|
Post by decadealj on May 8, 2010 21:46:56 GMT -5
I am reluctant tocomment because my posts seem so negative but I am on my way out the door so I want to add something. To me this scheduling process proposal is just the last objective manifestation of management folks with no legal training or experience to hijact the hearing process that began with HPI. I would anticipate that if I was to be part of the proposed process, I would continue 90% of the cases scheduled for additional development. How the heck can you conduct a hearing when the reps have just submitted an average of 50-100 pages of new evidence within days of the hearing. And if you have an ME or VE, and the submissions are Faxed, how do you scan it into the record and give them time to review it before testifying? My answer is I won't anymore- if SSA won't allow us to require the rep to certify the record is complete prior to scheduling the hearing, our initial hearings become pre-hearing conferences and if the bean counters don't recognize their proposal is an invitation to disaster, there is nothing we can do about it except shove it down their throats when implemented.
|
|
|
Post by ed on May 9, 2010 8:17:02 GMT -5
Other than using the Union, what can we do to prevent centralized scheduling? It would also be nice if we could enforce some type of time line for reps to offer evidence,especially if it is over one year old. Get it in...do your jobs.
|
|
|
Post by Legal Beagle on May 9, 2010 21:11:14 GMT -5
How many of your offices call the reps and try to work around their schedules? Plus SSA is leting selected reps access ODAR computers to view their clients' eFiles - but the ALJs and other SSA employees do not have that access at their homes. Makes you wonder what tail is wagging the dog.
|
|
|
Post by barkley on May 10, 2010 14:08:32 GMT -5
How many of your offices call the reps and try to work around their schedules? . My clerk has my schedule and calls the reps to slot the cl's in. I am willing to "block" schedule, i.e., allow a rep to have three or four slots in a row. It does not matter to me who I see on a particular day, it helps the reps with their time management, and increases the number who actual show. I know some of the reps I see HATE the "here's your time, take it or leave" it attitude they get when some outside offices or the NHC schedule. With centralized scheduling, will they allow ALJs to still pick their dates? Express opinions re: time allotted to hearing? Do "they" also handle arranging for VEs?
|
|
|
Post by decadealj on May 10, 2010 18:54:46 GMT -5
barkley- I envy you that you still have someone to work with. We are not allowed to ask an employee to do anything. We must go to a GS who of course are not attorneys and have no experience with the hearing process. Since all the other ALJs have a VE at every hearing I am always the last one to be scheduled and if I need an ME or VE, I do it with a "supplemental hearing" once I have the evidence in. We do a lot of video hearings in PA and Ohio- it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out why Cleveland can't seem to keep ALJs there for long.
|
|
|
Post by justfoundthisboard on May 10, 2010 21:52:55 GMT -5
Hi, I haven't posted in a long while and perhaps I'm not understanding the gist of this thread, but my reasons for leaving Cleveland after one year had everything to do with my family and absolutely nothing do to with the Cleveland ODAR, which is a wonderful office with a fine, dedicated staff. Everyone in that office made sure the ALJs had what they needed to decide cases as fairly as possible. I never needed to go "through" a group supervisor to discuss a legal issue with an attorney who worked "for" the GS. Everyone knew what their respective jobs were, and everyone did their best to get their jobs done. A priority was placed on the needs of the ALJs to get files in good shape so the case could be heard and decided.
|
|
|
Post by deltajudge on May 11, 2010 18:44:54 GMT -5
8-)I've said it here before. The attorneys that come before ODAR practice in other forums, plus they have cases before other ALJs in the particular ODAR office, as do the non-attorney reps. It will be a nightmare is this is implemented.
|
|
pinky
New Member
Very Negative and Disgruntled Employee; Believe at your own risk.
Posts: 8
|
Post by pinky on May 22, 2010 12:40:41 GMT -5
ODAR is already scheduling for judges in my office. What it means is that the judges get a week to review the case for needed development (heaven help you if you go on vacation or have hearings out of town). The case is scheduled. If the judge requests development, the case is scheduled immediately, even though the development may not come in time.
There are many reasons that judges are low producers--most of the ones on the lists are management or union types. Some are on special details. Some are on extended leave due to illness. Others--bad staff is one likely reason? reps do not submit evidence timely is one frequent reason for delay? sabotage of a targeted judge by management is another? There may be some slugs out there, but they are few. Surely, those few can be dealt with without slamming the claimants right to due process development.
|
|
|
Post by nothingventured on May 22, 2010 13:07:01 GMT -5
Great post Pinky! You have identified many reasons why hard-working well-intentioned judges may not be producing at the rate management would like to see. Central scheduling is not the answer to any of them.
|
|
|
Post by Orly on May 22, 2010 13:09:10 GMT -5
ODAR is already scheduling for judges in my office. What it means is that the judges get a week to review the case for needed development (heaven help you if you go on vacation or have hearings out of town). The case is scheduled. If the judge requests development, the case is scheduled immediately, even though the development may not come in time. You know, what you're saying makes absolutely no sense. Pray tell how long is it between the "scheduling" you're talking about and actual hearing date. I'd be shocked if it's not at least twenty days in between, since that's the minimal amount of notice we have to give to the claimant pursuant to CFR. Right now most offices I know are backlogged enough that if a hearing is scheduled today, it will be heard 60-90 days down. Development doesn't need to hold up hearings. If it doesn't come in, case goes in POST after the hearing and you don't have to decide until you get that evidence you need. Sorry. Explain better or no cookies for you.
