[blindlaw] binders = Schedule A? (a nonpartisan question)

Mon Oct 29 14:16:21 UTC 2012

In a sentence, I'd say don't quit.  

I'm serious - you just need to get your resume in the hands of the right
person.  Also, get to know people - if you meet someone on the bus who works
where you want to work, strike up a conversation with them.  Sometimes it
helps if you get your resume in their hands, because they can share it with
their manager - that way of a current employee referring someone is much
more effective and powerful than a cold call, even if you are Schedule A
eligible.  

-----Original Message-----
From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Ross Doerr
Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2012 10:16 AM
To: Blind Law Mailing List
Subject: Re: [blindlaw] binders = Schedule A? (a nonpartisan question)

Hello Ronza:

You have me a bit confused. I understand how someone who works in the
Washington DC area may know of individuals with a disability hired under the
Schedule A programs, but hundreds of them? I'm very impressed, how on earth
do the rest of us find ofices outside of DC to take us that seriously?

It seems as if the rest of us can't seem to get the time of day from a
Schedule A program coordinator "out here" while simultaneously it seems to
be a well known and well functioning program in the DC area?

I can tell you this much, the VR offices in two states in New England can't
seem to do anything with it, if they understand it at all, and State
versions of it do exist in print, but not in spirit. At least up here.

Forgive the observation, but your experiences seem to be the polar opposite
from what the rest of us experience year in and year out.

Speaking for myself, what am I doing wrong? Obviously you did something
right, or significanly different from what I've done, because you have a
job, and my years of efforts have not resulted in anything. I can't even get
a rejection letter from Federal agencies when I apply.

Should I sell out and move to the DC area? Is that the secret?

I stopped applying to Federal offices up here a year ago because I was never
contacted, not once, and I have years of experience in the field of federal
healthcare law.

I contacted an outfit that claims to be recruiting for federal agencies, but
when they demanded to know every job I'd had since high school, and then
said that if I couldn't do that, they wouldn't list me, I really just gave
up on working for the Federal government at all.

Hundreds of us have years of experiences  that are the opposite of what ;you
relate, we aren't exagerating or making this up, we're frustrated. I will
change what I do at once if you can tell me, what you did that is different
from what I and many others out here have been dooing wrong for years.

Ronza, how on earth do you do it?

Ross

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ronza Othman" <rothmanjd at gmail.com>
To: "'Blind Law Mailing List'" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2012 9:32 AM
Subject: Re: [blindlaw] binders = Schedule A? (a nonpartisan question)

