How to gets a gummint job

[vicarz]

I'm cutting and pasting from an email exchange about "How to get a Fed job" since this has come up a lot lately. I'm in favor of people I don't hate getting Fed jobs.

KSAs suck! They also require that you speak the secret code:
> Describe a problem you encountered
> Tell what you did to solve the problem
> Give the measurable results of your solution.

This sucks balls because if you haven't done the exact job before, you are often cut as "unqualified" and many top applicants have answers like "I have the education and experience to perform this task, but have not done so in the past." This may be why we keep promoting illiterate secretaries and can't keep degreed people in da gummint.

Some links:
http://www.ourpublicservice.org/OPS/programs/calltoserve/toolkit/KSAs.pdf

NPS training doc - (start around page 11 with samples)

If you're frustrated by not making it through the process, I think you may suffer from be looking at it the wrong way. We just interviewed 2 people for a job, but one of them was already doing the job and a shoe-in. The poor other person wasted their time reporting for this dance, and who knows how many others applied - when the decision was made before the job was posted. We're required "to be fair" by posting all jobs. It's moronic. If any of them feels bad about not getting the job, it's only because they didn't know (nor could they find out) what the playing field was. A JD PhD with 30 years experience was not going to get the job over the girl that already sat in the chair as an administrative person for 20 years - it wasn't even a question. Anyone upset over that fact was misplacing their frustration or inappropriately attributing their frustration to some nonexistent flaw in themselves or their experience. That's just silly.

When you apply for a fed job, don't. Don't apply for "A" as in ONE, or THAT fed job. You apply with a shotgun into a flock approach - you fire cheap easy rounds with a low chance per bird of a hit, and hope to hell you hit something. Looking for a fed job isn't like picking out a ripe target and aiming your sights on a well-reasoned shot with an expensive round loaded into the chamber manually, you find a simple way to go full auto and blast away at distant and fuzzy targets that you'll almost certainly miss like a drunken redneck.

Guns. Ammo. Targets. Alcohol. Federal jobs. Deer crossing signs. Shakespeare. It all comes together.

If you get wedded to a job or don't apply to ones you're not terribly qualified for you just reduce your chances of getting any job, and increase your frustration at not getting each one you really like. You have to try often, make it easy to try, and not care if the inconsiderate birds fail to recognize which of your bullets are best suited to penetrate their internal organs.

I feel like I'm describing how to be a club whore. For the record, the gross analogies and tactical advice all work for both environments - only it's morally bankrupt to scatter shot exchanging disease risks for hours of pleasure, while whoring for cash is USian and even church approved.

I'm going to get fired for talking like this. Hope it helps!

Comments

[jukebox-heroine.livejournal.com]

i hate the ksas. big time. i wrote millions of them, for all manner of jobs that i got turned down for, at about 412 different tlas. finally, i happened upon my agency, who (up until a year ago, right after i was hired) didn't use usajobs, but their own hiring system, & didn't require the ksas. they asked about 10 yes or no questions & you were sent on to the next round if you passed. beautiful.

this was fantastic, as i was brought on as an illiterate secretary, instead of the property specialist (buying & trading in reservation land for the bureau of indian affairs), which i was deemed overqualified for, & would have been paid the same. kudos, me.

[vicar.livejournal.com]

I'm a huge fan of this approach and result. Sad that the self-proclaimed premiere employer can't read resumes like the rest of the planet

[grymnir.livejournal.com]

Useful comments, but one thing to consider re: the shotgun approach: it only works IF your goal is ANY government job, rather than A specific job that you want. I think the value in your suggestion is especially relevant for those at the beginning of a career path, but (for me at least) for those attempting something mid- to high-level, it is a lot harder to "shotgun" across the range of GS-10 - 12 levels.

Still, both of the documents are useful, though it would be interesting to find an actual "sample" that wasn't written as though a recent college graduate were trying to get into their first federal job as an admin or clerk.

[joanarkham.livejournal.com]

I "shotgunned" in as a 12. Granted, I'm bored and working in a budget office, but I'm poised to strike (poised!) when Dream Job comes along.

I am wondering if the LOC job you're looking at is the same one I'm thinking of...

