OPM Conducting Survey For New Exam

[tiggen]

I received this email from OPM this morning:

Dear Administrative Law Judge xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxx:

On behalf of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management's (OPM) Administrative Law Judge Program Office (ALJPO), OPM's Individual Assessment Office is conducting an occupational analysis of the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), AL-3 position. This occupational analysis will be used as the basis to develop a new examination process. A critical step in developing a new examination process is to collect information about the position. We are conducting this survey to identify and document the critical tasks and competencies that are required for successful performance in the ALJ AL-3 position. ........

[decadealj]

I received this same letter about 18 years ago and eventually particpated at OPM in screening skill qualification responses and exam questions for what turned out to be the exam process for the annoncement in the mid-90s. If you receive this questionare, I strongly encourage you to put your heart and soul into answering it because the skill set required today is far different than in my time although I am not certain it is for the better, i.e. the ability to ferret out irrelevant information in thousand page exhibits submitted the morning of the hearing. I really don't know how anyone can consciously do a complete record review and keep-up with the expected monthly body count. I strained to make the 500 annual case figure and there is no doubt I did a better job in the beginning than at the end. Of course as I have mentioned many times before, my production was far better when we had team support rather than pool support where no one seemed to be accountable for their work product.

[chinook]

This request is not just for SSA judges. It is going to other agencies also.

[71stretch]

There was something on here several months ago about OPM doing site visits for the same purpose. Given how slowly this is moving, I doubt we will see a reopened register until FY 2013.

[decadealj]

Chinook makes a very important observation to those SSA ALJs who decline to take the time to participate in the survey. What I did not mention above was that I was the only SSA ALJ to participate in the follow-up at OPM. The reason is that SSA would not fund travel or per diem so every ALJ at OPM developing the new exam was from other agencies in DC who did not have to travel to participate and they unanimously opioned trial experience was a necessary prerequisite for appointment as an ALJ. Remember SSA is the only agency I know that conducts non-adversarial hearings. SSA must have used its hefty influence to dilute the experience skill required for qualification in '96 or so. SSA has always pushed for technical experience (i.e. SSA background) and finally broke through on that exam redevelopment. So for those of you who benefitted from that change in the experience prerequisite, this may be your only chance to influence the process. I can assure you that most, if not all, agencies with adversarial hearings, will make an effort to toughen the definition of qualifying experience.

[bartleby]

One of the problems I see is that there is a vast difference in what is classified as trial experience. The type of litigation experience of a JAG Officer or another Agency Attorney (other than SSA) has versus the litigation experience of a down in the weeds, downhome attorney, who must make their livelihood based on their ability to evaluate clients based upon their discernment is very different. The type work we do as ALJ's requires the down in the weeds type of litigator. A litigator with a large firm/JAG/Agency attorney who is used to billable hours, large supporting staff and is really not concerned with whether their client is innocent or guilty, liable or not, may not have developed the street smarts needed to evaluate the credibility of our claimants. The best of all worlds would be a 10 year private lawyer who has had his own small office, done a lot of personal injury cases, gone to work for the Agency for about 10 years and then ascends to the position of ALJ. Of course this is all personal opinion and worth what you paid for it, but it is based upon my observations and experience. Flame suit on for all you that have been seriously offended..

[agilitymom]

bartleby--Here's my personal opinion. I've been both and I must insist that you have somewhat of a skewed vision of the JAG Corps. I can guarantee you that as prosecutors and defenders each of us really do/did care about our clients (and whether or not they were innocent or guilty...especially when they were innocent or had their due process rights violated in some form or fashion). As a "down home" attorney who practiced "down in the weeds" I must say that I practiced a much higher level of "legal" skill when in the military. I must also assert that as a military attorney practicing administrative law and civil litigation (yes, we do actually go into "real" courts and litigate civil cases along with the US Attorney), I found that even our youngest JAGs could be matched against attorneys from the private sector. I will also state that 25+ years as an attorney, supervisor, military officer, mother, and citizen has prepared me very well how to "evaluate clients" and discern what the “facts” are and apply those facts to the law. I also question what Agency or JAG Corps office has "large support staffs." I was in the military for two decades and never once was in an office with a large support staff (you were lucky to have a couple of paralegals and a stay-in-school). I now work for a large Agency, in a fairly large General Counsel’s office, where we have two support personnel and one paralegal that support 9 attorneys (in our division), they don’t do our research or writing for us, they simply don’t have the time. I guess my rant is to point out that JAG officers are some of the best and brightest our nation has to offer and they “give up” the possibility of a lucrative income that might be had from a private practice in order to serve the nation. They also learn how to practice law at a fairly high level, in many different fields of law. The JAG Corps are competitive in nature because you are competing against your peers for promotion, which means you have to be the better officer and lawyer than the gal or guy standing next to you. All of this is not to say that attorneys in private practice are not excellent at their craft because I have met many over the years who I thought were excellent at thier craft. The real answer is that each and every attorney being considered for a position that will ultimately impact the lives of others must be judged on their own merit, character, and desire to serve. BTW—I’m not really all that offended by your perceptions because there are many out there who speak without knowledge about what makes up the practice of a civil servant or military JAG officer. As with the others, you just need a little education.

