2012 Applicants

[SA SMART]

I am upset, I can not believe it has been this long without any information or anything. 2 emails, really? That is all that these guys can muster? I don't know about you guys, but my life has basically been on hold for 3 months now. I am not currently a graduate student, but I applied, was accepted, and am now waiting for SMART to come back with an answer. Ther graduate program is breathing down my neck to register for classes and do other things. If I get it, I quit my job and become a full time graduate student, if no, then I can move on. I am not anchored down by a program right now, not yet. I have not had to put a deposit down on my school yet, but that day is rapidly approaching. It really bothers me though that if we would have submitted our applications for this program 1 minute late, they would not be accepted. Where is the accountability?

[Guest 2012]

I don't recall seeing this specifically in, but I was under the impression that the goal of SMART was to recruit and retain the brightest minds in science for the advancement of government research project in the various STEM fields. This is not to say that veterans cannot be the among the best minds, but in cases where they are not, a veteran's preference seems as if it would undermine that goal.

I am not a veteran, and I appreciate everything that all the vets have done (thank you veterans!)--I just wanted to express my sentiment on the vet preferences based on the goals of the program as I understand them. I can see this creating animosity from those who are not veterans toward the veterans who may receive a position in preference with lesser qualifications, but more importantly (as seems to be the case with the "friend in AK" discussed above, animosity from your future employer over not having received the best candidate. That could lead to a pretty miserable experience with your SF.

[Guest]

I don't recall seeing this specifically in, but I was under the impression that the goal of SMART was to recruit and retain the brightest minds in science for the advancement of government research project in the various STEM fields.

While SMART may say they have that goal, reality is a bit different. If you are accepted for the scholarship and begin interactions with a SF, you'll find that the overall DoD machine has motives other than "recruit and retain the brightest minds in science".

In my experience (past scholar) they're interested in enticing technical people to complete technical degrees. They do a great job at that. Recruitment and retention into the government workforce? That's hard to say. I don't believe the DoD is really trying for recruitment and retention when the government compensates the PhD highly technical engineer the same (or many times less) than the guy who got the AS degree in geology and is now working as a GS-12 electronics technician.

YMMV.

[usernameFieldBlow]

I don't recall seeing this specifically in, but I was under the impression that the goal of SMART was to recruit and retain the brightest minds in science for the advancement of government research project in the various STEM fields. This is not to say that veterans cannot be the among the best minds, but in cases where they are not, a veteran's preference seems as if it would undermine that goal.

I am not a veteran, and I appreciate everything that all the vets have done (thank you veterans!)--I just wanted to express my sentiment on the vet preferences based on the goals of the program as I understand them. I can see this creating animosity from those who are not veterans toward the veterans who may receive a position in preference with lesser qualifications, but more importantly (as seems to be the case with the "friend in AK" discussed above, animosity from your future employer over not having received the best candidate. That could lead to a pretty miserable experience with your SF.

The USG likes to think none of their goals undermine any of their other goals through sheer will power. So speaking from the viewpoint of the USG, of course veteran's preference doesn't undermine our goals

[bulldog]

For those of you who are not veterans or have no experience with veterans (personally or professionally, whichever), just be aware the veteran's preference is a nationwide program in which, legally, if an employer is looking at a handful of applicants and all are equally qualified and one is a veteran, the employer is technically mandated to hire the veteran first. Every job application has a place for veteran's preference, not just DoD.

[Guestguest]

For those of you who are not veterans or have no experience with veterans (personally or professionally, whichever), just be aware the veteran's preference is a nationwide program in which, legally, if an employer is looking at a handful of applicants and all are equally qualified and one is a veteran, the employer is technically mandated to hire the veteran first. Every job application has a place for veteran's preference, not just DoD.

I don't think anyone is arguing that vet preferences shouldn't exist. Rather, unfair advantages shouldn't be given to veterans over others who are more qualified. Like AZGeologist said a few posts back, the SF seemed to resent that that vet was chosen, even thought there were 3 people more highly qualified.

[Realtalk]

For those of you who are not veterans or have no experience with veterans (personally or professionally, whichever), just be aware the veteran's preference is a nationwide program in which, legally, if an employer is looking at a handful of applicants and all are equally qualified and one is a veteran, the employer is technically mandated to hire the veteran first. Every job application has a place for veteran's preference, not just DoD.