> Aser,
>
> Great post.  Thank you.  While it is true that Schedule A is actually a
> broader hiring authority than simply for individuals with disabilities,
> individuals with disabilities are given greater preference than anyone 
> else
> hired under that authority, for the mostpart.  The federal government has
> set aside several hiring authorities for various groups of individuals, 
> for
> example political appointees, students, interns, etc.  Attorneys who
> represent the government are members of what is called the "accepted
> service" - which means they don't have the same sort of protections as 
> other
> federal employees.  The logic behind that is that Congress wanted to allow
> whichever political party in power to be able to ensure that "its lawyers"
> are capable, ideologically and otherwise, to defend that party's policies.
> Thus lawyers can be hired using Schedule A - but not the same Schedule A 
> as
> individuals with disabilities.  Attorneys still often have to compete for
> the position with other attorneys.  Schedule A for people with 
> disabilities
> (subsection u of the provision) lets someone with a disability basically
> bypass any of the other hiring processes.
>
> The program works, I promise.  But as I said previously, it's only as
> effective as the individuals administering it.
>
> Regards,
> Ronza
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Aser
> Tolentino
> Sent: Friday, October 19, 2012 6:47 PM
> To: Blind Law Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] binders = Schedule A? (a nonpartisan question)
>
> Hello,
> The problem specific to people on the list, as I understand it, is that
> disability is a grounds for rather than the sole basis of Schedule A
> appointment. More to the point, another reason to use Schedule A
> appointments is special requirements of a position, which happens to 
> include
> all attorney positions. The Office of Personnel Management is forbidden by
> law from creating standards for rating attorneys and thus must fill all
> attorney positions by Schedule A non-competitive appointment. This would
> seem to render the typical incentive for the hiring authority, the added
> flexibility of faster appointment than the typical federal hiring process 
> if
> you pick someone with a disability, rather moot. If I were a cynical 
> person,
> I'd say that identifying yourself as a person with a disability by routing
> an application through a Schedule A coordinator in addition to following 
> the
> regular process might be the worst thing you could do, assuming that
> disability is indeed a net negative without an incentive for the hiring
> authority as a counterweight, which I think is the whole point of the
> program.
> If on the other hand, one believes federal agencies are sincere in their
> desire to fulfill their diversity mandates, than Schedule A remains a
> powerful tool for identifying qualified people with disabilities. I have 
> had
> a fair amount of success working with Schedule A coordinators. The problem
> as I've said is that the end result is not a hiring authority jumping at 
> the
> opportunity to hire me, since anyone they pick will be a Schedule A hire.
> That's all based on things that I've been told or rooted out while poking
> around online as just another person looking for a job. I'd be happy to
> learn I was mistaken in my understanding of Schedule A as applies to 
> persons
> with disabilities.
> Aser Tolentino
>
> P.S. Thanks Ross for the job postings, I've acted on several in recent
> weeks.
>
> On Oct 19, 2012, at 2:38 PM, Patti Chang <pattichang at att.net> wrote:
>
>> I do know of several.
>>
>> p.s. give to our annual appeal by sending to NFBI c/o glenn Moore po box
> 1065 Elgin, IL 60121.
>>
>> Patti S. Gregory-Chang
>> NFBI President
>> NFB, Scholarship Committee Chair
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Oct 19, 2012, at 1:44 PM, "William T. Miller"
> <william_t_miller at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Sounds familiar. I don't feel entitled to noncompetitive status, but
>>> please spare me the dangling carrot. I'm curious to know if anyone on
>>> the list is aware of any Schedule A success stories -- I'd love to
>>> find out that my skepticism regarding the program is unwarranted.
>>>
>>> Will Miller
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Alcidonis Law Office [mailto:attorney at alcidonislaw.com]
>>> Sent: Friday, October 19, 2012 12:13 AM
>>> To: Blind Law Mailing List
>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] binders = Schedule A? (a nonpartisan
>>> question)
>>>
>>> As I said, it is just a joke. Long ago I stopped wasting my time with
>>> so-called schedule A coordinators. One of them pretty much admitted to
> me:
>>> "I don't think I am still the coordinator though." Really? And your
>>> name is on the government's website?
>>>
>>> I also don't see what the heck they are coordinating if they have
>>> applicants
>>>
>>> send resume to their attentions and the applicant just never receives
>>> even an acknowledgement of receipt.
>>>
>>>
>>> Rod
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Deepa Goraya
>>> Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2012 11:49 PM
>>> To: 'Blind Law Mailing List'
>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] binders = Schedule A? (a nonpartisan
>>> question)
>>>
>>> Many Schedule A coordinators don't even return calls or emails. I
>>> have tried contacting some of them.
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of
>>> Alcidonis Law Office
>>> Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2012 4:25 PM
>>> To: Blind Law Mailing List
>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] binders = Schedule A? (a nonpartisan
>>> question)
>>>
>>> Some of the schedule A coordinators don't even know they hold that 
>>> title.
>>> The whole thing is a joke.
>>>
>>>
>>> Rod
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Angie Matney
>>> Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2012 5:41 PM
>>> To: Blind Law Mailing List
>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] binders = Schedule A? (a nonpartisan
>>> question)
>>>
>>> Hello Will:
>>>
>>> Jobs filled through schedule a do not have to be (but may be)
>>> advertized. I guess you could contact the agency you're interested in
>>> and see if there are openings. This page has more information:
>>>
>>> http://www.opm.gov/disability/mngr_3-13.asp
>>>
>>> I don't know how well this theoretically great program works in 
>>> practice.
>>>
>>> Angie
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10/18/12, Daniel McBride <dlmlaw at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>> Will:
>>>>
>>>> Not only do I find the Schedule A Federal program somewhat suspect,
