe the funds got cut for that position. Or maybe they reassigned someone to it instead. People on this thread do generally try to helpā¦
š¤·š»āāļø good luck - Iām being serious. If you have that kind of expertise in an esoteric area, Iām sure they can use you.
Congrats!! Well reasoned and deserved, clearly.
Key here being *well-supported request*. There's way too many folks advocating others to puff up their responses to the questionnaires, etc, to the point of out right lying.
That kind of behavior doesn't do anyone any favors - and frankly, contributes to the *mis-*perception that Feds aren't qualified or pulling their weight as public servants.
A better idea is to put together a quality application package that doesnāt leave any question about your qualification, therefore eliminating the need for a reevaluation.
I challenged a rejection once. The posting asked for qualifying experience or an advanced degree. I had the advanced degree. They grudgingly changed my status. In my case it helped that the requirements were on black and white, but HR still whined about it. I eventually got the job. And then everyone clapped.
ššššššš
lol. I had to do this too. I qualified for the role with my GPA but OPM read My transcript wrong, so I had to appeal the decision and have the colleges registrar explain how to read my transcript along with my GPA. I also got the job, nearly 10 years ago..
Exact thing happened to my spouse. Contract recruiter calculated gpa by averaging the cumulative gpa at the end of each year. Had to explain that the number printed at the end was the total gpa, and you donāt add the lousy freshman year back in again. This happened AFTER a good interview. CCād the hiring manager. Ended up starting a great Fed career!
Wow! Good job!
šššššššš
I did this once. They agreed I should have been referred but opted not to because āit would be unfair to the others in the candidate pool to add another nowā š¤¦š»āāļø
HR here: That is absolutely incorrect and should have been addressed. You should have been given priority consideration if selections were already made.
How long after an "ineligible" or "not referred" decision can we challenge it?
As soon as you receive that notice
Wow how is that even legal?
Wondering the same thing.
Same thing happened to me
Because thereās no requirement that says you need to interview anyone.
Hmm referring someone isnāt anything close to requiring them to interview them.
Wow. Thatās ridiculous.
The HR people are sometimes supremely unqualified to review the applications that they review. Itās amazing.
HR here: we are not the SMEs of the position, however we are tasked with reviewing each resume against the specialized experience of a job announcement. We are only human and make mistakes- if something like this happens, please elevate this if it is not handled correctly. This could have easily been a grievance.
So why not let the hiring manager who actually is the SME review the resume or consult together on the resumes? It makes zero sense; my team is for specialists with PhDs and we need to review their research papers and academic cv's which is something HR is not qualified to do so. We've had people not get referred even though they're a PhD candidate from a top university.
I canāt answer that, that guidance is from the Master Labor Agreement and I am just following the rules. š Trust me, I wish HR wasnāt responsible. I still have about 80 resumes to try and review this week.
In 30 years of government employment, I have personally seen NUMEROUS errors in this area. I think the other posts here suggest my experience is not occurring in a vacuum. I donāt ask for perfectionā-only competency in a basic decisionā-qualified or not qualified.
This is all dependent on the agency- in my agency we are more likely to add your resume to the list of folks referred if asked and truly qualified, or were referred in the first place. I cannot speak for anyone else.
Thanks. Again, I didnāt say all were unqualified, but some. And given the posts on this page from myself and others, Iād say there is some type of basic systemic problem in government HR when many many many qualified candidates have to appeal the decision regarding their application because somebody didnāt take the time to carefully read and digest a 3 page resume.
I can understand- I can speak for my team that we work diligently to ensure we have correctly referred/not referred each person. Mistakes do happen and it seems like that has been your experience more so than others. It also depends on the experience of each person reviewing resumes- I have been around for some time, however it seems there are a bunch of newer folks. It all comes down to please be sure to reach out and elevate if you do not receive the answer you truly believe you should have.
Taken in aggregate, the Federal government is the nation's single largest employer - so the sheer number of errors will be high. As the rules dictate a substantial amount of transparency, you can't compare what you read here to the private sector. No one there owes ANY reason or rationale, and they rarely provide it since it poses more of a litigation risk than any benefit to the company. Favoritism? No problem. Nepotism? Sure thing. Bias, harassment, coercion, or discrimination? Check, check, check... Frankly, as someone who's worked public, private, small company, and Fortune 500... the stuff you don't see in the private sector dwarfs what you see in the public sector. If you think people "don't take the time to read a resume" in Federal HR... well. On average you get a LOT more consideration, reconsideration, due process rights, etc... than any private sector company.