But isn't the issue under discussion what happens if they're not equally qualified? In regards to the SMART application, I did feel a little discriminated against for having not served. So, I spent my "Why do you want to work for the DOD?" essay explaining that I come from a very military rich family (I can place a relative in every branch and every US conflict since before the US was the US), but was PDQ'ed when I tried to join up. I said very plainly that I viewed working as a civilian researcher was the second best way I could serve.

So, with that context, I would feel that if you're a veteran and make it to the final round and it's you or me and we have the same qualifications, you should get picked over me. But, I would hope that if we weren't equally qualified, they'd pick the better candidate.

[AZGeologist]

I don't think anyone is arguing that vet preferences shouldn't exist. Rather, unfair advantages shouldn't be given to veterans over others who are more qualified. Like AZGeologist said a few posts back, the SF seemed to resent that that vet was chosen, even thought there were 3 people more highly qualified.

While this may have been the case early on, I will note that the supervisor ended up LOVING Jeremy, and after his year there was sad to see him transfer to a warmer posting in upstate NY. I was just interested in seeing how many of us were veterans, and to comment on the previous post about not being contacted by the SF, I had spoken on the phone with SMART, and the lady I spoke with said that in her experience not many veterans get interviews due to their rankings already.

[Guest 2012]

I don't think anyone is arguing that vet preferences shouldn't exist. Rather, unfair advantages shouldn't be given to veterans over others who are more qualified. Like AZGeologist said a few posts back, the SF seemed to resent that that vet was chosen, even thought there were 3 people more highly qualified.

While this may have been the case early on, I will note that the supervisor ended up LOVING Jeremy, and after his year there was sad to see him transfer to a warmer posting in upstate NY. I was just interested in seeing how many of us were veterans, and to comment on the previous post about not being contacted by the SF, I had spoken on the phone with SMART, and the lady I spoke with said that in her experience not many veterans get interviews due to their rankings already.

So you're saying not getting an interview is either 1) a really good sign because you were ranked so highly or b) a really bad sign because you were not even close to the top of the list, and it was not worth interviewing?

I will take that, and keep thinking positively!

I didn't get an interview

Back on topic--I understand it is possible for people to be swayed away from an initial feeling, but that can sometimes be a difficult thing to accomplish. My point was just to say that it could end up backfiring on people not prepared for it, if they are indeed selected out of rank order.

[bulldog]

So, with that context, I would feel that if you're a veteran and make it to the final round and it's you or me and we have the same qualifications, you should get picked over me. But, I would hope that if we weren't equally qualified, they'd pick the better candidate.

This is the way the system is supposed to work. And then it's only IF the veteran claimed preference (for example, my husband chooses not to because he wants to feel he earned a job on his own credentials, not just because they would have a legal obligation to choose him).

[Lurkish]

So I'm a 2012 applicant and I just found this message board yesterday. I read every post and had no idea about SMART having so much trouble. I've just been waiting patiently without concern. Well I have an update I thought you guys would like to hear about.

I got a call AND an email today from the ACEE SMART scholarship team. I missed the call but they left a voicemail. I was undecided on my school when I first applied and they wanted to know what school I was planning to attend. He also mentioned that since the awards are being delayed they are doing a "clean up" of the applications until they hear from the DoD.

It made me feel a little hopeful that they actually called me. I hope I get the award. Has anyone else been contacted? Do you guys think this a good sign?

[GuestForADay]

Did anyone else apply for Eglin AFB? Just curious to see if any information has been given yet from them.

[SA SMART]

So I'm a 2012 applicant and I just found this message board yesterday. I read every post and had no idea about SMART having so much trouble. I've just been waiting patiently without concern. Well I have an update I thought you guys would like to hear about.

I got a call AND an email today from the ACEE SMART scholarship team. I missed the call but they left a voicemail. I was undecided on my school when I first applied and they wanted to know what school I was planning to attend. He also mentioned that since the awards are being delayed they are doing a "clean up" of the applications until they hear from the DoD.

It made me feel a little hopeful that they actually called me. I hope I get the award. Has anyone else been contacted? Do you guys think this a good sign?

