Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

DQ's instant or is it a waiting game in BI?

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • DQ's instant or is it a waiting game in BI?

    In my last investigation (November and December of 2010), after about a month, I spoke with my BI when he was wrapping up. He said that the investigation was complete, everything I told him checked out, he thanked me for being prompt through the process in getting him all required materials. He then told that even though he did not find any major issues with my background, he was just a fact finder and he could not put in his opinion about me. He said the 12 remaining background files would be submitted to the selection board to choose 4 or 5 candidates who would move onto the next step and best of luck to me.

    About two weeks later, I got a letter stating that they were moving forward with more qualified candidates. I'm assuming that they just picked more qualified applicants like the letter said (there were a number of certified officers looking to lateral in this process). Is this most likely the case, or is it possible that the selection board DQ'd me for something? OR, if there had been something in my background that he didn't like, would I likely have been disqualified instantly?
    "If the police have to come get you, they're bringing an @$$ kicking with them!"
    -Chris Rock

  • #2
    Originally posted by GangGreen712 View Post
    In my last investigation (November and December of 2010), after about a month, I spoke with my BI when he was wrapping up. He said that the investigation was complete, everything I told him checked out, he thanked me for being prompt through the process in getting him all required materials. He then told that even though he did not find any major issues with my background, he was just a fact finder and he could not put in his opinion about me. He said the 12 remaining background files would be submitted to the selection board to choose 4 or 5 candidates who would move onto the next step and best of luck to me.

    About two weeks later, I got a letter stating that they were moving forward with more qualified candidates. I'm assuming that they just picked more qualified applicants like the letter said (there were a number of certified officers looking to lateral in this process). Is this most likely the case, or is it possible that the selection board DQ'd me for something? OR, if there had been something in my background that he didn't like, would I likely have been disqualified instantly?
    What makes you believe the reason you were not selected was anything other than what was written in the letter you received? Agencies don't have to give all the details as to why an applicant isn't selected, but they also don't have to lie about their reason for non-selection either (don't you think that would be a bit of a double standard for agencies to require applicants being honest during the application process only to willfully lie about their reasons for not selecting applicants?).

    Unless there was something in your background that you only thought was not uncovered and you didn't advise them of, the reason you were not selected is in all likelihood because other applicants who were selected have more to bring to the table (i.e. exactly what the letter said). Even if you had been disqualified, agencies typically come out and say so if that's the case, even if they don't go into specifics of what it was in your background that caused you to be disqualified.
    Last edited by Kimble; 05-27-2011, 01:46 PM.
    sigpic

    Comment


    • #3
      Okay, good. I was upfront with my investigator about absolutely everything. I have a very boring background (except for the dead hooker in my trunk ) but with the amount of people applying for just one or two openings, some things that were trivial 4 years ago can be deal breakers these days. My main concern (having failed a psych with a prior department) was dismissed as no big deal by the investigator, but I wasn't sure if maybe it was an issue with the hiring board.

      I also had taken a polygraph a week after my investigation had started. My BI never said anything about me failing it, and the examiner didn't seem too concerned after the test was finished. I'm guessing I would have gotten the "You do not meet the qualifications" letter had I failed it. Those were my only two questions.

      I guess another good part was that the BI said that he liked me and would gladly give me a good reference for another department if I didn't get on with his.
      "If the police have to come get you, they're bringing an @$$ kicking with them!"
      -Chris Rock

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by GangGreen712 View Post
        Okay, good. I was upfront with my investigator about absolutely everything. I have a very boring background (except for the dead hooker in my trunk ) but with the amount of people applying for just one or two openings, some things that were trivial 4 years ago can be deal breakers these days. My main concern (having failed a psych with a prior department) was dismissed as no big deal by the investigator, but I wasn't sure if maybe it was an issue with the hiring board.



        I also had taken a polygraph a week after my investigation had started. My BI never said anything about me failing it, and the examiner didn't seem too concerned after the test was finished. I'm guessing I would have gotten the "You do not meet the qualifications" letter had I failed it. Those were my only two questions.

        I guess another good part was that the BI said that he liked me and would gladly give me a good reference for another department if I didn't get on with his.
        You are over thinking the process
        Last edited by Iowa #1603; 05-27-2011, 07:23 PM.
        Since some people need to be told by notes in crayon .......Don't PM me with without prior permission. If you can't discuss the situation in the open forum ----it must not be that important

        My new word for the day is FOCUS, when someone irritates you tell them to FOCUS

        Comment


        • #5
          Really difficult to add to the replies you've received. Seldom does the BI give his/her personal view of an applicant, seldom does the BI make a recommendation on hiring/rejecting an applicant. Those decisions are made higher up in the hiring chain. The BI simply gathers facts. It's important to note too, that you were NOT DQ'd. You were simply Non Selected. Many applicants use these terms interchangeably, and that is an error. Where you to have been DQ's you would not have been able to reapply for a number of years, if ever. A Non-Select will allow you to re-apply with Agency you tested with, as well as other agencies. As my colleague suggested, don't over think this process.

          Comment


          • #6
            The nice thing about the BI that I am working with in my CSP Application Process, is that he is very upfront about everything. If he discovered a fact that would DQ you, he would call you and discuss it and then let you know that you have been DQ'd. Because there are so many applicants for the State Patrol, you don't pass onto the next phase if you have a DQ' able fact in your file. We have been told from the beginning that the process is long and there will be months that you won't have any clue as to where you are at in the process. The process follows the idea that "No News" is "Good News" as they are very quick to notify you if you are not moving forward in the process... Good Luck!!
            HONOR ~ DUTY ~ RESPECT

            Comment


            • #7
              For several years I have been reading candidates talking about the "DQ". There are certainly issues that will drop you out of the process as soon as they are discovered, and in that respect, the dreaded "DQ" does exist. There are also a myriad of other reasons why you may be dropped from the process, even though you are not "DQ'd". Other more qualified applicants is certainly the big one. Another reason is a decision to delay filling a position, or cancelation of the hiring process altogether. Not getting the job does not equate to being disqualified, it merely meant they prefered a different candidate, or candidates. On the other hand, merely completing the process without being disqualified does not mean you will get a job offer.

              On a side note, if a candidate gets actually "disqualified" without the process being completed, that is a fairly serious problem. It does not inherently end your shot at a police jobs, departments have various standards and what may be unacceptable at department A, may not be at department B. Even with a true disqualification, some of these issues can be repaired. A poor driving record could be overcome with time (and good driving). Drug use can not be undone, but a different department may have a different standard. On the other hand, there are fairly universal disqualifications that a candidate will likely never overcome.

              Comment

              MR300x250 Tablet

              Collapse

              What's Going On

              Collapse

              There are currently 3589 users online. 178 members and 3411 guests.

              Most users ever online was 26,947 at 07:36 PM on 12-29-2019.

              Welcome Ad

              Collapse
              Working...
              X