GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: America's Got Talent

• 81143
  

  It is very good news indeed to read that our fellow citizens are interested in public service and want to contribute to the common good. As an alumnus of the hyper competitive Presidential Management Fellowship Program, I recall with great pleasure many shared experiences I had with others who were similarly filled with enthusiasm about being challenged and putting their skills to work for the common good of our great Nation.

  But this 'feel good' piece needs to be balanced with some unpleasant reality. Although I wish for nothing but good luck and success for our fellow citizens who wish to apply and compete for federal positions, they need to be aware of the thick wall that many of them are about to face. And although this wall is certainly not present within all federal employing agencies, the wall is nearly impenetrable within the largest of all federal employing agencies - the Department of Defense. And yes, I know I've said it before, but it needs to be and it will be repeated and repeated until something is done to at least slowdown this self-serving and self-financial gain driven dregs of public administrative management practice.

  These prospective applicants need to be aware that even when DOD hiring mangers opt to recruit positions in the general and financial administrative management fields (i.e., the 0300 and 0500 series) in the mid and higher salary ranges (GS-12-15 and equiv), these DOD hiring 'managers' end up hiring only and merely current or prior DOD staffers nearly 100% of the time, again nearly 100% of the ridiculous time. And this laughable near 100% rate of inbreeding occurs when these 'managers' opt to recruit these positions outside of DOD and have the temerity to ask for applicants from other federal agencies and the private sector.

  While some of these hires could be DOD staff, but certainly not nearly 100% of them. At the end of the day, these surmised external to DOD recruitments are de facto shams and frauds that are concocted by and for DOD one agency careerists who care more about 'taking care of their own (at the US taxpayer's expense via these shams)' than they are genuinely serving the public good.

  I am aware that this truth is unpleasant to eyes, but it is even more unpleasant to continue to think and write about. In any event, these new federal job seekers need to know the truth.

  Michael J. Smith, MPA Posted June 24, 2009 1:23 PM
• 81120
  

  Nice advertorial. How much did Taleo and Vangent pay for this? More than a full-page glossy in the print edition, I hope.

  Skepticus Posted June 24, 2009 11:00 AM
• 81105
  

  Your citation of the City of Chicago's process for winnowing applications doesn't take into account the most ubiquitous tool used by the Windy City to narrow the applicant pool for its vacancies to the truly desirable candidates. If you've been following the news regarding Chicago's hiring practices, you must be aware that what 's all important in considering job applicants is whether or not they come with the requisite political endorsement. As the local pols have long put it, when it comes to filling jobs with the city, the mantra is "We don' wan' nobody dat nobody sent." No doubt, "Hizzoner" Mayor Daley (also known here more colloquially as "Da Mare" or "Himself"), would disavow this in his usually tangled syntax, but that is our long established "Chicago Way" in "the city that works (with featherbedding and all)."

  Jeremiah Posted June 24, 2009 10:09 AM
• 81095
  

  Noting rather than complaining here. Your web software appears to have some semi-serious problems with certain puncuation marks.

  "résumés." should obviously be "r?sum?s". But then I don't know if that will come through correctly.

  Additionally, I've noticed a number of times when single and multiple parentheses come out as "?" (Question marks - Wondering how THAT will look as well. 8^)

  Tip off Posted June 24, 2009 9:11 AM