Filling 62 IT Vacancies Under a Rule-of-Three and a Hiring Freeze

Separate the legitimate goal (a qualified supervisor quickly) from the method (skipping the list), then engineer a compliant path.

• Verify the premise. Confirm in writing that candidates one and two actually declined and that the third was contacted. Declinations must be documented in the system of record; verbal recollections will not survive an appeal.
• Understand how the ranking was produced. Veterans preference points are added after the passing score, so the 'fifth' ranking may include a preference-adjusted order. Confirm the certification list reflects the correct order before anyone argues about it.
• Use the rule-of-three correctly. The appointing authority typically selects from the top three available candidates. If two declined, the list may legitimately reach the next candidate - no exception needed. If the CIO wants to reach past an available top-three candidate for a documented minimum qualification (supervisory experience), that is a list-removal or selective-certification action requiring the civil service body's approval and notice to the candidate, not an informal skip.
• Do not rewrite the minimum qualifications after the fact. If supervisory experience is genuinely essential, the durable fix is to amend the class specification prospectively and reannounce.

Recommendation: pull the certification file today, document declinations, and if the top-three candidate is still available, either appoint or process a formal removal with reasons.

First, replace the single number with a stage-level cycle-time view: requisition approval, exam administration, list certification, interview scheduling, reference and background, offer and freeze approval. In most agencies with this profile, two or three stages carry most of the delay; the 228-day average is usually a story about waiting for exam cycles and approvals, not about sourcing.

Likely high-leverage fixes:

1. Exam cadence. If the written exam is administered quarterly, the average candidate waits ~45 days before anything else happens. Move to continuous or monthly testing, or adopt a validated alternate assessment. This is the single biggest lever in most merit systems.
2. Batch certification and delegated authority. Ask the civil service body for standing delegated authority to certify and appoint within the class for hard-to-fill IT classes, with quarterly audit. Delegation moves days, not weeks.
3. Freeze exception workflow. The step-3 approval requirement pulls the deputy director into every offer. Pre-approve a band (e.g., steps 1–5) for designated hard-to-fill classes with a post-audit, and reserve case-by-case review for above-band offers.

Pair the diagnosis with an honest vacancy review: not all 62 vacancies need filling as employees. Compare the $185/hour vendor rate against fully loaded employee cost including the 228-day delay and supervisory overhead, and present a mixed strategy rather than a hiring-only ask.

The $185/hour figure is persuasive but easy to attack, so frame it defensibly.

• Normalize the comparison. Build a fully loaded employee hourly cost (salary + benefits + pension + overhead + workstation) and compare like scope. A contractor rate often bundles supervision, tools, and termination flexibility that an FTE cost does not.
• Include the cost of vacancy, not just the cost of hire. A 228-day vacancy has a real cost: overtime, contractor backfill, delayed projects, and burnout-driven turnover in the remaining staff. Quantify at least the overtime and backfill lines.
• Acknowledge the limits. Contractors are not a substitute for supervisory and institutional-knowledge roles; the Help Desk Manager position is exactly the kind of role where continuity matters more than rate.
• Avoid presenting the comparison as an ultimatum. The message should be: 'The current process makes contracting the path of least resistance, which is a strategic risk.' That framing invites the deputy director to grant the delegated authority rather than defend the freeze.

Also caution the CIO about circulating vendor rates to staff - it invites internal equity questions and, in a unionized environment, potential bargaining obligations if the agency shifts work categories.