Alucard

As Young stated, the hiring process for this position is a bit different from others. There is no medical/physical/drug test. Upon getting your "conditional offer" letter to show up you will go through their "final processing" but it doesn't necessarily mean you will get appointed to the position. All the individuals that were on that first call in went through final processing.

That seems strange, all #s from 260-270 are on the latest 69446 certification on the data set. I would think #s 1-59, and 299-470 would not be on outstanding certification according to the new certification data set. Maybe it's on the certification, but too far from the starting point of #s being called, which would seemingly begin at 60. So even if they called 50 people in, it would only be from 60-110, that could explain it perhaps, or maybe not.

Truly not sure what to make of the data, some observances of this new certification: 1. The original certification [ 68808] had all 470 individuals "certified" this newer certification[69446] list has 252/250 requested. 2. Also, the "certification sequence" is split between the 2 certifications, the new certification sequence starts again at one [with candidate 11.5, then 28.5, then candidates 60-298] 3. The # of Vacancies column for this newer 69446 certification, states 14. 4. Individuals on the 1st Certification, do not appear on this newer one, their dates list the expired 68808 certification time frame. 5. There were 13 of those [.5] adds mentioned by a previous poster [11.5, 28.5, 63.5, 77.5, 157.5, 163.5, 230.5, 253.5, 262.5, 275.5, 280.5, 285.5, 291.5] Don't know what relevance is really being shown with the data, could be something, could be nothing. Only way to see the data changes is to split it between the two certifications. So essentially people who were on the first "outstanding" certification are not on the current "outstanding" certification. Which would mean if you're 1-59 on this list, you may have been on the first outstanding, but are not on this one. How that relates to hiring is anyone's guess. By what I've read on several other boards here, usually the outstanding certification means you are "callable to" an opening/or possible processing/interview for opening. But who knows, it would seem strange if all those in the top 60 of the list were skipped over and not callable for open slots. I think today marks 3 months since this list was established, after taking 16 months to GET established. At a certain point, I can see why many abandon the pursuit. As to if anyone's been appointed, there were some on this board that mentioned they were quite high on the list, but I don't think anyone has confirmed a fill. Compound that now with the fact that the new certification list excludes the 1-60 ranks.

Actually, it was like it never happened :) have not heard back a thing. Did anything change from the previous letter of results to the "updated" one? Depending on where you rank on the list, I suspect they will call in block groups [ie. say 1-50] then seek to fill x number of positions, likely by rank order, then eliminating the number they filled, and then calling the next block. So let's say 5 were filled from that first calling in, then likely the next call will be from #s 6-56. I am not sure if there is info available as to the last appointed number off the list [seen some mention that information is available by calling in & speaking to someone] but the city data certified list doesn't have that piece of info. Also, the last certification date on that list expired on January 9th, and hasn't changed since. When you call the automated line it will let you know if you are on an outstanding certification or not [I guess that outstanding. meaning, you can be called in via a letter for these block group sessions/processing] The fact of the hiring freeze probably will make this a very long drawn out tedious thing. At the time, they definitely delineated between current transit employees and non employees. So I suspect that likely on a transition/title change they would allow salary match, but not really sure. I do think as a employee you likely have an advantageous position on a few levels versus an outside person. Most the employee people seemed to have exited way quicker than others there that day.

At the employment center yesterday there were about 50 or so individuals called from this list, process ranged in time for some [those who were already mta employed, and those not] but it lasted about 8 hours, going from station to station. Seems everyone there went for "final processing" but honestly it didn't seem like anything final, just procedural. Individuals were called to interview in supposed list order, but not sure what the final results of anything were. Whether individuals were hired, or told they'll contact you or something different. Maybe some on the board were there as well. Odd things: They asked for quite a few documents to be brought in, but never asked for them. The letter to come to the location arrived a day prior to actually having to go in [can only guess this made some miss the letter/date & not show up] Tight scheduling And yes, mention of a hiring freeze. Got the feeling the 50 were there for a small handful on openings, if any. All in all a strange experience for sure.