[bartleby]

Well, I can't speak of all JAG's, just those I have worked with or mentored. I still contend that making a living depending upon whether you win or lose a case based upon the ability to discern your client and look at both sides of the case are true attributes in this business. Although you may have put a lot into your military cases, you still got a paycheck at the end of the month. Not so much the sole practitioners. Our ALJ practice is very akin to sole practice. Your docket is yours and yours alone. You have associates to bounce things off of, but it is all yours and it is a rush business from morning till dark (and sometimes after). This is not a 40 hour a week job.. At least not for the ALJ's I know. The amount of glory (being a Judge) is very small compared to the amount of sweat one puts in..

[factfinder]

JAG experience differs. Some do get some limited experience with civil litigation matters, but as a rule the assignments very rarely go beyond four years. In addition, after a certain point JAGs become supervisors, not lawyers, unless they become judges - these guys (judges) have made really good ALJs. In addition, Army military justice attorneys typically do far more work than their USAF counterparts.

My own experience as a defense attorney and prosecutor has served me well over the years. Nevertheless, it is the more than thousand depositions I took afterwards, the briefs I have written, the arguments I made at all levels, and decisions I wrote, that best prepared me to be an ALJ. Plus, there is just no way to fudge knowledge of the FRE or the Fed.R.Civ.Pro or the various 28 USC statutes.

I kind of agree that a private practice attorney plus ten years of agency work is a good qualifier.

I know for a fact I would not stand the proverbial snowball's chance in my current job unless I had developed a lot of technical acumen and litigation experience. As a SSA judge the skill that served me best was my ability to evaluate evidence and work really hard. All of us in our office worked like dogs, all of the time. Plus, several of us had been JAGs, including a senior one. We were all darn good, whether or not we had been JAGs - those of us who were better had the most litigation in our background. Sorry if anyone disagrees, but if you have not examined witnesses, written briefs, and lots of both, you are, IMHO, not the best choice to be an ALJ, anywhere. Hence, when I filled out that survey, I pointed my answers in that direction. Another thing - I think some of the questions were dumb - e.g., ethics is an absolute, there should be no question of needing that kind of skill, and I do not think people can learn to ethical, they either are or are not.

[decadealj]

Agilitymom- thanks for your service. Bartleby and factfinder are also right on. I chose and was fortunate enough to spend 13 years in Military and Federal Courts as a civil litgator, trial, defense attorney and four years as a miliitary judge in the Pacific. Then another four years as a Deputy Commonwealth's Attorney and SAUSA. By the time I was selected as an ALJ, I had tried over 2,000 criminal and civil cases. My 10 most "signifacnt cases" (which you had to list with the judge and opposing counsel in those days) were all reported. I saw some outstanding military and civilian attorneys but most were better-off doing something else. In my 34 years of practice, I think the practice of law went from a profession to a business. I do believe the best experience to be an ALJ was to have been a judge, if for no other reason than to have a record for competence and temperment. On the old exam, OPM contacted your peers, not your references. Of course some awful people still got though but it was OPM's fault for not ferreting them out-they certainly had the tools to do so. But I digress from the message- make yourself heard!

[agilitymom]

Definitely agree with some of what everybody has said. There is not an exact recipe (or crystal ball) that will guarantee that any individual will make a great or even good ALJ. I have been fortunate to work at the trial and appellate levels in both criminal and civil litigation. I have seen a lot of really good people who have events happen in their lives that impact their ability to continue practicing. So there are no guarantees no matter what your background is. My main point is that everyone ultimately should be judged on their own merit, character, and desire to serve. So the old process of contacting peers had much value. It’s a shame that this part of the process was lost. I would think that whatever your peers had to say about you would be the most valuable indicator of whether or not you would be successful in this particular position.

[bettrlatethannevr]

I answered it this week and would encourage others to do the same. It took me about 45 minutes, and it seemed detailed and relevant enough to provide useful information for the next go-round.

