Ts/sci

MrAgent

rlloyd3030 wrote: »

I have a TS w/o the SCI. I also have had three job interest that were shot down due to not having the SCI identifier. You must be in a "billet" that requires a SCI, and your security manager / functional manager must make arrangements for you to get the added SCI identifier. Just what i do know.

This is not true. When you get your initial investigation is what determines if you can get an SCI. You have to be SCI eligible, which requires a SSBI to be conducted. Ive had an SCI since 95, so I am very familiar with the process.

bellhead

ArabianKnight wrote: »

I just applied to the Dept of the Navy website for an Intelligence Specialist. Very basic requirement for the lower pay grades, but since I have no intention of doing the job when I get my TS/SCI with CI Poly I will tell them never mind

It seems kind of shady, but in this market do what you can to reach your goals

Yea, and they'll take that clearance away in a heartbeat also...

Don't think that once you get your clearance that they government cannot take it away also.

Also you almost will never receive a CI poly unless you are really doing some hush hush stuff like Ivy Bells.

bellhead

MrAgent wrote: »

This is not true. When you get your initial investigation is what determines if you can get an SCI. You have to be SCI eligible, which requires a SSBI to be conducted. Ive had an SCI since 95, so I am very familiar with the process.

Yes, you can have a TS without the SSBI but isn't this an interim until the SSBI is completed. Mostly for people who are new to a command and due to mission requirements and manning cannot be chipping paint or serving chow for 9 months until the clearance is complete...

MrAgent

An interim can be granted while waiting for the inital background investigation to be done. I started my clearance process while in boot camp, so by the time I got into the sensitive areas of my schooling, I was cleared and could view the information.

ArabianKnight

bellhead wrote: »

Yea, and they'll take that clearance away in a heartbeat also...

Don't think that once you get your clearance that they government cannot take it away also.

Also you almost will never receive a CI poly unless you are really doing some hush hush stuff like Ivy Bells.

They can't take it away unless you do something bad, but if I have to go on assignment with them for a year then so be it. When you leave them it will become inactive and you will have 2 years to find a job that requires that level of clearance.

shodown

ArabianKnight wrote: »

They can't take it away unless you do something bad, but if I have to go on assignment with them for a year then so be it. When you leave them it will become inactive and you will have 2 years to find a job that requires that level of clearance.

CI poly is a joke. If you got a TS/SCI already u can get a CI poly if you work in one of the alphabet gangs or any where in the militay intellegence community or FBI

higherho

ArabianKnight wrote: »

They can't take it away unless you do something bad, but if I have to go on assignment with them for a year then so be it. When you leave them it will become inactive and you will have 2 years to find a job that requires that level of clearance.

I talked to my security manager and they can take your SCI status away if you are not working with any material that needs that status. SCI status is not meant to be given out like candy.

SrAtechie

To the OP - Why not join the military in some capacity? That's the easiest way to get a clearance. And you're guaranteed a job for 3-6 years or more depending on what contract you sign. And if you want a little more control over your career, you could always look into the national guard or the reserves. Either way, it's a small price to pay for something that can literally add thousands of dollars to your salary when you're done.

BerryKix

I have a severely herniated disc in my back so it's impossible for me to join the military. Plus, I'm 28 years old so I don't have the time to go that route. I'll go become a developer where there's tons of jobs and the pay is extremely good.

SrAtechie

BerryKix wrote: »

I have a severely herniated disc in my back so it's impossible for me to join the military. Plus, I'm 28 years old so I don't have the time to go that route. I'll go become a developer where there's tons of jobs and the pay is extremely good.

Ah, sorry to hear that. In that case, I'd say keep on applying. A guy I know here kept applying for jobs, interviewing and all. He'd been turned down a ton because he didn't have a clearance as well, but one manager who interviewed him for a job with a bigger company moved to a smaller company that had just won a contract and needed bodies ASAP. That manager gave him a call back after confirming that they'd be willing to pay for his clearance and everything and the rest is history. So there's always a chance. It's also a good way to get a feel for the skillsets desired by the defense companies in your area. So you can tailor your resume and studying to meet the needs. It's much easier for a company to swallow the costs if they know you'd be able to slip right into the position and get spun up quickly.

BerryKix

I ended up being disqualified from the position with Lockheed Martin. Looks like being a Java/.NET developer is my only option. It makes more money anyway.

Kasor

Seriously, someone post this type of question here. I'm a big OPSEC and SEC type of guy. Having a clearance didn't mean you will get a job or you should have one. After the wikileaks situation, the govn't is locking down. So, if you don't have a need-to-know. Your clearance will end as it expire.

Turgon

Kasor wrote: »

Seriously, someone post this type of question here. I'm a big OPSEC and SEC type of guy. Having a clearance didn't mean you will get a job or you should have one. After the wikileaks situation, the govn't is locking down. So, if you don't have a need-to-know. Your clearance will end as it expire.

It might be wiser for those with TS clearance to keep that fact to themselves. Just a thought.

shodown

Another thing I want to add is that this isn't 2003 anymore. The bus has already left for the high paying contracting jobs. I have a pretty high clearance and I'm working outside the govt making more than I was with a clearance.