+Young+ thanks for the info. I guess then the question would be, upon calling what is the significance of those two criteria ["On An Outstanding Certification" or 2. "Not On An Outstanding Certification"] the online data lists does not seem to have those particular data points identified (Unless since it's a Certified List, All on the list are "On an Outstanding Certification"). So it's a bit of a curiosity as to if it represents anything. From prior posts on these forums some say it does. Haven't dealt with it enough to know. In regards to the data sets you linked, do the data sets ever change to show individuals were appointed to the position or where the list currently stands in terms of hiring sequence. I know on the State level those exams results will show dates people on State lists were appointed, but not sure how these DCAS data/list sets run. Thanks again. Surely, something has to happen for those on this list, eventually! Seems they clumped all the TMA [4 levels] exams within a 2 year period, but doesn't seem like these exams occur too often.

For anyone on this list, if you call DCAS automated line (212-669-1357) and select option 2, then enter exam 7606 and your credentials they ask for, it will deliver back a message that may include at the end one of two messages. 1. "On An Outstanding Certification" or 2. "Not On An Outstanding Certification" According to some posting on these boards & other on the net, the On An Outstanding Certification signifies that DCAS as sent your information along to the hiring agency. While the Not On signifies that your information is still held with DCAS and has not been transferred as yet. I would suspect that those in the upper tiers of rankings on the exam will hear the positive of the two, and as the list progresses further down those hearing Not On now might hear that portion of the message change later. There have been posting of individuals saying they call weekly & check. Maybe Young+ can reflect on it a bit more, as to how that message relays to real world changes or actions on an established list. Again, this may all be moot due to the potential/probable hiring freeze.

It would seem the first request date [12/7/18], and certification expiration date[1/9/19] have passed without any forward momentum towards filling from the list as of yet. There is a column for "Reissue Date" which is described as "the date on which a Certification will be extended beyond its original expiration date" By that wording it would seem that a reissue date would be required if they wish to again use the list for candidates, as at current, it has surpassed its certification expiration date. With the probable hiring freeze, perhaps this all means very little. Guess on the bright side, the list is established, and it's just a matter of time before something occurs with the first batch.

Just an update, the proposed answer keys have posted for these multiple P/TMA Exams Good luck to those managing to successfully pass any of these level 4 A/P/TMA Exams. This completes up to the proposed answers point for all the following exams given in 4Q18: 9613 Assistant Transit Management Analyst 9614 Associate Transit Management Analyst 9718 Promotion to Associate Transit Management Analyst 9719 Promotion to Associate Transit Management Analyst(Ops) 9615 Principal Transit Management Analyst 9720 Promotion to Principal Transit Management Analyst 9721 Promotion to Principal Transit Management Analyst(Ops)

While this list got established in mid November, a month has passed without seemingly any forward motion of progressing with hiring off the list. This may be due to MTA's ongoing hiring freeze on all "non essential personnel" that's been mentioned in various media from around October, to more recently in mid December. http://gothamist.com/2018/12/13/mta_budget_subway_fares.php "The MTA has already instituted a non-essential employee hiring freeze and minor cuts to service" Not sure how these positions are classified, but likely they are seen as non essential [being trainee an such] & might be under the freeze umbrella. Also not sure how hiring freezes at MTA operate in terms of duration or scope. So while this took close to 2 years to get a list, and there is a certification date listed for early January, the wait might just be longer. But definitely could be wrong on that. Will have to see if it starts moving anytime in the near future.

Thanks +Young+, for the effort & information you posted. Always helpful to have some background info on things. Hopefully, some will get contacted within the window established by that certification end date on 1/9/19. Seems like a rather short window, but we'll see.

Just an update here, the proposed answer keys have posted for these multiple A/TMA Exams http://web.mta.info/nyct/hr/proposed_answerkey.htm Good luck to those managing to pass either or both of these level 2 & 3 A/TMA Exams. The level 4 [Principal TMA] Answer Keys will release next month. **The protest session for these A/TMA exams is scheduled for 12/18/18, from 10am-12pm. Anyone wishing to voice a protest & attend the session has to inform them of intent to do so by 12/14/2018 by 3pm**Details are on the records of answers sheet. If someone's scoring on the proposed answers is a few answers short of passing, and the protest session gives them the ever slight possibility of getting 1 or 2 answers changed allowing them to pass, then certainly it's worth it. 24 incorrect [out of 80] & they hit passing at 70%, but if someone has 25 incorrect, it's worth the effort if they can attend & attempt it, as one answer changed would get them onto the list if they can protest & get a positive ruling & result.

