Maybe this isn't the right forum for this, but it's a question about jobs, not a job posting. I didn't know where else to talk about this.
Anyway, I get email updates from the USA Jobs website for land surveyor openings, and it seems like every week there's a different USACE job available in some random big city around the country. It's almost like they are required to feature a different city every week, and they just cycle through all their offices just to put them out there.
My question is, is there that much turnover in that agency, or is there some obscure rule that requires them to post jobs just to post them? It doesn't make sense to me. It's almost like they hire someone, keep them there for a couple months, and then they leave, and the feds have to start the process over again. Has anyone here worked in these positions before and have some insight?
I've never met a USCOE surveyor, nor talked to one, nor heard of one mentioned by name. And I've worked on more than a few USCOE projects. I think that they would be glad to get one one board anywhere they could.
I met a USCOE engineer once, she was headquartered at the Omaha office but spent most of her time in Puerto Rico. I believe that USCOE jobs entail a lot of travel.
I strongly suggest you search for "ghost job advertising" on reddit.
TLDR: The sale of your voluntarily supplied personal data.
USA Jobs is a government website for federal job postings. I highly doubt they are selling the personal data of applicants. Even if they were, I don't think a USACE land surveyor job posting would be their best bet to collect a large amount of personal data, considering the relatively low number of applicants they would get.
TLDR: The sale of your voluntarily supplied personal data.
Well, if OPM is doing this, I at least hope they are using the ill-gotten proceeds to pay down the national debt.
Good luck: https://help.usajobs.gov/privacy
And that's just "your government".
BTW, government is the largest employer in the United States, so maybe you should expand your horizon beyond USCOE.
But you're free to believe whatever you like, despite being shown otherwise.
So I have met several Land Surveyors in my time that worked for the USACE. Here are my thoughts on the advertising of jobs. I don’t think it is turnover so much as retirement. Many federal agencies are loaded with people that are at or beyond retirement age. Also as some of those retire those positions get filled internally often by someone on the team if they meet the requirements. That opens a possibility for another position to be filled. Depending on the way they are handled each agency does this a bit differently. The first advertise internally then they may be required to also advertise external or within certain parameters like moving from one agency to another. Often times the role is already spoken for in some ways but that is not supposed to happen. Other is they may have received funds for specific projects that they require a new position to be filled. This is where internal postings also happen then it’s the chain affect all these positions get advertised as people move around. Some times I believe they are just fishing for that perfect person to fill a role. Sometimes the OPM that advertise makes a mistake. Remember these people follow a structure outline and often misinterpret what the SME is requesting. Then of course if you have followed this much it is election season and many jobs get advertised during these times historically.
"despite being shown otherwise"
Not sure you have "shown" anything. We were talking about the sale of personal data. I said I highly doubt they are doing so. If there is proof of them doing so, then I would absolutely stand corrected, but I see no proof of sale in the privacy policy you linked.
I worked at the Pittsburgh district from 1980-1986 (sometimes full time, sometimes summer only as I went back to school). At that time there were around 8 full time people in the field (none licensed) and 4 or 5 in the office. Later they got rid of the field people and were down to 2 in the office administering contracts. Now they are building back their field and office capabilities, at least in that district. I have no idea about the other districts.
I enjoyed my time there, but I was a fairly low paid survey tech, although way above minimum wage. I went in knowing nothing at all about surveying (I liked maps, that is why I took the job), and came out headed for a career in surveying. So it was a major influence in my life.
I had a buddy who retired from the private sector and went to the USACE because he thought it would be a lot of fun work and he wanted to get enough time in for retirement health care, etc. It wasn't what he expected, mainly being an administrator.
1798.140 (ad) (1) “Sell,” “selling,” “sale,” or “sold,’’ means selling, renting, releasing, disclosing, disseminating, making available, transferring, or otherwise communicating orally, in writing, or by electronic or other means, a consumer’s personal information by the business to a third party for monetary or other valuable consideration.
"1798.140 (ad) (1) “Sell,” “selling,” “sale,” or
“sold,’’ means selling, renting, releasing, disclosing, disseminating,
making available, transferring, or otherwise communicating orally, in
writing, or by electronic or other means, a consumer’s personal
information by the business to a third party for monetary or other
valuable consideration."
And if you actually read the privacy policy you posted, it says they may share information with other government agencies or "to contractors, grantees, or volunteers performing or working on a
contract, service, grant cooperative agreement or job for the federal
government". Hardly the sale of personal information "to a third party for monetary or other
valuable consideration." As you wrote, the federal government is the largest employer in the country. Of course, as an employer, it would share information about it's employees as needed within the organization.
In fact, the privacy policy you posted contains this statement, "...we do not create individual profiles with the information you provide or
give it to any private organizations. We do not collect information for
commercial marketing."
"or other valuable consideration".
Can mean anything, not just money.
"...we do not create individual profiles with the information you provide or give it to any private organizations. We do not collect information for commercial marketing."
Falls under the heading of: "If You Send Us An Email Or A Forms Request"
And FYI, I did NOT say that the federal government is the largest employer in the country.
Reading for accuracy and comprehension is paramount to success.
No wonder the surveying profession is struggling.
The "1798.140" definition for “sale" that has been referenced is from The California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018, Cal. Civ. Code § 1798.100 et seq., (“CCPA”). For a good overview or summary, see: https://iclg.com/practice-areas/data-protection-laws-and-regulations/04-selling-or-sharing-personal-information-under-us-privacy-laws.
While it only applies to the personal information of California residents, other state privacy laws have adopted a similar definition for "sale".
"One of the key considerations for any business working on compliance with these state privacy laws is whether a transfer of consumers’ personal information may constitute a “sale”, bearing in mind the extensive definition of “sale” under such laws that goes well beyond the common meaning of the word. If the transfer constitutes a “sale”, then the business has additional duties of disclosure and must allow consumers to opt out. In particular, businesses must post a clear and conspicuous link on their website to enable consumers to opt out of the “sale” of their data to third parties."
"While the disclosure of information in exchange for a payment is quite straightforward, what “other valuable consideration” means is less clear in practice. A “sale” includes “renting, releasing, disclosing, disseminating, making available, transferring, or otherwise communicating” personal information to another party (whether orally, in writing, or by electronic or other means)."
From the USA Jobs Privacy Policy:
"Other possible routine uses of the information that is collected includes releasing information to the following:
1. To refer applicants, including current and former federal employees to federal agencies for consideration for employment, transfer, reassignment, reinstatement or promotion;
2. To refer applicants to state and local governments, congressional offices, international organizations, and other public offices for employment consideration;
... [continued] "
State and local governments are certainly "another party" and a "third party", separate from the federal government, as are some of the other organizations or entities listed.
I will admit that if USA Jobs is in fact releasing applicants' personal information to state and local governments and/or other third parties, if they are not allowing applicants to opt out of the release, and if they are subject to the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) and/or other state privacy laws with a similar definition of "sale", then they may be in violation of those state privacy laws in regards to "selling" applicants' personal information. I could certainly see this exact question or scenario coming up in court.