Your mileage may vary, but based on my 30 years in Feds and 7 years in private sector, itās a lot easier to fire incompetence in the private sector.
Absolutely. It's also way easier to discriminate, illegally, at any point in the employment lifecycle. Have also seen plenty in the private sector who are practically retired on the job, or running a side gig and not doing anything productive. Profit does not equal productivity. YMMV.
Question for you: why does it take so long to get even a referral? I'm sitting at over a month on one application without even a referral decision has been made. Don't get me wrong, I've been a fed for a while and have been through many hirings so I understand it's a process. I'm just trying to figure out how it can take so long to sort through resumes? As a second question if you take the time to answer the first, what's the average number of applicants you have to sift through? I noticed usajobs started showing number of applicants which is helpful. How many of those generally score high enough in the questionnaire to make it to you and are subsequently sent on to the hiring manager?
The first question is a two part answer: 1) it varies on the agency, however I know that there can be upwards of 10-20 job announcements that close at one time, and subsequently have applicants to be reviewed. 2) It fluctuates- more often than not (I can only speak for my office), we are very short staffed and have so much other work that also needs to be completed. For an example, I think I was working close to 50 selections 3 weeks ago. As for the average number of applicants, it can range. The most I have had to go through is 180 I think. With the positions I review resumes for, itās normally 80-100. Other agencies can have hundreds or even thousands of applicants. 180 applicants, on top of my other workload, can easily take 2 weeks.
Well thanks for ruining my ability to blindly hate HR by providing context that explains why these things can take so long! Do you happen to work for a centralized processing center or process your agency's applications in house? My guess is a centralized HR because otherwise I would think you'd try to space out your hirings more, or is it just too hard to try and sync up so many things? I've seen the applications with over a thousand submissions. I don't envy them a bit. In general how many applicants get auto filtered by the questionnaire, like 5-10%? And I'm assuming the rest you have to read each one looking for the qualifications? Thanks for taking the time to let us peak behind the curtain!
Haha, anytime! š The agencies I know process their applications in house, including mine. Itās so hard to sync up things- when there is a vacancy, management wants the job announcement immediately, even if itās just one. You can see how that can quickly add up. I would say it varies based on the amount of applicants per announcement that get screened out- for mine, itās usually in the 5-10% range, sometimes less. We look through each applicant to first see if you have documentation for the eligibility you selected (ex. You selected 30% as an eligibility, you provide a letter from the VA stating your combined disability rating is 30% or more (note: it *has to be 30% or more, it cannot be more than 10 but less than 30)). Then, we look at your resume for qualifications (specialized experience). Itās honestly way more complicated than it should be. Iām happy to help anytime! Iām usually providing feedback on posts every day.
So I'm waiting on an application that closed on April 11th to make a referral judgement. If I'm interested in seeing if they're still working the referrals or if they just haven't updated usajobs, should I email the email on the announcement and ask for a status update? I'm trying to temper my impatience with the workload you shared previously, but don't know when I'm being impatient and when it's taking too long. I don't want to be annoying but it's an exciting opportunity and the wait is killing me. In general, how do the eligibility categories affect referrals? Do they affect referrals or is preference and disability only considered after interviews have been made? I'm not a vet so I don't know how that affects my application versus someone that is a vet and at what point in the process. Also, do you get given a set number of referrals to make and pick the "most highly qualified" of the resumes to forward on, or do you just forward all the acceptable resumes and let the hiring manager decide? Finally, your thoughts on resume length? I know a fed resume is frequently much longer but I don't know if you have a preference for length, or see a preference by hiring officials? Thanks and sorry for bugging you again!
Iām happy to answer you! I would say if you donāt hear anything by the end of this upcoming week to email the team box. Depending on the announcement you applied to, there could be a ton of applicants to sift through. The only eligibility category that could affect a referral status would be VEOA. They are subject to a cut off score (for every vacancy, we can refer up to 10 promotional candidates, if you select VEOA as an eligibility and you are outside of the 10 applicants, you would be below the cutoff. When resumes get to management, eligibilities do not come into consideration, every resume must be looked at. No resume length per se, I would ensure all the information on your resume accurately reflects the experience you received, and also reflects the specialized experience if you truly have it. Federal resumes can be as long as you need it to be- so management is not going through a ton of pages, maybe keep it under 10 if possible. š
I am a oit tech in the customer service role, I was once disqualified from a position for not having a year off experience with service now. I still love using that joke for how well we are evaluated.
