Posted Federal Govt jobs already taken?

[DawnStorm]

I've heard it said that some federal jobs are filled by employees already working at the agency/building, but by law those jobs must be posted. True or false?
If true, what would be the point of posting a job that's already been filled?

[me, no really]

I don't know about the US, but here, all permanent government jobs must be advertised - at least in the government publication. I believe it falls under Equal Employment Opportunity legislation. Anyone who wants to can apply. It may be that someone has been in the position for a while on a temporary contract. If so, then that person is probably the most likely to get the permanent position, as they are already familiar with the job, and the work environment, and have direct experience. I have known situations however when the person in the job did not get the permanent position - it can depend on who else applies. So that is all to say that you advertise a position that is already filled because by law you have to, and in a small percentage of situations, an outside applicant may still get the job.

me

[Not_Done_Living]

My ex was a temporary "contract" based employee for the Municipal Gov't.
When they made her role permanent, they had to post the job AND conduct interviews. This was a UNION rule though, so that other Union members could apply for the job. She was also given the opportunity to apply for the job she had done for 4 years.

She did get the job regardless.. but they had to do it.

Is the US Federal Gov't Unionized? May be the same.

[Floater]

I can only add that it's the same situation in Sweden as in Australia and Canada. Government jobs must be advertised even if there's no question about who's going to get it.

[Troberg]

I can only add that it's the same situation in Sweden as in Australia and Canada. Government jobs must be advertised even if there's no question about who's going to get it.

Not only that, they also need to pretend that they are actually considering other applicants...

[STF]

I'd believe the OP. I know of places around here who post jobs because they have to by law even though that position is meant as an internal promotion. Sometimes that person's promotion will free up an entry-level position so it's not all bad.

[Dactyl]

I've heard the same about the Civil Service in the UK too.

[rangerdog]

While there are very few "new" government jobs, there are lots of vacancies because of people retireing, quitting, or moving to other jobs. As someone who has hired people into federal service, I can say that no, people are not pre-selected, in general. There is always competition. When the next level job came up in my shop, there were two of us equally qualified for the promotion. The manager advertised the opening, and my cow-orker and I both applied along with hundreds (perhaps thousands) of others. The list came from personnel, screened down to (I think) 25 people. He then conviened a 5 person panel to rank the list with the resume names unknown. Cow-orker out scored me by 1 or 2 points and got the promotion. That was 5 years ago and I had/have no problem with it at all because of the fairness. We have hired several people over the years using this same process.

[Floater]

Originally Posted by rangerdog

As someone who has hired people into federal service, I can say that no, people are not pre-selected, in general.

However, what this discussion is about is not the general, but the particular situation when somebody already has a position and does a good job so the powers that be want to hire him/her/it permanently (or something similar).

I must add, though, that I remember a case or two when my employer has decided not to advertice the job in the proper channels (don't ask me about the reasoning, I don't remember).

[rangerdog]

Originally Posted by Floater

However, what this discussion is about is not the general, but the particular situation when somebody already has a position and does a good job so the powers that be want to hire him/her/it permanently (or something similar).

In my experience, in this case, the job is still always competed.

[putitinwriting]

Originally Posted by DawnStorm

I've heard it said that some federal jobs are filled by employees already working at the agency/building, but by law those jobs must be posted. True or false?
If true, what would be the point of posting a job that's already been filled? :confused:

I work for the state, and it varies. All jobs must be advertised, even the ones that are going to be filled by someone in office. The higher up/better paying a job, the more likely that honest interviews will be conducted. For support staff jobs, it's often someone moving from one department or program office to another, and the advertising is just for show.

[DawnStorm]

Originally Posted by Not_Done_Living

Is the US Federal Gov't Unionized? May be the same.

Some positions are, some aren't.
The USA Jobs site mentions whether or not the position is a unionized one.
I know I was replaced by a Fed--it was a done deal, so I didn't even bother applying for my old job. I don't think the position was advertised, but I don't remember.