MrAgent

shodown wrote: »

Another thing I want to add is that this isn't 2003 anymore. The bus has already left for the high paying contracting jobs. I have a pretty high clearance and I'm working outside the govt making more than I was with a clearance.

This is not true. I make awesome money as a contractor. Much more than I would without a clearance. I know my company is hiring a ton of people with systems engineering backgrounds for the contract I am on, making quite a bit.

Chris:/*

No it is true the government is converting a large number of its contracting positions into GS positions because of the cuts being made in the budget. The thought of the current administration is that GS are easier to handle and can be paid less.

I do not know if you are going to get the quality product you get out of a private industry company that has to turn a profit. As compared to a GS who after 2 years of service is very hard to fire and can be a slug and still sit in a position that needs an active body.

Agreed with the statements above about stating you have a TS or TS/SCI. Stating you have a clearance is one thing but showing your level is just bad OPSEC.

wastedtime

Chris:/* wrote: »

I do not know if you are going to get the quality product you get out of a private industry company that has to turn a profit. As compared to a GS who after 2 years of service is very hard to fire and can be a slug and still sit in a position that needs an active body.

Not to change the topic but I have seen it go both ways. I have seen contractors hired for helpdesk positions that couldn't do anything more then read off a card. I have seen others who didn't want to do there job and would literally do the Monty Python dead parrot sketch (parrot = "computer issue" in this case and was not even close to funny).

Chris:/*

Agreed but I find more often if the contract is well written you get what you pay for.

hustlin_moe20

BerryKix wrote: »

So I had a company tell me I wasn't being considered because I don't possess top secret clearance with SCI eligibility. I have another company that said I would be a perfect fit but also wants TS/SCI so I suspect I am also going to be disqualified from this one as well. I'm going to be really pissed if I get disqualified from this one because it's a top aerospace and defense company. Does anyone know how to get TS/SCI? I basically have to work for the government to get it or there's another way? Otherwise, that pretty much limits my job options to the government and the 1 or 2 help desks that I haven't heard back from. I really don't want to go the help desk route anyway since it's not network or programming related. If I can't find a way to get TS/SCI I'll have to try and become a Software Engineer I guess.

The only reason I'm cleared is due to me working with certain items when I was in the Army. The easiest way to get cleared is to join a non-deployable unit of the Army National Guard or Air Force Air Guard. If you join with an IT role you'll be cleared to TS automatically, or at least they'll try. If your investigation doesn't come out positive you'll be knocked to Secret or you won't be granted a clearance at all. If you're cleared TS, then your SCI is a read-in by your company security officer, no big deal. When you leave, you're read-out and leave with a TS clearance.

Now, to find a non-deployable unit; Ask around. Find a recruiter and ask him/her if they know of what units cannot deploy. Most of them will be IT/Intelligence units with a SCIF close by. That's how my brothers both got their clearances and it's paid them 100 fold.

Someone mentioned getting a job with ITT in a hazard zone to get a clearance. Most of ITT's contracts are Secret and below and they pay terribly low (150k/year) or lower. PM me for more information on that. Nobody with a clearance should be making below 170k or so in my line of work.

Just my 2c.

Moe.

hustlin_moe20

Computadora wrote: »

Correct me if I am wrong, but I heard that some companies are now making employees sign an agreement that they must serve a certain period of employment with them after receiving their sponsored security clearance, in order to stop them from just gaining the clearance and running away, is any of this any true? Even if they do not have an agreement, I am sure the hiring manager most likely will not give a favorable recommendation if one just gains the clearance and runs?

Most clearance jumpers don't care if the hiring manger was going to give them an excellent recommendation, that clearance recommends itself, sad but true. You see how many jobs are out there! New contracts come out every day and they need those clearances on contract ASAP, faster than ASAP so most companies don't care how you separated from your last gig most of the time.

Moe.

SephStorm

MrAgent wrote: »

Clearances dont cost the companies sponsoring you anything except the pay they have to pay you while waiting for it. Which is why they generally dont take people on who arent already cleared.

The people who incur the cost of the investigations are the DSS (at least for the DoD). Other departments/agencies use a different system. The costs they incur are just whatever it is to go door to door talking to former coworkers, neighbors, etc.

A good friend of mine who works with me, but for another company, is the security officer for his company. So I have a pretty good idea of what happens.

Thats not my understanding, but I could be wrong.

Turgon

Folks, if people want guidance on clearance levels there are other official sources they can turn to. Some of the information coming forward may be unwise, past history, present clearance level, location, experience with weapons. Many people post on works time and that infrastructure is monitored. If you are cleared you do not want to raise a flag as a potential target for a social engineering attack putting not only yourself but also the organisation you work for at risk. A clearance by definition requires the holder to use some discretion, it is not just a ticket to a bump in pay paid for by tax dollars.

Chris:/*

Turgon wrote: »

Folks, if people want guidance on clearance levels there are other official sources they can turn to. Some of the information coming forward may be unwise, past history, present clearance level, location, experience with weapons. Many people post on works time and that infrastructure is monitored. If you are cleared you do not want to raise a flag as a potential target for a social engineering attack putting not only yourself but also the organisation you work for at risk. A clearance by definition requires the holder to use some discretion, it is not just a ticket to a bump in pay paid for by tax dollars.

Agreed, lets move on from this!

hustlin_moe20

Roger that, cleaned up and rollin' on!