|
|
|
Post by bartleby on May 22, 2010 14:10:43 GMT -5
Post may not continue to be the safe haven it has been. Staff meeting this week, we were informed our post was too large and needed to be reduced.. Slowly, ever so slowly, they are trying to begin micromanaging the ALJ's as they have been the attorney/paralegals. They are getting to the point where they are setting daily goals. They are also bringing supervisors from offices outside of ODAR that know nothing of our procedures and processes, but know how to read CPMS and count beans. Friends, I would suggest extreme awareness and proactiveness on all fronts. This is beginning to interfere with due process as I see it.
|
|
|
Post by hod on May 22, 2010 14:46:50 GMT -5
I just have to agree with some of the posts. I think the cattle call idea is great for reps who have a number of cases in the office, but it would not work well for people with only a few cases or who are out of town etc. Remember this is a user friendly service, not to be confused with THE LEGAL SYSTEM OF STATE AND FEDERAL COURTS. However, I do wonder what the heck is going on when reps can review our cases from home or office and we are told that there is too much of a PII concern for us to get the ability. Then we are pressured to get more and more cases out quicker and quicker, and yet some reps still have no idea about the case when they enter the hearing room. The system would be better served if everyone involved had some responsibility and were held to it.
Reps should indicate that a record is ready to close or specifically point out what is still out there, why they have been unable to get it and how long it will take. Cases in POST should reflect the specific information/evidence that is "in transit", and when it should be in the file. A "delay of game" as in the rep not sending in the evidence or sandbagging evidence or not being prepared or whatever, should be held against the rep in the same way that it is in state and federal courts. If we are to improve the system, everyone should be part of the solution. Requiring all stakeholders to comply with specific rules is not out of the questions. Indicating that ALJs are somehow responsible for the current mess is just name calling childishness. There is plenty of blame to go around and focusing on "fixing the ALJs" is not a viable solution. If a case is being held for the receipt of evidence necessary to the decision process, tand such is indicated in the file- then management should let it alone. The BENCHMARKS should be guidelines not the Ten Commandments.
There is a significant lack of respect between managment and professional staff. And, I am sorry to say, it cuts both ways. Managment cannot continue to think that micromanaging an ALJ docket will get better results. It just incurs more resentment. ALJs cannot pretend that what they do is so important and blessed that they need not be answerable to anyone. That just feeds the stereotype of our judges being "too good" for rules. Happy medium gentle people- I am sure that if we spoke to one another with a bit of respect for each other's position and problems, we might be able to get on with service to the public.
|
|
|
Post by barkley on May 22, 2010 16:54:19 GMT -5
The dirtly little secret about POST is that it can be a dumping ground to hide a multitude of errors. In my office, it is office policy that the SCTs don't order new evidence on unrepped files and management backs that because it gets cases in "ready to schedule" much faster even it the case is not. So at the hearing, I get a list of a half dozen doctors who have seen the cl since the DO developed the case two years ago and get the proper HPPA releases signed. And the case goes to post for 90 days.
Bottom line is they can take the time before the hearing to get to info the right way or we gotta take it after.
A whole different issue is whether the SCT is monitoring POST - if requested evidence is received and sits in the efile with no one looking at it for 90 days - not THAT's a problem, but rather than lecturing the group, they should correct and document on the SCTs who are not doing their job.
A far as it affects ALJs - I could churn a whole lot more if cases came to me correctly worked up, with all the evidence already in the file and if completed decisions came to me correctly written.
|
|
|
Post by Orly on May 23, 2010 0:09:16 GMT -5
There is a significant lack of respect between managment and professional staff. And, I am sorry to say, it cuts both ways. Managment cannot continue to think that micromanaging an ALJ docket will get better results. It just incurs more resentment. ALJs cannot pretend that what they do is so important and blessed that they need not be answerable to anyone. That just feeds the stereotype of our judges being "too good" for rules. Happy medium gentle people- I am sure that if we spoke to one another with a bit of respect for each other's position and problems, we might be able to get on with service to the public. Agreed. It's actually quite a vicious cycle that cuts both ways. It'd be nice if we can find a happy medium somewhere.
|
|
pinky
New Member
Very Negative and Disgruntled Employee; Believe at your own risk.
Posts: 8
|
Post by pinky on May 25, 2010 15:15:35 GMT -5
I forgot to mention that production numbers can be low if there are not enough hearing rooms available, and the agency will not let the office rent additional space.
|
|
pinky
New Member
Very Negative and Disgruntled Employee; Believe at your own risk.
Posts: 8
|
Post by pinky on May 25, 2010 15:34:59 GMT -5
Orly,
The lag between when a judge says "Ready To Schedule" and the day the hearing is held is not what the backlog is about. Right now, I am scheduled through August. I share a hearing room with other judges. If the agency started scheduling right now, they could not schedule cases sooner than September--no hearing space.