>>>> I am curious about the complete absence of Schedule A type programs
>>>> at the state and local levels.
>>>>
>>>> I have been practicing criminal law for 29 years; 3 years as a
>>>> prosecutor and the remainder in defense.  The local DA's office is
>>>> quite familiar with me and my abilities.  However, my efforts to
>>>> gain employment with them do not receive the time of day.  I have no
>>>> doubt but that their stated EEOC policy is mere form lacking any
> substance.
>>>>
>>>> I cannot agree more with the posts entered since Ross' apology.
>>>>
>>>> Dan McBride, Attorney
>>>> Fort Worth, Texas
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of
>>>> William T.
>>>> Miller
>>>> Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2012 1:41 PM
>>>> To: 'Blind Law Mailing List'
>>>> Subject: [blindlaw] binders = Schedule A? (a nonpartisan question)
>>>>
>>>> Theoretically there is a process similar to the "binders" mentioned
>>>> in the last presidential debate: Schedule A. I'm curious if this
>>>> list feels that schedule A is an effective process? My understanding
>>>> of Schedule A is that disabled candidates for federal positions can
>>>> post for jobs before they are posted publicly and, if qualified, the
>>>> hiring manager may hire them noncompetitively. However, I don't
>>>> understand how disabled job candidates are supposed to know of
>>>> potential jobs before they are posted to the public.
>>>> If disabled candidates have no way of knowing what Schedule A
>>>> opportunities exists, then how can he or she take advantage of the
>>>> program? I'm definitely no expert on this topic, so if anyone on the
>>>> list can correct me and explain how one applies for a specific
>>>> position as a Schedule A candidate, please enlighten me.
>>>> Thank you,
>>>>
>>>> Will Miller
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Daniel K. Beitz [mailto:dbeitz at wiennergould.com]
>>>> Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2012 12:54 PM
>>>> To: 'Blind Law Mailing List'
>>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] "Question" Posting
>>>>
>>>> I didn't see anything wrong with the post.
>>>>
>>>> -------------------------------------------
>>>> Daniel K. Beitz
>>>> Wienner & Gould, P.C.
>>>> 950 University Dr., Ste. 350
>>>> Rochester, MI  48307
>>>> Phone:  (248) 841-9405
>>>> Fax:  (248) 652-2729
>>>> dbeitz at wiennergould.com
>>>> This email transmission and any documents, files or previous email
>>>> messages attached to it may contain confidential information that is
>>>> legally privileged.  If you are not the intended recipient or the
>>>> individual responsible for delivering this email to the intended
>>>> recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or
>>>> distribution or use of any of the information contained herein or
>>>> attached to this email is strictly prohibited.  Should you receive
>>>> this communication in error, please notify us immediately by
>>>> replying to the sender of this email or by telephoning us at (248)
> 841-9400.
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: blindlaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of
>>>> Ross Doerr
>>>> Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2012 12:45 PM
>>>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List
>>>> Subject: [blindlaw] "Question" Posting
>>>>
>>>> Hello List:
>>>>
>>>> I am the one who posted the "question" about why disabled job
>>>> seekers aren't being asked for binders full of their resumes to get
>>>> more of "us" into the workplace. It was my blatant reference to a
>>>> comment made during the presidential debate.
>>>>
>>>> In view of the on list and off list reprimands I have received about
>>>> the posting, I feel that I should go onto the list and apologize for
>>>> posting what is, as it has been pointed out to me repeatedly, an off
>>>> topic message.
>>>>
>>>> I had thought that, in view of the underlying unemployment  issues
>>>> that face those of us on the list, and those of us who regularly
>>>> post job listings, such as myself and Noel Nightengale, that an idea
>>>> to improve the employment situation would be net with some positive
>>>> thought provocation.
>>>>
>>>> Since I was wrong, I apologize to the list as a whole for my off
>>>> topic posting. It will not happen again.
>>>>
>>>> Ross A. Doerr Attorney at law
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> blindlaw mailing list
>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
>>>> for
>>>> blindlaw:
>>>
>
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/dbeitz%40wiennergould.
>>>> com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> blindlaw mailing list
>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
>>>> for
>>>> blindlaw:
>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/dlmlaw%40sbcgl
>>>> ob
>>>> al.net
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> blindlaw mailing list
>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
>>>> for
>>>> blindlaw:
>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/angie.matney%4
>>>> 0g
>>>> mail.com
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> blindlaw mailing list
>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> blindlaw:
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/attorney%40alci
>>> donisla
>>> w.com
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> blindlaw mailing list
>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> blindlaw:
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/deepa.goraya%40
>>> gmail.c
>>> om
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> blindlaw mailing list
>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> blindlaw:
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/attorney%40alci
>>> donisla
>>> w.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> blindlaw mailing list
>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> blindlaw:
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/pattichang%40at
>>> t.net
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindlaw mailing list
>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> blindlaw:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/agtolentino%40gm
>> ail.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> blindlaw:
>
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/rothmanjd%40gmail.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
> blindlaw:
>
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/rumpole%40roadrunner.c
om
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2012.0.2221 / Virus Database: 2441/5345 - Release Date: 10/21/12
> 

_______________________________________________
blindlaw mailing list
blindlaw at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
blindlaw:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/rothmanjd%40gmail.com