I got an this email on Monday "You applied to the SMART Program and indicated the 711th Human Performance Wing (711 HPW) Bioeffects Division at Fort Sam Houston, TX, as your first choice. As you are well aware, the SMART Program Office has been delayed in sending out letters notifying applicants of the results of selections this year. Because of this some applicants may have opted to accept other scholarship programs. I am contacting all of the 711 HPW applicants to see if that may be the case. Please let me know AS SOON AS POSSIBLE if you have accepted a scholarship through another program or are still considering the SMART scholarship if selected.



NOTE: We have not been given any information from the SMART Program Office as to when the notification letters will be sent out.



Thanks!

[mitts]

Did anyone else apply for Eglin AFB? Just curious to see if any information has been given yet from them.

I have not heard from Eglin. Did you get a phone interview?

[Waiting sucks]

Having served (honorably at Least) is part of your credentials, it says many thing about you:

1. You are used to the governments BS. i.e. change in stipend for awardees this year
2. You know how to operate in a government job
3. You will be serving service members in this job, so know what the operater will be thinking when using the product you design
4. You will be less likely to bitch about things because of #1
5. You have made the mistake of signing a contract with the government and are willing to repeat that mistake...until retirement hopefully.
6. You have leadership ability
7. You can deal with highly stressful situations.
8. You can take direction well.
9. You know the etiquette if dealing with high ranking officers.
And many more.


This is not to say that civilians don't possess any of these skills, but SMART knows veterans possess these skills. Again, I know there are sh!tty veterans out there and this excludes them. There are sh!tty civilians too. The "brightest" is a relative term, so just cause you have a 4.0 GPA doesn't mean sh!t. Being a veteran makes you far more qualified for this program than civilians.


A veterans wife

[guest01234]

=)

[smart_hopeful]

I got an this email on Monday "You applied to the SMART Program and indicated the 711th Human Performance Wing (711 HPW) Bioeffects Division at Fort Sam Houston, TX, as your first choice. As you are well aware, the SMART Program Office has been delayed in sending out letters notifying applicants of the results of selections this year. Because of this some applicants may have opted to accept other scholarship programs. I am contacting all of the 711 HPW applicants to see if that may be the case. Please let me know AS SOON AS POSSIBLE if you have accepted a scholarship through another program or are still considering the SMART scholarship if selected.

Did the email come from SMART or 711 HPW? If the latter, it matches my experience - my SF called me last week and asked if I'd still be able to accept the scholarship if offered. It could be that SMART has asked the SFs to find out who's taken themselves out of the running. Possibly they're trying to mitigate the paring-down they have to do themselves due to budget cuts, and/or possibly trying to mitigate the logistical difficulty of the fact that second-round notifications (if any) will have to go out on an extremely rushed timetable.

Either way, at least it's movement of some kind. I do think we can safely reject the "they're just checking the contracts with their legal department" hypothesis though.

[Guest]

This is not to say that civilians don't possess any of these skills, but SMART knows veterans possess these skills. Again, I know there are sh!tty veterans out there and this excludes them. There are sh!tty civilians too. The "brightest" is a relative term, so just cause you have a 4.0 GPA doesn't mean sh!t. Being a veteran makes you far more qualified for this program than civilians.


A veterans wife

Disagree on the "far more qualified." Only the facilities can determine that, given the broad range of SMART positions out there. But remember that a major goal of the program is to attract people who would not normally be looking for these jobs.

[Guesterss]

Having served (honorably at Least) is part of your credentials, it says many thing about you:

1. You are used to the governments BS. i.e. change in stipend for awardees this year
2. You know how to operate in a government job
3. You will be serving service members in this job, so know what the operater will be thinking when using the product you design
4. You will be less likely to bitch about things because of #1
5. You have made the mistake of signing a contract with the government and are willing to repeat that mistake...until retirement hopefully.
6. You have leadership ability
7. You can deal with highly stressful situations.
8. You can take direction well.
9. You know the etiquette if dealing with high ranking officers.
And many more.

May I inquire about your list?

1. Is this to say you are willing to let the government strip you of contractually obligated offers?
2. What is more difficult about working in a government job that cannot be learned? Training in a job is still almost always necessary. How to work in a gov't job can be covered in training and allow for the hiring of the more experienced/better qualified.
3. I am not sure what this means. Also bear in mind you are not always designing products. There are a multitude of research endeavors in the various DoD labs.
4. Less likely to bitch may be a good quality, but from your implications in the example in 1, I assume you also mean less likely to voice one's opinion when it could actually matter and make a difference.
5. Typically, making the same mistake twice is a bad thing. Did you mean something else? Or was this a stab at humor?
6. Some people have leadership ability. Everyone has the ability to follow.
7. I can't argue this one. Basic training is intended to make sure this is true, and in conjunction with real life experiences, this is undoubtedly true.
8. Yes.
9. Elders/superiors deserve respect. But everyone should know this. If they don't it will likely come across in their essays or from the writers of the recommendation letters.

