If you’re a vet, here is a Army Corps Deckhand position for vets only:
[QUOTE=HooliganMariner;175090]If you’re a vet, here is a Army Corps Deckhand position for vets only:
https://www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/ViewDetails/422655200[/QUOTE]
It’s not really veterans only, the government can’t advertise a job that way. Typically Federal jobs are advertised as “open” meaning anyone can apply, or, like this one, as “Merit Promotion.” Most jobs are advertised as both. “Merit Promotion” means any current civilian employees of the Federal government, former employees eligible for reinstatement (e.g. they were laid off), or certain veterans. But, it will still only be available to a limited number of the audience here.
Well, I fit in the vet category & I appreciate the posting by HooliganMariner. Does anyone happen to know how long it takes for the USACE to fill these positions?
I graduated from a maritime academy a couple months ago & have been having a devil of a time finding employment. I put in an application with MSC (terribly slow process, in addition to hiring department incompetence), I’ve become an applicant with a union (I don’t have Tankerman PIC, so they said don’t bother holding my breath), & I’ve visited almost every tugboat & commercial vessel outfit from Maine to New Jersey in person (almost to a man, they just say to fill out the online application, then shut the door in your face. Wasn’t worth the gas money driving down). The Oil & Gas downturn is turning out to be a reall killer on the newbie job hunt.
They have to fill them within 90 days of the closing unless they get an extension by OPM. I’ve been a boat captain with the corps for two years now. It took me about 2 months to get through the process. Licensed positions are more competitive because less vets have a license. 99.9% of USACE unlicensed deckhands are vets. It’s hard to beat a 5 or 10 point vet.
[QUOTE=KusOmik;175132]Well, I fit in the vet category & I appreciate the posting by HooliganMariner. Does anyone happen to know how long it takes for the USACE to fill these positions?
I graduated from a maritime academy a couple months ago & have been having a devil of a time finding employment. I put in an application with MSC (terribly slow process, in addition to hiring department incompetence), I’ve become an applicant with a union (I don’t have Tankerman PIC, so they said don’t bother holding my breath), & I’ve visited almost every tugboat & commercial vessel outfit from Maine to New Jersey in person (almost to a man, they just say to fill out the online application, then shut the door in your face. Wasn’t worth the gas money driving down). The Oil & Gas downturn is turning out to be a reall killer on the newbie job hunt.[/QUOTE]
You might want to expand your search past the East Coast. The Northwest and Alaska seasonal jobs will be hiring soon. The Northeast is particularly tough, ask the tug guys here.
It’s also, in my opinion, discriminatory. Why would you hire the guy who fetched coffee for the General at Ft Somewhere in the middle of Nebraska when there is a guy with his AB and experience who would be able to do the job from day 1?
[QUOTE=Bayrunner;176766]It’s also, in my opinion, discriminatory. Why would you hire the guy who fetched coffee for the General at Ft Somewhere in the middle of Nebraska when there is a guy with his AB and experience who would be able to do the job from day 1?[/QUOTE]
Every job above dishwasher at Denny’s discriminates. If a job requires a Bachelor’s degree, that discriminates against the people who don’t have one, too. If the job requires a license to practice law, that discriminates against non-lawyers. And so on. It’s a Government job. The government does this to give a hand to veterans who spent a chunk of their lives in the service of this nation while many others did not, and used those years instead to establish careers.
I used my 5 point preference when applying for my current job. Damn straight I did. I earned that. I also came with good past experience and the credentials required for the job, so how much the 5 points factored in is something I’ll never know.
I want to add, that if you apply for a job and you have a good Federal style resume and a well written KSA page, and you have the relevant experience, you stand about as good a shot as anyone. I work with plenty of people with no military experience.
Properly applied to well-crafted job announcement, a veteran’s preference simply gives priority to a veteran over an equally qualifed non-veteran applicant. Not everyone who served in the military gets a preference, and very few get a “10-pont” preference. Your “guy who fetched coffee” in Nebraska probably would not get a veteran’s preference. See 5 CFR 211.102(a).