My advice to people is to always make your specialized experience the top bullet on your resume. Make sure that you have 52 weeks of it. I even bold and highlight mine. The staffers actually love it because itās one less resume they have to go hunting for it in, and it pretty much guarantees Iāll at least be qualified. Havenāt figured out the trick to getting an interview every time yet, but as long as you follow the guidelines in the job announcement there really isnāt any reason you canāt qualify every time.
HR here: I would tend to agree with you, however please do not copy and paste the specialized experience. We are required to send your resume to management, however they are not keen on that.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Iāve had that too- my favorite is when the specialized experience is whited out and hidden in the resume š
Lol, I got one recently with white text. Hysterical. No, I didn't put them through.
I donāt either, I donāt blame you!
I was getting "not reffered" f for announcements that I am clearly qualified for. So I did an experiment: I started adding the specialized experience word for word as cited in the announcement under the particular position it applies. My referral rate jumped to 100% and I interviewed for most of them. I suck at phone interviews so that's where I lost most of them.. is there any regulation that says something along the lines of "if I were to request an in-person interview it needs to be granted?"
Itās possible the scenario of requesting an in person interview may be a reasonable accommodation. I am not well versed in that area, HR is broken up into different sections (Recruitment and Placement, Benefits, Employee Relations etc). This question may be more suited for someone in ER.
Thank you!!
Good advice. Thanks!
This is the way!
I tried this and just got an email back restating what was in the not referred email. Don't expect op's situation to occur even if you are very qualified.
HR here: This is untrue and I am sorry this was your experience. If you do not receive an answer this is acceptable, please elevate it. I can only speak for myself in that I am passionate about what I do and want to help others in their career, not hinder them.
Thatās solid adviceābut how can they elevate it with only one HR email in the announcement? Itās not like agencies have a publicly available HR org chart with contact info.
So, when you get a response from that email, an HR Specialist answering the email should put their contact information on it (itās a requirement for me). From there, you can look them up/their chain of command. If you get an email back and no contact information is listed, email them back requesting that information. If you donāt get a response, call the number on the announcement. Do whatever you need to do in order to get in touch with someone. The best piece of advice I could ever give is to be your own advocate.
^ This gal HRs.
HR here: please do this if you strongly believe you should have been referred. Iād rather admit I made a mistake rather than you be left out of an opportunity.
Thanks for this. Is it true humans read every app/resume to qualify candidates? How does that work for postings with thousands of applicants?
Yes, we unfortunately read every single resume lol even if there are a bunch of applicants
How do we challenge a wrong rating?
You can send an email to the contact at the bottom of the job announcement and state something like this (please be nice, there are humans that answer, no AI š): āCan you please take a second look at my resume for job announcement x? I believe my resume reflects the specialized experience of the positionā. Even better, you can send your resume to the team box that you uploaded to USA Jobs and highlight the areas which reflect the specialized experience of the position you applied to. - The specialized experience is different per each job announcement (JOA), it can be found in the qualifications section of the JOA. Sometimes you will find that you are eligible and qualified for one JOA in the same series, but not for another JOA in the same series. HR reviews each resume against the specialized experience of the JOA.
Is it even an HR person making a mistake or is it all just up to an AI that scans your resume and isn't "I" enough to know nuances to experience, knowledge, lateral skills, etc? I assume that AI is in charge of scanning the applicants, no?
There is no AI scanning resumes. That myth wonāt die. And itās why some people have 75+ page resumes.
Well to be fair companies have been using software to scan resumes and letters for key words to sort applicants for decades, so I can see why people think that. We just didn't call it AI back then.
First, your system eligibility ("tentatively eligible") is based on your assessment questionnaire responses. Second, is the manual review of the resume to confirm done by HRS.
So are you saying that the first is done by software/AI and the second by a person? Thanks for clarifying. Just curious.