In all, several of your points seem to be moot or counter the argument you are trying to make. These types of skills (those that can be considered skills) are likely evident in phone interviews which were conducted, in the essays of the applications or within letters of recommendation. Being a veteran does not mean someone else does not have the same qualities and that it cannot be proven on paper.
I agree that veterans deserve a great deal of respect for the sacrifices they have made and for putting their lives on the line for the sake of the rest of us. I also agree that veterans deserve recognition for their service,be that in the form of a veteran's preference or otherwise. I do not agree that being a veteran automatically instills within you a set of qualities that propel you ahead of someone with a greater pedigree or resume in terms of research experience. And for a research based job, that experience should take preference. In the case of a roughly equal resume, give the job to the veteran.

[Waiting sucks]

Having served (honorably at Least) is part of your credentials, it says many thing about you:

1. You are used to the governments BS. i.e. change in stipend for awardees this year
2. You know how to operate in a government job
3. You will be serving service members in this job, so know what the operater will be thinking when using the product you design
4. You will be less likely to bitch about things because of #1
5. You have made the mistake of signing a contract with the government and are willing to repeat that mistake...until retirement hopefully.
6. You have leadership ability
7. You can deal with highly stressful situations.
8. You can take direction well.
9. You know the etiquette if dealing with high ranking officers.
And many more.

May I inquire about your list?

1. Is this to say you are willing to let the government strip you of contractually obligated offers?
2. What is more difficult about working in a government job that cannot be learned? Training in a job is still almost always necessary. How to work in a gov't job can be covered in training and allow for the hiring of the more experienced/better qualified.
3. I am not sure what this means. Also bear in mind you are not always designing products. There are a multitude of research endeavors in the various DoD labs.
4. Less likely to bitch may be a good quality, but from your implications in the example in 1, I assume you also mean less likely to voice one's opinion when it could actually matter and make a difference.
5. Typically, making the same mistake twice is a bad thing. Did you mean something else? Or was this a stab at humor?
6. Some people have leadership ability. Everyone has the ability to follow.
7. I can't argue this one. Basic training is intended to make sure this is true, and in conjunction with real life experiences, this is undoubtedly true.
8. Yes.
9. Elders/superiors deserve respect. But everyone should know this. If they don't it will likely come across in their essays or from the writers of the recommendation letters.

In all, several of your points seem to be moot or counter the argument you are trying to make. These types of skills (those that can be considered skills) are likely evident in phone interviews which were conducted, in the essays of the applications or within letters of recommendation. Being a veteran does not mean someone else does not have the same qualities and that it cannot be proven on paper.
I agree that veterans deserve a great deal of respect for the sacrifices they have made and for putting their lives on the line for the sake of the rest of us. I also agree that veterans deserve recognition for their service,be that in the form of a veteran's preference or otherwise. I do not agree that being a veteran automatically instills within you a set of qualities that propel you ahead of someone with a greater pedigree or resume in terms of research experience. And for a research based job, that experience should take preference. In the case of a roughly equal resume, give the job to the veteran.

"Welcome and thank you for your interest in this exciting scholarship opportunity. The Science, Mathematics And Research for Transformation (SMART) Scholarship for Service Program has been established by the Department of Defense (DoD) to support undergraduate and graduate students pursuing degrees in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) disciplines. The program aims to increase the number of civilian scientists and engineers working at DoD laboratories."

From the SMART website. So, they want want to increase the number of civilian scientists and engineers in the DOD. Civilian in this case meaning not currently in the military, so veterans are included in this use of the term civilian.