[grymnir.livejournal.com]

Given my web design "background" and the shift into academia (which is why the "writer-editor" slot at LoC has my attention), I don't see how I can shotgun. Undergrad degree, sure; MA in some cases, ok, but a PhD? I don't see that...

[vicar.livejournal.com]

Look harder - shotgun by applying to those jobs to which you arguably qualify under either job family. If you don't find the ideal job at first, you'll still double your salary in a # of years. Once in, it's MUCH EASIER to move to other positions.

This redneck thing never gets old!

[vicar.livejournal.com]

Yeah I'm with the "a shotgun at any age" mentality

Sample KSA

[vicar.livejournal.com]

2. Skill in analyzing and weighing both sides of a legal issue.

As a Litigation Specialist in the Hearings and Appeals Branch, I routinely conduct extensive research in federal employment law and provide legal advice based on recent decisions. I perform this research with LexisNexis, reference books, and cyberFEDS. Once I have performed an initial search into the case law, I engage in fact finding to clarify case issues. I then analyze the facts in light of the law, weighing both the Appellant, Complainant, or Grievant's case and compare their possible arguments to the responses available to the Agency. I then communicate my findings orally and in writing to top Agency officials. I show both the strengths and weaknesses of all cases presented, and am granted settlement authority when appropriate based on my assessment of the potential case liabilities or the authority to pursue the case through litigation through the hearing stage.

MSPB Law:
I recently served as the agency’s representative in a petition for review (PFR) that contained an interesting legal issue - whether the Agency could withhold funds which had been offset by state unemployment benefits from awarded back pay. Agency staff was convinced they could, citing and arguing for their examples of case law from both the Federal sector and state level litigation. I conducted extensive research, and communicated my legal analysis in a report which clearly laid out the requirements the Agency had to meet before they could withhold the funds. I noted the history of related case law which first prohibited any such withholding, then allowed it when notified by the state, later noting this wasn't necessary if the employee reimbursed the state themselves, and finally only allowing withholding if it was required by state law. I compared my research to the conclusions of the staff who had withheld pay based on the state unemployment benefits, and showed where there were gaps in their research that could expose the Agency to liability. When I had communicated the law to the top Agency officials through internal memos complete with case citations, I was able to get the funds disbursed to the employee as required. I then communicated with the Appellant and subsequently filed motions with the Administrative Judge in time to prevent receiving an unfavorable decision. As a result of my efforts, the PFR was dismissed by the Board as moot because the Agency had complied with the law fully before the decision was issued, and the Appellant was satisfied with the result.

Labor Law: (truncated)

[novaya-zemlya.livejournal.com]

I've been keeping my eye on analyst type jobs for a bit, but at the moment am pursuing options in the private (or not so private because everything in DC somehow relates to the government) market. But in late 2008 I applied for an analysts job with the Congressional Research Office and actually got to a face-to-face panel interview. I didn't get the job, but the fact that human beings got to talk to me was a bit of a reward in itself. Also, the CBA is a branch of the Library of Congress--they use the same job hiring site. A quick note about that since I know Rikk was looking at the Library of Congress, they don't require KSAs. There are some questions involved, but they're fairly flexible and I think you also throw a resume in. But if I could at least get into a face to face for a cybersecurity analysts job advising Congress, you should be able to get some traction with your qualifications as well.

[grymnir.livejournal.com]

We'll see -- the online site I have to use (oddly, not USAJobs) is requiring KSAs in a fill-in-the-web-page fashion...so I am treating them as the loathed and leaky KSAs as Vicar's example above. I give myself a 10% chance...oddly, to both you and Vicar, I expect the PhD to work against me.

1) everyone seems to assume that anyone who gets a liberal arts PhD *must* want to teach.
2) other people with a writing background who end up in a supervisory position always seem to measure their dicks in terms of which papers and journals they've published in, until their name is one to conjure with. The issue? Editor w/MA or MFA will not want ot hire someone with a PhD. I've heard horror stories...always "you're overqualified" or "But don't you want a university position?"

[vicar.livejournal.com]

Those rules probably don't apply to government positions - you're thinking of real jobs. I suppose they might, particularly if the selecting official came from the private sector. I suspect you're reading too much into the situation.

Plus, while some might be intimidated by your Dr-ish status, some might actually like it. Hard to say w/o knowing the person doing the screening and selecting. Don't think too much, silly.