Not AI, no, and there is nothing screening your resume at the first "tentatively eligible" stage - it is 100% based on your answers to the application questions. There are simple scoring formulas in USA Staffing for each announcement that rate you as eligible (or BQ/HQ/Q) based on how you answer the questions or screens you out if you don't meet the requirements. Example: Position requires a Bachelor's Degree in Cybersecurity but you answer "No" to the degree question - automatically ineligible because you said you don't have the requirements. The 2nd part is always done manually by a person.
The first initial scan is from the system and will code applicants out for not selecting any eligibilities/applicants saying they do not have the minimum qualifying experience/stuff like that. There is no AI system scanning eligibility documents/resumes. HR does all of that.
Any AI in the process is on the applicant side. The staffing side is either weighted scores or binary - yes/no, in/out...
Oh, no AI I can promise you. š We read each resume
Yup my wife did that with a simple email. Led to a 2 grade career ladder promotion when she was ultimately Selected.
I challenged my result and CHRA closed my appeal without addressing it.
this has been my experiences appealing as well. 4 appeals, all 4 closed (within days) without any response at all. TYVM, message received o7
I tried this for a GS9 position that paid less than I was making doing the same exact job as a contractor; same org, same team. Had two years GS9 equivalent grade, masters, military background, and other experience that would qualify me for a GS11. The HR person was the biggest "wanker" I had ever talked to and said I had no relevant experience only qualified for GS7. He was external to the agency. Took a different position in a different agency. My "why did you leave" out processing cited that guy by name.
I did the same. HR agreed it was an error. Just accepted the tentative offer. Advocate for yourself!
Thatās awesome. Congrats!!
Same here. I was a GS-14 and applied for a GS-13, and I was eminently qualified in all respects. Didn't get referred - contested it. Got referred, got interviewed, got hired.
My wife got rejected as ineligible for a science writing job at NIH because she only had a PhD in biology and not journalism lol. Wtf is a PhD in journalism and why would it have anything to do with writing reports for NIH
Applied for a lateral for a position Id been in for a bit, and was told I was ineligible. I had sent communication to HR & hiring manager and it began a review and then just nothing. But in all honesty, after talking with a few people who had worked at that office, it was a blessing in disguise that I didnt get hired in.
I did the same! I, unlike the vast majority of my colleagues, do not have a college degree. Ā So they didnāt consider me, despite experience+education being an acceptable path. Ā I pointed at my license to practice as acceptable proof.
Good for you!
On far too many occasions, Iāve seen our HR reject people that were actually eligible among other basic mistakes. It doesnāt hurt to challenge it, these HR people are not making hiring decisions anyway.
Our leadership is getting very frustrated with HR, as they are not properly vetting applicants. Some qualify, others don't. No consistency or objectivity. Totally subjective. Totally sucks.
Iāve heard the same thing from hiring managers in my agency.
I can understand the frustration. Not one specialist rate and rank (review resumes) the same, the process is subjective in nature. We try the best we can but cannot be perfect all the time.
I'm in my current position after challenging the status. In this case they used a very draconian definition for something and disqualified about 90% of the applicants on a national hiring event so I probably would have been changed to eligible anyway but I'd like to think I helped them realize how stupid their wording was. I was already a Federal employee so I was in a position to easily argue with them. I feel bad for those who don't know they can, or how.
Exactly. This is my first time trying this after learning it was possible here on Reddit.
I challenged one once. It was for a GS-13 on my team. I was not referred because they said I didnāt have the 52-week time in grade, despite being a GS-12 for four years. Challenger worked, got interviewed, and got the job.
Wish I did this last year. Had an offer for a gs 11 position but didn't take it for personal reasons. Instead, I took a gs 7 and kept applying to more local positions in the 11 slot that were open to the public. Suddenly I'm told I'm not qualified since I'm a gs7, although I was qualified 6 months earlier when I didn't have the 7 job.
I once didnāt get referred because my resume mentioned leading teams in Hazardous Material incidents and the advertisement talked about leading teams in HazMat incidents. When I contacted HR I was told that only used the term HazMat 2 times and used Hazardous Material the other 8, so they could only count the 2 that had the same wording (HazMat) as the job listing. I was not reconsidered and was told to ābe more clear next timeā.
Former coworker was very enthusiastic about a lateral move but was not referred for the position, even though she was EXTREMELY qualified for the position. She challenged the 'Not Referred ' status, got referred, and then ended up getting the position. She's now the happiest she has ever been in her career.