[jespur62]

My experience is that most non-entry level jobs are aimed at specific people.
Been working in federal gooberment for 22 years.

[Banrion]

The summary on this issue that I got from someone in HR for Homeland Security is thus:

If it is a temp job becoming permanent - must be posted
If it is a promotion - must be posted
A lateral move between departments with no change in payscale - does NOT have to be posted.

I work for a large company, and that pretty much is what we follow, although even a lot of the lateral moves are posted.

The reality of the matter is this, though: If the powers that be want to promote a specific individual, they will write the job posting such that the new job uniquely describes that individual. For instance, if it is a testing position, it will require 5 years experience testing exactly what the Chosen One has been testing for the last 5 years. Granted, others in his group may apply for the job, but even within a group you can make distinctions from one person to another in the job description.

This is a good thing if you're the one they're writing the posting for; it's a waste of time if you're not the Chosen One.

The idea behind posting the position, even though someone has been pre-chosen for it, is the possibility that someone even more qualified will apply, which helps the company. Most often, though, it simply gets a specific person promoted per his boss's wishes.

[Vanilla Gorilla]

I have been working for the US Federal Govt.-Treasury Dept, for 12+ years now. But from what I have gathered if we want to hire someone fromt eh outside...i.e. say there is a contractor who we would like to convert to fed...then we have to post externally(i.e. on USAJobs.gov). However, in many cases we have internal job announcments too which are offered to employees to compete for first. Especially if there has been a round of RIFs-Reduction In Force..to allow current employees a new position. However if there is someone we really want then the announcement is usually written so that that person becomes the best match. However, with federal jobs people fromt eh outside usually get points being ranked for various situations: such as being disabled, a veteran, or being RIF'd at another federal agency.

And as what was mentioned above, we may end up with 100s of resumes. Sad thing is that in many cases I think people are just sending in resumes to send in a resume to try for a job without paying attention to the job description. We had a Java programming position for instance and literally had resumes where the people's biggest familiarity with computers was using MS Word.

My wife however told me that her company does the same thing; that is they know who they want to hire, but they still have to post the job.

And as for unions. The Treasury Dept has NTEU, National Treasury Employees Union so unions are probably based on the Department.

[meanjelly]

I ve seen this happen for teaching jobs. There is a good sub who is already picked but you have to have interviews.

I have also seen a canidate who was so good that he was hired over the selected person.

I am not sure if there is a regulation that requirers the Fed to do the same

[AnglRdr]

All federal civil service jobs are supposed to be merit-based, so that, in theory, the best qualified candidate gets the job. There are many ways around that theory, though. Some federal jobs are not even open to the general public to apply for (there can be some legitimate reasons for that, such as the skills required for the job are so specific that they can only be gained while working for the US government).

The federal hiring system is pretty complicated, but it is supposed to help keep jobs from being given to political supporters.

[DoubleNaughtSaleen]

I'd always heard that, especially lateral reassignments posted on our internal system. I got both of my positions from USAJobs (and its predecessor).

Some jobs are "bargaining" meaning unionized, (usually) non-supervisory, and some are "non-bargaining" meaning can't unionize. It's NTEU for CBP, too.

[DesertBerean]

Originally Posted by AnglRdr

All federal civil service jobs are supposed to be merit-based, so that, in theory, the best qualified candidate gets the job. There are many ways around that theory, though. Some federal jobs are not even open to the general public to apply for (there can be some legitimate reasons for that, such as the skills required for the job are so specific that they can only be gained while working for the US government).

The federal hiring system is pretty complicated, but it is supposed to help keep jobs from being given to political supporters.

That's basically it. I'm a fed employee who have been involved with staffing and recruiting for some time now. There ARE ways to get just the person you want, but it's almost always through competitive means. The obstacle course (not exaggerating, trust me) can get hairy when recruiting outside the fed gov't.