Does the open data Request Date, Cert. Date & Cert. Expiration date signify anything? Has anyone seen any correlation to these categories and how they worked with any prior established lists? I'm really not sure how the hiring process goes for these types of positions, you have many variables, some of those on the list will have selective certification in certain fields & these analyst positions are quite variable in task & scope. Some on the list likely took the exam to be "In Title" and are already with the TA. Should be interesting soon. Maybe +Young+ can shed some light on what the general hiring practices & protocols are usually for most established lists, my guess is this will mirror those closely. Hopefully they will start contacting individuals soon to get things going. Good luck to those who get the process started, will be great to keep the board updated.

Indeed, likely it will operate like any other list. They will establish contact, meetings, request paperwork, drug test etc. After 16+ months, there were some positives. Initially at the start of the application for testing [Jan. '17] the pay rate on the Trainee position was stated at $46,225. On current employment listings it is stated as follows: Transit Management Analyst Trainee (OA) $49,295 - $49,295 Transit Management Analyst Trainee (TA) $49,055 - $49,055 Not sure if MTA resets pay rates at the start of the calendar year, or at a fiscal calendar point during the year. But with '19 a short while out those numbers above may or nay not change. Good luck to any of you, who will likely soon begin the hiring process for this established list.

With a listing as low as you have you might get to enlighten many of us as to the process & proceedings soon enough. I suspect that many of the 20+ or so "ahead" of you may already be with MTA & "in title" or above, so you may be able to soon shed some light as to how things proceed forward. Since it's a "trainee" designation, I am not sure if it will be valid across titles, as Staff Analysts have their own designation & exam. My best guess is that with a rank in the 20s, you'll soon be entering the process [whatever that process may be] Let us know if you can, it would certainly be helpful. Good Luck.

Just a quick update on the list establishment date of 11/14/2018, as per the Notice of Results for this exam, dated 11/20.

KidSon, thanks for the update on this. Thought this was on ice for a bit. 470 Eligible, with an average passing score of about 79.80. 47 people in both the upper & lower 10% of passing scores. 376 In the middle 80%. Guess we will get the test score letters soon. Best of luck to those who decide to proceed forward with it. > Exam Announced: Jan. '17. Administered: July '17. Answers released: August '17. List Established: 11/21/18 [16 months total from exam date] List End Date: 11/21/22 [?]

The following exams are occurring later this week: Exam #/Title/Test Date 9613, Assistant Transit Management Analyst, 11/18/2018 9614, Associate Transit Management Analyst, 11/18/2018 9718, Promotion to Associate Transit Management Analyst, 11/18/2018 These seem to be some of the first exams that have the new expanded Selective Certification for Education and Special Experience [15 categories/backgrounds] http://web.mta.info/nyct/hr/select_exams.htm "Selective Certification for Education and Special Experience: If you have the education and experience listed below, you may be considered for appointment to positions requiring this education and experience through a process called Selective Certification. If you qualify for Selective Certification, you may be given preferred consideration for positions requiring this education and experience. If you have a qualifying degree and experience, as listed" There is also an upcoming Exam 9615, Principal Transit Management Analyst & Exam 9720 Promotion to Principal Transit Management Analyst on 12/8/2018. Good luck to anyone taking any of these, feel free to share any thoughts or info.

So attached is an print-screen version of the e-mail that I sent them, in addition to their response. To make a long story short: It seems that they're in no rush to produce the list anytime soon. Thank you for the effort to get a response. It would seem it's in one of those not going anywhere for a while moments. Got to figure a large number passed, and any list might be lengthy. And there seems to be way less trainee positions than actual TMA spots. Levels 2 & 3 to this position have an exam in a few weeks time. Seems these type positions have an exam once every 10 years, and it might take 2+ years just for a list to establish, then the wait again for a lucky open position within the 4 years of the list existence. Thanks again. Perhaps by mid '19 this will get off the ground.

Only time will tell...we will see... Wondering if this is the normal timeline or if this one is going long? Test was announced in Jan. '17, given in July '17, answers released within a month [8/'17] & then it's gone cold. It's in month 15 from the test date & seems to be on ice for now. Also see there's another analyst [higher levels] exam upcoming next month. Guess once it crosses 15 months, next outlook is to 18, and then 24. Hopefully the list will have a lengthy duration, are these typically 4 years?