I love that for her!
I replied and asked how but never received a response... For a position that does only part of the work I do in my position. I swear HR knows nothing.
Same here. Sent emails to 4 ineligible determinations in the past 3 months and am yet to receive a response. YMMV depending on the agency. Mine is IRS internal applications.
Mine was an external application trying to go from CSR to TE
Always challenge if you think you qualify. I applied for a job that I was/have been already doing. I was doing the same job for the previous 5 years and they posted a position a little further away, but the locality pay was more so it was worth the drive. My resume didnāt even make it to my supervisor. I contacted the HR rep assigned and she said my resume didnāt reflect any work experience. I think I just did the job resume from usajobs and it put my work history in reverse chronological order. They didnāt even read my resume. Looked at my first job that I had down and moved on. Now mind you I worked a lot of part time jobs and had been doing it for years. That might be why it was in reverse order. Started 10 years ago, but only worked Saturdaysā¦ my federal job I had only work for 4 years. Always challenge!!!
As a hiring manager I've had to ask HR if maybe there were more candidates that applied. I once received 10 additional resumes. It works on both ends. The last job we posted received 58 resumes for a GG11. 80% were 12 or higher. A couple were 14's. That's another topic lol š
Happened to me. I challenged my ineligible because I was officially acting in the position when I applied. They, escalated it for review and gave me a summary of how I was eligible. Hassle, but they probably have thousands of resumes to read.
This has happened to me as well. Ā It got escalated, eventually, followed by non-stop apologies. Ā I turned down being referred after that though. The thought of potentially working in a place Ā so disorganized was just off putting. Ā I mainly was pointing out a flaw in the how they asked their pre-screen question and that likely led a lot of potential candidates being deemed ineligibleĀ
I once got qualified but not best qualified, not referred. Challenged it (quite the process). Told again not best qualified. Got on the phone with HR and talked to her to find out why. The position was a first level supervisory position. I had no experience as a supervisor but had been a team lead. The key to getting the HR woman to change her mind was to tell her that my supervisor had often designated me as acting in his absence. I never really thought I'd actually DONE anything in that role. She said that didn't matter, it showed his trust in me.
I get referred to a lot of jobs and just don't make the cert list over the arm long list of status candidates.
I've challenged a handful and always managed to get the initial decision overturned. Problem is it always took so long that the hiring was completed and someone was working by the time it was reversed.
Yep. They usually let go through if you challenge. I applied for my old job I retired from. Said I wasn't qualified. Lol. Challenged and hired again as rehired annuitant. Bottom line. They can do what they want to do. They'll say they can't do it then turn right around and do it.
What was the reason they gave for your initial ineligible rating? Iām assuming it was the same exact title, grade, series and duties. Thatās wild.
Couldn't give a reason. She didn't know why. It was actually a lower graded job that I had in past, then supervised that position. But I didn't qualify. Lol. After I was hired back I had opportunity to go back into the supervisor position at higher grade although they were no longer supervisors. Leaders but not officially. Directs the section. You know how that goes. Need the supervisor slots elsewhere. After quite a few more years of working there I said it's time to go. Loving retirement this time around.
Nice Job!!!! Congrats in advance
It seems that they throw applications out for the dumbest reasons these days. The latest we've been seeing is people not writing out that they work 40 hours per week...boom...kicked out. Federal HR needs some reform.
How did it go?
Thanks for asking. It went really well! They reached out for a second interview for next week.
Awesome! I pray you get the job š
I have done this successfully too. It was ridiculous that I had to even try. It was lateral in same job series & they said I wasnāt eligible for the series which I was currently in & had been for over 10 years. š« But Iāve done it & it worked.
Did the same thing. It took less than an hour and I was referred. Got the job, too.
So I have had this experience a few different times. In one case I went from ineligible to selected in a week and in other cases I was eventually rated eligible but not selected without an interview. I feel that in a lot of cases where this happens the hiring manager has a candidate in mind already.
I received an email stating that I am qualified for the position I applied for but the HR employee will not be referring me to continue in the hiring process for the position. No reasons stated why? I'm guessing they probably don't understand my resume. I have STRONG experience over a decade for the job. It's so silly that people picking the qualified pool of individuals have no idea what the job even entails, but still feel qualified to tell me that I'm not even allowed to interview.