I already hear 9-10 cases a day. I do not think that more comports with due process. Do you?
My cases do not linger in review or instruction writing beyond the benchmarks. I do not hold my scheduling for prehearing development. They go to scheduling as soon as the development is requested. I ride herd on my POST--nothing outstanding more than 60 days. (But I do not hold hearings when much material evidence is still outstanding, including CEs, because if I do not know the issues, the hearing is a sham. ) Hint: if your claimant needs a CE, let me know early.
The huge backlogs are in cases waiting for file workup. My office has 2,000. Another huge logjam is in writing, where my office has a couple of hundred.
Oh, do you understand that you SHOULD have 60-90 days notice of hearing, so that you do not have calendar conflicts, and [hint, hint] get the evidence in before the hearing? The delay is scheduling comes when a case is scheduled, and the rep requests a postponement for more preparation (boom--another 90 days). Think about it.
|
|
|
Post by bartleby on May 25, 2010 15:59:36 GMT -5
In an office doing 500-700 cases a month, a couple of hundred cases in writing is not a huge backlog.. That's barely a week or two worth of writing for your writers.. Work up is another problem..
|
|
|
Post by Orly on May 25, 2010 18:30:07 GMT -5
The lag between when a judge says "Ready To Schedule" and the day the hearing is held is not what the backlog is about. Right now, I am scheduled through August. I share a hearing room with other judges. If the agency started scheduling right now, they could not schedule cases sooner than September--no hearing space. Your previous post up the thread I responded to was about how the agency is already scheduling for your office and it denies your claimants due process and adequate development. So I asked you a simple question about the lag time between scheduling and actual hearing date. Now you're saying "If the agency started scheduling right now". So has the agency taken over scheduling at your office or not?!? I already hear 9-10 cases a day. I do not think that more comports with due process. Do you? C'mon. Let's hear the real numbers, which is how many cases do you hear a week and how many do you actually do a month. 8 hours a day = 480 minutes. So assuming you really do 9 - 10 hearings a day, it would mean an average of 48 minutes per case for 10 cases, or 53.3 minutes for 9 cases, with no additional time for file review or instructions. This also means no bathroom breaks, 30 minute lunch, etc. If all you really spent on a case is 48 or 53.3 minutes total, then you're probably not giving it sufficient attention. If you're really doing 9-10 hearings a day for about 220 working days a year, you'd be disposing 1980 - 2200 cases a year. Even if you're doing it every other day, you'd be disposing 990 - 1000 cases a year. Most productive judges I know hear about 12 - 16 cases a week and dispose between 450 - 600 cases a year. Are you twice as productive as they are? I don't like talking about numbers, but if you're going to beat your chest about how much work you're doing, at least be honest about it. Oh, do you understand that you SHOULD have 60-90 days notice of hearing, so that you do not have calendar conflicts, and [hint, hint] get the evidence in before the hearing? The delay is scheduling comes when a case is scheduled, and the rep requests a postponement for more preparation (boom--another 90 days). Think about it. I understand it perfectly, and the feeling I get is that you're not being straight here. Your first post was all about how ODAR is scheduling for your office and is violating claimant's right to development, and now you're talking about how 60-90 days isn't enough. Sorry, but my BS meter is going off. Bottom line is you're supposely a judge. Act like one and have some control over your docket. If rep or claimant can't get their act together and get the evidence to you in 150 days (90 days pre hearing and 60 days post hearing as you mentioned), and this is in addition to the 1 - 2 years the case have been sitting there between DDS and ODAR, decide the case and move it. The claimant can appeal to the AC or refile again. By delaying your decision and dragging things out, you're denying due process to everyone else behind this claimant.
|
|
|
Post by southeastalj on May 25, 2010 19:40:37 GMT -5
I think the back and forth in this thread well shows why there isn't a "typical office" when it comes to caseload and how well cases can be processed. Trying to micromanage scheduling from Baltimore won't work and will only increase problems. Some judges are still in offices where cases sit 1-2 years waiting for a hearing while other judges are in offices so depleted of local cases either due to increased staffing or DDS cutbacks that have cut off the flow of cases that they are already doing hearing requests from 3/2010.
we all do cases differently. I hear approx 20 cases a week, every week.I'll probably issue around 800 dispositions this year. Thats a caseload that is manageable for me but, for a lot of judges wouldn't be. There is no one size fits all solution.
|
|
|
Post by southerner on May 26, 2010 9:39:37 GMT -5
I agree w/SE ALJ. We all operate differently according to the office case availability, the work ups performed, adequacy of evidence, and efficiency of support personnel. Some people hold more hearings per day than others and some prefer flexibility, week on and week off. I do 3 days of hearings per week at office and work 4/10, so I have 10-hour days at the office. I like 7 per day, 21 per week, except no hearings for 1 week after a 2-week travel docket (about every 1 1/2 to 2 months), so I agree cookie-cutter scheduling and one-size-fits-all may not be the solution for the vast majority, myself included. Each of us has our own methodology and I would hope at this point in life and career I can be expected to know how I want my docket and cases set.
|
|