Applications are scored on the merits of their qualifications on a point scale (I think 0 to 100, but am not positive). A veteran’s preference adds points to that score. Normally, an agency has discretion to select any of the applicants who obtained a minimum qualifying score (Note the common word origins of “discretion” and “discriminate”). However, if there is an applicant with a veteran preference, the agency cannot select a minimally qualified applicant with a lower qualification score.
When I hired staff, I was not concerned with who would perform the best on “day 1.” I wanted the guy who would perform the best after one or more years on the job.
[QUOTE=catherder;176774]…I want to add, that if you apply for a job and you have a good Federal style resume and a well written KSA page, and you have the relevant experience, you stand about as good a shot as anyone. I work with plenty of people with no military experience.[/QUOTE]
Very important. In a sense, Federal hiring is backwards. For a private sector job, your resume, application, etc. is just to get you to an interview. In Federal hiring, it decides whether or not you get the interview, and as noted above, possibly whether or not you are allowed to be hired. The “KSA page” is not a requirement, and many unfamiliar with Federal hiring don’t include it. That’s a big mistake. Every job announcement describes the “Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities” (KSA) required for the job. This is what you are being evaluated against. You are allowed to submit additional documentation to show how your experience relates to the KSAs. A typical KSA page will break out each of the KSAs and include a narrative or bullet list of how what you did is relevant to the KSA. Even when applicants who are not familiar with Federal hiring do this, they often make the mistake of not fully describing their experience. Fior example, if a KSA was “Knowledge of dangerous liquid cargo operations” many applicants might just say they were a Chief Mate on a tanker. Bit it would be fololish to assume the perosn scoring the application knows what a Chief Mate does. You have to tell them, in detail and in layman’s terms.
Many Federal job announcements make what I think is a big mistake in that they get too specific on the individual tasks of the job and do not focus on the skills it takes to perform that task well. For example, a KSA might be “Experience evaluating Merchant Mariner Applications Against Regulatory Requirements.” With this KSA, a low-level employee at an REC has the required experience and might score well. An experienced merchant mariner and Admiralty lawyer who has never worked for the Coast Guard does not have that experience. A better KSA would be “Ability to apply relevant legal requirements to mariner applications.” With that in mind, a KSA page would enable the job application screener to give appropriate credit to the person who hasn’t worked for the organization before.
Our society owes veterans a lot. Society as a whole should properly compensate and take care of our veterans. The proper tool to do this is cash provided by all taxpayers, good medical care, and assistance programs that focus on the needs of veterans.
Federal jobs should be filled strictly on merit. Veterans should not be a privileged class with more rights than ordinary Americans. Federal jobs should not be used as a social program to compensate veterans for their service.
[QUOTE=jdcavo;176800]Properly applied to well-crafted job announcement, a veteran’s preference simply gives priority to a veteran over an equally qualifed non-veteran applicant. Not everyone who served in the military gets a preference, and very few get a “10-pont” preference. Your “guy who fetched coffee” in Nebraska probably would not get a veteran’s preference. See 5 CFR 211.102(a).
Applications are scored on the merits of their qualifications on a point scale (I think 0 to 100, but am not positive). A veteran’s preference adds points to that score. Normally, an agency has discretion to select any of the applicants who obtained a minimum qualifying score (Note the common word origins of “discretion” and “discriminate”). However, if there is an applicant with a veteran preference, the agency cannot select a minimally qualified applicant with a lower qualification score.
When I hired staff, I was not concerned with who would perform the best on “day 1.” I wanted the guy who would perform the best after one or more years on the job.