1. I would be as mad as anyone, but veterans also know the government can and will, in reality, do what it feels is necessary, not what it is contractually obligated to do. Just ask the American Indians of the 1800's. The government always has a clause that states depending on the needs of the dod to make it legal anyways. I challenge any lawyer to go through the prior recipients contracts and tell me that it was indeed broken. My sister was an Army JAG officer who wrote said contracts, it may be shady, but it's what happens.
2. Yes, but vets already know. Therefore quicker adaptation to the work environment.
3. Doing research for the dod, which uses said research to make weapons, equipment, or knowledge gained to better equip service members. In case you were unaware. The entirety of the dod is there to support the 19 year old grunt on the ground; everyone from civilian researchers, to generals, to pilots.so again, vets already know that and bear that in mind when designing things OR doing research.
4. Wrong again. There is a difference between bitching and speaking up for what is right. Dealing with crap and just doing it instead of complaining the whole time is, not bitching. Deciding not to tell your boss his decision might kill someone is not voicing your opinion. I didn't mean that. Remember, when you assume you make an ass out of you and....well just you.
5. This was not a stab at humor, it was humor. However it was directed towards vets and their families as they know what that commitment entails. And SMART wants candidates who are most likely going to stay a long time, not do thier minimum term then leave.
6. Wrong yet again. Not everyone can follow. Some people feel that they shouldn't have to deal with what everyone else does. Some people feel special and like the rules don't apply to them. Vets don't have that problem. And vets also DO have the ability to lead.
7. I know you can't argue.
8. Yes. YES!
9. Everyone does not know elders deserve respect. That was the point. Not to mention there is a particular etiquette whe dealing with high ranking OFFICERS. Not just old people.


Not everyone received an interview, and even if they had people typically show there best when interviewed. With vets thier abilities been proven with the challenges they've faced. you don't have to agree with me, but you also don't have to be, and aren't, right. In the Marine Corps there's a saying, "adapt and overcome." It's pretty much true for any service and gives vets the leg up in almost any situation. I hear that you appreciate vets and that is good, but you aren't correct in your disagreements with what I've said above. If anyone needs further explanation of my points I'll be glad to oblige. And to anyone who doesn't think vets deserve at minimum what they already get can play hide and go f@<€ yourself.

A Marine wife.

[GuestForADay]

Did anyone else apply for Eglin AFB? Just curious to see if any information has been given yet from them.

I have not heard from Eglin. Did you get a phone interview?

Yes. I interviewed with the munitions directorate and their warheads group. I am a phd student in ME. What about you?

[smart_hopeful]

With vets thier abilities been proven with the challenges they've faced. you don't have to agree with me, but you also don't have to be, and aren't, right. In the Marine Corps there's a saying, "adapt and overcome." It's pretty much true for any service and gives vets the leg up in almost any situation.

I think the two of you are sort of arguing different things. If you had a heart attack right this moment, would you prefer to be assisted by David Petraeus or your local civilian cardiac surgeon? It's pointless to say "veterans are better" or "civilians are better" without knowing about the specific people involved and the specific job you'd like them to do.

Being a veteran gives you a certain toolkit of skills. This toolkit is especially useful at DoD. In my civilian opinion, this set of skills makes a veteran more qualified for DoD jobs, all other things being equal. But all other things are not always equal, and how the balance plays out depends on the specific people involved. Hopefully SMART will assess each person fairly on an individual basis, taking into account whatever skills they have learned in their civilian and/or military careers.

[af_vet]

This just proves that you don't understand what it means to be a vet. A vet looks at this list and immediately understands everything listed. Your right anyone can learn these "skills", however it takes time. Hiring a Vet means that the office doesn't have to wait for you to "catch up".

Everyone needs to understand that all government agencies are required to give preference to vets when hiring. Since SMART is a government agency and it is hiring for other government agencies, they have to give preference. Its not just about "skills", its about helping out someone who a gave themselves to their country.

Having served (honorably at Least) is part of your credentials, it says many thing about you:

1. You are used to the governments BS. i.e. change in stipend for awardees this year
2. You know how to operate in a government job
3. You will be serving service members in this job, so know what the operater will be thinking when using the product you design
4. You will be less likely to bitch about things because of #1
5. You have made the mistake of signing a contract with the government and are willing to repeat that mistake...until retirement hopefully.
6. You have leadership ability
7. You can deal with highly stressful situations.
8. You can take direction well.
9. You know the etiquette if dealing with high ranking officers.
And many more.

May I inquire about your list?