There are a ton of reasons why this could happen. Maybe there were more qualified vets than vacancies, so no point moving on with non-vets. Etc. Since there's no reason stated, it's also silly to extrapolate that the people looking at your resume didn't know what the job entailed. Also - even in the private sector it's very rare for the recruiter or HR person to understand what the job truly entails. You...know that...right?
Also in the private sector when hiring for a very specialized role the group of individuals that are hiring very often are the ones determining if they want to speak to an individual about the position. You...know that.....right?
Yes, I do - but so what? You didn't specify what job you applied for - could have been a customer service rep or a one-in-a-million role... Regardless, that's not how Federal hiring works. That's why they have to check this stuff FIRST. That's often how folks get tossed early in the process. It's not that you're not the best candidate, but someone else has higher preference for the job - and maybe enough of those that there's no point considering you at all. You didn't get to see the pool / competition, so your decade of experience might have been amazing - or maybe the average was 15 years. Maybe the others were military vets. Maybe a military spouses. Maybe the parent of someone who died for their country. Maybe someone who did years overseas as a Peace Corps volunteer. Lots of options.
It's not. Cute try tho.
Well. whoever you are with the most amazing STRONG decade of experience ever in apparently a super duper specialized role/function - better luck next time.
Hahahaha thanks sweet cheeks.
Soo... according to your post history you: >...have 13 years of tax experience and my CPA, but did take 3 years off and have been running my own business (not tax related) Unless your 13 years was in a very narrow and esoteric section of the tax code or other niche...that's not uncommon for them at all. They also have negotiated practices that require them to consider internal employees first for bargaining unit positions - see page 50 (article 13) of [https://www.jobs.irs.gov/sites/default/files/nho\_documents/2022-National-Agreement.pdf](https://www.jobs.irs.gov/sites/default/files/nho_documents/2022-National-Agreement.pdf) ...and most accounting (0512) or other tax-related positions are bargaining unit. Not saying that's actually what happened in YOUR situation, just another example of other things that come into play. Better luck next time - seriously, *not* being sarcastic.
It actually is quite an esoteric area of the tax code, which is why I stated that the HR people likely don't understand it. And apparently that was SO OFFENSIVE to you that you stalked me. Weird, but ok.
ACTUALLY, I wasnāt offended. I was genuinely trying to help, since you didnāt seem as familiar with what can go into the hiring process especially at an agency like that. They have an obligation to look at internals first, and while itās esoteric itās rare they have NO ONE on staff who has any experience at all. Or maybe the funds got cut for that position. Or maybe they reassigned someone to it instead. People on this thread do generally try to helpā¦ š¤·š»āāļø good luck - Iām being serious. If you have that kind of expertise in an esoteric area, Iām sure they can use you.
better fit for r/usajobs that back n' forth fight can be worth it tho for some
I posted there too.
I tried to challenge for the Army once, there was no place to write a narrative. Just check a box to challenge. Never heard back from anyone.
And here comes the "good interview going with someone else" post
Very glad to hear that. Sadly my experience typically has been that by the time I get a rejection email they close the posting and don't care.
I have probably gotten HR to reconsider my applications 50 times over the years when I get rated unqualified for a job and then sigh and respond "the posting says you can substitute experience for 3 years of graduate school leading to a doctorate, and I hold a doctorate, as highlighted in my transcripts." Never once led to me getting an interview, mind, but at least they are not stonewalling me at the rĆ©sumĆ© phase!Ā
Do you just email the agencyās HR to contest? This just happened to me.
Yes. There was an HR email listed in the notice.
Unfortunately, HR did not respond to my two emails. Too bad because I am a great candidate for the position.
Congrats!! Well reasoned and deserved, clearly. Key here being *well-supported request*. There's way too many folks advocating others to puff up their responses to the questionnaires, etc, to the point of out right lying. That kind of behavior doesn't do anyone any favors - and frankly, contributes to the *mis-*perception that Feds aren't qualified or pulling their weight as public servants.
A better idea is to put together a quality application package that doesnāt leave any question about your qualification, therefore eliminating the need for a reevaluation.
You must be the HR specialist whose decisions get reversed.
Literally the HR hater who does it right the first time and learns from my mistakes instead of blaming faceless overworked bureaucrats.