Very important. In a sense, Federal hiring is backwards. For a private sector job, your resume, application, etc. is just to get you to an interview. In Federal hiring, it decides whether or not you get the interview, and as noted above, possibly whether or not you are allowed to be hired. The “KSA page” is not a requirement, and many unfamiliar with Federal hiring don’t include it. That’s a big mistake. Every job announcement describes the “Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities” (KSA) required for the job. This is what you are being evaluated against. You are allowed to submit additional documentation to show how your experience relates to the KSAs. A typical KSA page will break out each of the KSAs and include a narrative or bullet list of how what you did is relevant to the KSA. Even when applicants who are not familiar with Federal hiring do this, they often make the mistake of not fully describing their experience. Fior example, if a KSA was “Knowledge of dangerous liquid cargo operations” many applicants might just say they were a Chief Mate on a tanker. Bit it would be fololish to assume the perosn scoring the application knows what a Chief Mate does. You have to tell them, in detail and in layman’s terms.
Many Federal job announcements make what I think is a big mistake in that they get too specific on the individual tasks of the job and do not focus on the skills it takes to perform that task well. For example, a KSA might be “Experience evaluating Merchant Mariner Applications Against Regulatory Requirements.” With this KSA, a low-level employee at an REC has the required experience and might score well. An experienced merchant mariner and Admiralty lawyer who has never worked for the Coast Guard does not have that experience. A better KSA would be “Ability to apply relevant legal requirements to mariner applications.” With that in mind, a KSA page would enable the job application screener to give appropriate credit to the person who hasn’t worked for the organization before.[/QUOTE]
I agree with many of the points made here. Federal hiring needs to be brought into the 21st century.
Our agency no longer uses USAJOBS, which added layers of inefficiency and bogged down what should be a relatively simple process. We have our own page, and the applicant contacts the hiring manager directly.
[QUOTE=tugsailor;176810]Our society owes veterans a lot. Society as a whole should properly compensate and take care of our veterans. The proper tool to do this is cash provided by all taxpayers, good medical care, and assistance programs that focus on the needs of veterans.
Federal jobs should be filled strictly on merit. Veterans should not be a privileged class with more rights than ordinary Americans. Federal jobs should not be used as a social program to compensate veterans for their service.[/QUOTE]
That is perfectly put.
Yup. 5-Point preference is USELESS if YOU DON’T HAVE THE SKILL
[QUOTE=Jolly Tar;177178]Yup. 5-Point preference is USELESS if YOU DON’T HAVE THE SKILL[/QUOTE]
I have the 5 point preference, years of experience, AB Unlimited, Mate 500, Master 100, LIVE in Portland…and I STILL was told that I wasn’t among the most qualified applicants the last time I applied for the USACE job…
This job is about to go to a Navy man that is about to be retired as 20 something year old disabled veteran with PTSD due the traumatic experience he had being seized by the Iranians he got lost and was held overnight in a scary situation.
[QUOTE=captjamied;177198]I have the 5 point preference, years of experience, AB Unlimited, Mate 500, Master 100, LIVE in Portland…and I STILL was told that I wasn’t among the most qualified applicants the last time I applied for the USACE job…[/QUOTE]
Maybe the job went to someone with a bigger license? I don’t know what size the boats in question are or what waters they could possibly operate on but you might have been out licensed.
This was a deckhand job, no license required.
[QUOTE=MariaW;177323]This was a deckhand job, no license required.[/QUOTE]
How do you know what job he applied for?
[QUOTE=captjamied;177198]I have the 5 point preference, years of experience, AB Unlimited, Mate 500, Master 100, LIVE in Portland…and I STILL was told that I wasn’t among the most qualified applicants the last time I applied for the USACE job…[/QUOTE]
If it’s an AB job on a dredge you’re after emphasize mechanical skills, if you know how to weld, that sort of thing as well as the usual KSAs.
[QUOTE=Capt. Phoenix;177328]How do you know what job he applied for?[/QUOTE]
Because it says so in the first post?
It’s a job that I’ve seen come up frequently, and captjamied mentioned “the last time I applied for THE job”, he’s referring to the job that was first mentioned at the top of the thread, which is the deckhand job…
[QUOTE=MariaW;177477]Because it says so in the first post? It’s a job that I’ve seen come up frequently, and captjamied mentioned “the last time I applied for THE job”, he’s referring to the job that was first mentioned at the top of the thread, which is the deckhand job…[/QUOTE]
That is correct.