1. Is this to say you are willing to let the government strip you of contractually obligated offers?
2. What is more difficult about working in a government job that cannot be learned? Training in a job is still almost always necessary. How to work in a gov't job can be covered in training and allow for the hiring of the more experienced/better qualified.
3. I am not sure what this means. Also bear in mind you are not always designing products. There are a multitude of research endeavors in the various DoD labs.
4. Less likely to bitch may be a good quality, but from your implications in the example in 1, I assume you also mean less likely to voice one's opinion when it could actually matter and make a difference.
5. Typically, making the same mistake twice is a bad thing. Did you mean something else? Or was this a stab at humor?
6. Some people have leadership ability. Everyone has the ability to follow.
7. I can't argue this one. Basic training is intended to make sure this is true, and in conjunction with real life experiences, this is undoubtedly true.
8. Yes.
9. Elders/superiors deserve respect. But everyone should know this. If they don't it will likely come across in their essays or from the writers of the recommendation letters.

In all, several of your points seem to be moot or counter the argument you are trying to make. These types of skills (those that can be considered skills) are likely evident in phone interviews which were conducted, in the essays of the applications or within letters of recommendation. Being a veteran does not mean someone else does not have the same qualities and that it cannot be proven on paper.
I agree that veterans deserve a great deal of respect for the sacrifices they have made and for putting their lives on the line for the sake of the rest of us. I also agree that veterans deserve recognition for their service,be that in the form of a veteran's preference or otherwise. I do not agree that being a veteran automatically instills within you a set of qualities that propel you ahead of someone with a greater pedigree or resume in terms of research experience. And for a research based job, that experience should take preference. In the case of a roughly equal resume, give the job to the veteran.

[Guest]

This just proves that you don't understand what it means to be a vet. A vet looks at this list and immediately understands everything listed. Your right anyone can learn these "skills", however it takes time. Hiring a Vet means that the office doesn't have to wait for you to "catch up".

Everyone needs to understand that all government agencies are required to give preference to vets when hiring. Since SMART is a government agency and it is hiring for other government agencies, they have to give preference. Its not just about "skills", its about helping out someone who a gave themselves to their country.

Having served (honorably at Least) is part of your credentials, it says many thing about you:

1. You are used to the governments BS. i.e. change in stipend for awardees this year
2. You know how to operate in a government job
3. You will be serving service members in this job, so know what the operater will be thinking when using the product you design
4. You will be less likely to bitch about things because of #1
5. You have made the mistake of signing a contract with the government and are willing to repeat that mistake...until retirement hopefully.
6. You have leadership ability
7. You can deal with highly stressful situations.
8. You can take direction well.
9. You know the etiquette if dealing with high ranking officers.
And many more.

May I inquire about your list?

1. Is this to say you are willing to let the government strip you of contractually obligated offers?
2. What is more difficult about working in a government job that cannot be learned? Training in a job is still almost always necessary. How to work in a gov't job can be covered in training and allow for the hiring of the more experienced/better qualified.
3. I am not sure what this means. Also bear in mind you are not always designing products. There are a multitude of research endeavors in the various DoD labs.
4. Less likely to bitch may be a good quality, but from your implications in the example in 1, I assume you also mean less likely to voice one's opinion when it could actually matter and make a difference.
5. Typically, making the same mistake twice is a bad thing. Did you mean something else? Or was this a stab at humor?
6. Some people have leadership ability. Everyone has the ability to follow.
7. I can't argue this one. Basic training is intended to make sure this is true, and in conjunction with real life experiences, this is undoubtedly true.
8. Yes.
9. Elders/superiors deserve respect. But everyone should know this. If they don't it will likely come across in their essays or from the writers of the recommendation letters.

In all, several of your points seem to be moot or counter the argument you are trying to make. These types of skills (those that can be considered skills) are likely evident in phone interviews which were conducted, in the essays of the applications or within letters of recommendation. Being a veteran does not mean someone else does not have the same qualities and that it cannot be proven on paper.
I agree that veterans deserve a great deal of respect for the sacrifices they have made and for putting their lives on the line for the sake of the rest of us. I also agree that veterans deserve recognition for their service,be that in the form of a veteran's preference or otherwise. I do not agree that being a veteran automatically instills within you a set of qualities that propel you ahead of someone with a greater pedigree or resume in terms of research experience. And for a research based job, that experience should take preference. In the case of a roughly equal resume, give the job to the veteran.

[Arghh]

If you people are going to argue about something that is not directly related to anything about 2012 Applicants, please create another topic and discuss it there.