[arkstfan]

All litigation experience isn't created equal. I know lawyers who spend months or years preparing one case. That experience is nearly worthless for an SSA ALJ.

A misdemeanor court DA or public defender turning a high volume of quick trials would likely adjust very easily.

[workdrone]

Jan 21, 2012 13:27:15 GMT -5 arkstfan said:

All litigation experience isn't created equal. I know lawyers who spend months or years preparing one case. That experience is nearly worthless for an SSA ALJ.

A misdemeanor court DA or public defender turning a high volume of quick trials would likely adjust very easily.

Concur. From my time with the Agency, I can say that some of the ALJs who have the hardest time adjusting are the ones who did low volume complex cases.

SSA is all about high volume, speedy adjudication. So those guys/gals have a very difficult time adjusting to this practice. The ones who fit right in are the folks who have no problem "turning a high volume of quick trials" as you aptly put it.

[usnjudge]

I have looked on the last several comments with great interest and agree with some and not others. It has been my impression having been retired for nearly a year now that JAGs are viewed in the non-Federal service job market as something as a novelty. Perhaps having read the above, maybe in Federal service too.

I don't believe a lot of potential firms or employers really understand the vast amount of experience in myriad venues that JAGs, from all the services, actually possess or assimilate over their military careers. The JAG Corps of any service is highly competitive such as any law firm in any jurisdiction. Not better mind you, but different. I think career JAGs bring more than just legal expertise to the table; they bring dedication, committment and a keen sense of mission accomplishment. While this is a generalization (I do know retired JAGs that don't fit this bill too), I find it to be a valid and sound observation. Agilitymom and arksfan nailed it though IMHO.

Factfinder - I agree with you too...I know a lot of my former brethren now sitting as ALJs - I am guessing that they are outstanding. I hope this helps me when it comes to this impending cert. By the by - 34 years active duty military with 28+ in JAG Corps, 10+ as a military judge.

[bartleby]

Our Chief Judge has said she thinks 2 1/2 hours is adequate to review, order development, re-review, develop pertinent questions for the hearing, develop RFC's, have a non-adversarial hearing, wait for post development to come in, re-review material in order to write instructions, edit the decision, and close the case. Average cases 300-500 pages of evidence. Hearing 1 to occasionally 2 hours. She has been expecting 500-700 cases a year and is now asking for a 10% increase by asking for an additional 5 cases each month.. Even pay cases are now being reviewed for quality. All of the cases we hear are the tougher ones. The obvious are paid at the lower level.. Most all ALJ's take off 5-6 weeks a year for Fed. holidays and vacation/sick leave. Some locations pay $118,000.00 a year. I don't know an ALJ that doesn't work extra hours/weekends and isn't exhausted when they leave the office. Please give real consideration prior to leaping into this position.

[workdrone]

Bart,

Try not to scare ppl off. It's a tough gig but nowhere near as bad as you're claiming. If you're really holding 1-2 hours hearings all the time instead of 45 min on average, you deserve all the extra hours you are working. ;-)

[bartleby]

My hearings are normally 1 hour with an occassional longer one as noted. I have done nothing but present the facts. I enjoy the job, but it wasn't what I thought it was going to be. People considering this position should realize the pressures they are expected to function under. It appears the pressures are mounting as time goes by. This should be a real consideration..

[factfinder]

I am with Bartleby on this.

Spend around an hour for the hearing, an hour to prep - at the least, time to do instructions, time to review decision (especially denial of benefits) and any other kind of post-hearing development and 2.5 hours is a joke. This does not even account for VA records cases or dual mental and physical cases or decision writers who do a poor job. 500 cases per year requires constant sustained effort (and lots of no shows) and now that they are reviewing the favorables, who knows? IMHO, any chief who wants this all done in 2.5 hours is no different from the clowns that let Huntsville happen. From a cost benefit ratio, ALJs should takes lots of time and deny more. I do not buy a 58% favorable rate based upon what I have seen. I am sure others have different opinions, but in my book, the emperor has no clothes on this one.

[onepingonly]

The ALJ position (at SSA at least) inherently involves high volume, simply by virtue of the sheer size of the backlog and the rate of new applications. This is the nature of the job. If there weren't around three quarters of a million people trying to get disability benefits, of whom, by any rational account, a significant percentage are actually entitled to such benefits, it would be a different story. Making momentous decisions in a few hours, hundreds of times a year, under imperfect conditions, is challenging. I've had easier jobs, but I've also had much harder ones, where the stakes were higher, the time-frames were much shorter, and the working conditions were much worse. I greatly enjoy the job, and I'm very grateful to have it.