This is quite interesting, did it result in anything happening or was it just an assessment?? best of luck to you. Seems they do a lot through email, I have in the past gotten emails to "confirm" interviews. They never phoned, so had I not checked the email I really would not have know an interview was there to be had. I am noticing that a few of the newer analyst openings are specifying this particular exam & that an individual would have to be on or have taken this exam to be considered for the position. Hopefully the final key will release before year end.

Interesting, I totally missed the protest deadline. Might I ask what you meant by something was "fishy"? I would think it was just a higher than normal turnout due to the basic qualifications of the exam. The exam itself had a high turnout, so 15 people seems rather small no? I am curious though if these dispute sessions can cause a "correct" proposed answers to become incorrect in the final answer key. Or is it that disputes allow for duplicate answers for the same question on final keys. Is there a timeline as to when these disputes go infront of the "board"? saw that on the back of the answers sheet but it didn't offer much details in terms of timing. Patience indeed, hopefully this list is established by end of 1Q18. Guess the next release on this will be the final answer keys then eventually the list. We shall see.

Best of luck to those passing, happen to whiff on 8 of them. All in all not bad, we'll see when a list gets established exactly how it looks. With over 1000 likely having took it, it'll be interesting how the scores broke down in that pool size. Anyone care to take a guess as to duration before list gets established? 6 months? 1 year? sooner?

Have to say I was surprised at the turnout to the exam, and with the numbers that were supplied by two posters on here it really looks like it was a sizeable lot. At 1000 heads, even a modest passing rate of 50% really creates quite a large pool of eligibles. It did appear to me that there was a large contingent of college/newly graduated to entry professional level crowd. This may have been due to campus recruiting via CUNY & other schools. All said, the numerics of the crowd was more troubling to me than the exam. Even with say a midline passing of 500 individuals, the modest bell curve would only place 50 people in the upper 10% of eligibles. Guess once the answer keys are released there will be more individual clarity. As for the exam, while the most time was lost on the lenghty reading passages that were often basis of 1 to 3 questions, the overall feel was of a moderate difficulty. Many of the questions were often repeated in slight changed requirements, so if you can spot patterns there were many repeats. The math questions especially had quite a few different iterations of esentially the same premise. The most frustrating ones were to me the spotting the error in the passage, it often required re reading the passage word by word just to spot a single word being misspelled [recall customer, being spelled as "custumer"] These were more a point of frustration, but the answers were right there in front, so it just took a real fine tooth go through. There were to me many easy ones in the groups of information ordering, paragraph sequencing, office relationship protocols, and the math [that pension calculation was a tricky one, in that it asked which of the answers was "closest to" and one of the $ amount answers was a 23 differential & the other was a 25 to the actual real answer] The questions with supervisors//what is the right thing to do etc really were set up in a pattern of highly "ideal" action taking, in the case of injured customer, calling 911 was the ideal "max effort" action to undertake given the circumstance & given the highest priority is the customer. Hopefully you all did well on it, it was a bit of a reality check to see the large turnout. But at the same time, if you have a bit of qualified experience [pgs 17-20 on the application] in conjunction with a good passing score there may be means by which one lower eligible candidate will outflank a higher one for some particular analyst postions. It's really good to see that they answers will be release within a relatively short time frame. I am not sure how the protest really works, but it would seem one would have to singularly go through all missed answers & choose which ones to dispute & then formulate a plot on why it may have been a possibilty of a duplicitous answer all in the span of 2 hours?

Definitely feel the same, it's one of those do it & forget it for a while things it would seem. And even then, it's a matter of where one lands & how extensive the list ends up being. Found this really informative site, http://www.osaunion.org/exam/main.htmlthat had DCAS results for a Staff Analyst Exam they gave back in May '15, and the established list didn't happen until July '16. Can someone confirm that MTA handles their own testing/scoring/list establishment independent of DCAS? Perhaps their timelines will deviate, as I have seen MTA answer keys released 2 months after exams [unsure if lists were established, but at least it's something to look for] I guess the slight good news is that the pay on the position/s seems to increase a few thousand every year and the position auto bumps to the next level position [w/o exam] after 1 year in good service. Hopefully some individuals taking the exam that pass will also be earning above the starting on this position, thereby constricting the list of eligibles a bit tighter as some pass on the position due to the salaryor any other reasons. Good luck to all and thanks for an informative board on this topic.