|
Post by privateatty on Mar 19, 2013 21:14:14 GMT -5
Does anyone know whether it is possible to bypass working for SSA and go straight to being an ALJ for an agency that does adversarial proceedings like the ITC, FTC, etc? What are the factors? Also, it doesn't seem like there are very many who move from biglaw to being an ALJ. So there must be a good reason for that. There are only three Agencies that hire off the Register: SSA, OMHA and Labor. The latter not so much (like one or two a year if that), OMHA maybe a few a year. All the rest of the Agencies will hire (you've seen the USAJobs announcements) if you are a sitting or retired fed. ALJ. And of course the caveat being that you had to have had some serious trial work under your belt because the hiring Agency expects you to perform like you are an Art. III trial judge. This is why we have (and I include OPM here) this concern about litigation vs. administrative work and what the latter may mean in reference to the former. Those ALJs that were consulted by OPM voiced concern on this issue of "transferability" and OPM decided to be Solomon-like in their approach.
|
|
|
Post by arkstfan on Mar 20, 2013 12:08:40 GMT -5
Question for current ALJs or those who know what being an ALJ is like: Is it worth it? I applied for the ALJ exam today. I'm an 8th year litigation associate billing 2400 hours/yr at a big law firm making about $350k (with bonus) with a decent shot (75%-90%) of making partner in the next 1-4 years. For me, my job is barely tolerable and I look down the road feeling like I will waste my life away if I stay in big law kissing up to partners, then later kissing up to clients 60-80 hours per week. What I would really like to do is become an Article III judge someday, or a state court judge, but that is even more of a lottery than an ALJ. I've read mixed reports on this forum about the quality of life of an ALJ, the hours, the excitement/tediousness of the job, etc. If being an ALJ is merely a "tolerable" job, then I'm probably better off sticking with the big law firm gig until I win the Article III judge lottery. What do you think? If you have your eyes on an Article III gig, stay as far away from the ALJ position as you can. Being an SSA ALJ bears little resemblence and you are barred from political activities that can win you the support needed to get an appointment. I absolutely love the job. Don't get me wrong there are days I go home angry or frustrated. I award benefits to people I don't like, I deny them to very appealing sad people who need a break in life but are otherwise able to work. If you do not fit, you do not get. I find most of the people fascinating. I listen to their stories and some are shooting it straight and some are full of bull, but they deserve their day to tell their story. If you have a bit of Sheriff Taylor in you, it is a tough job to beat. There is no real pressure except that you impose on yourself. For me that pressure is to try to read every bit evidence in the amount of time I have and then listen to the testimony in light of it. You aren't called upon to be a star litigator and shred the testimony of the claimant but you aren't here to take their statements at face value either. I get the impression from your posts that you are frustrated with your job, but that doesn't equal this job being right for you either. My impression (and that's all it is) is that you would likely be unhappy here as well. It's not as sexy or prestigous as being a District Court Judge. The money is nice for most people out there humping it but you'll have to wait 7 years just approach half of what you are making now and you can forget a District Court gig.
|
|
|
Post by elmerfuddgantry on Mar 20, 2013 20:35:43 GMT -5
I believe that to be true although I haven't seen it written down anywhere as formal policy.
The federal agency where I work has a statutorily-created lower-level grade of hearings examiner. The examiners issue decisions carrying the same weight as those of ALJs. The examiners conduct formal hearings on the record. Their decisions are appealed through the same channels. They have the same job (at our agency) as the ALJs, lacking only the pay and status. They work side-by-side with ALJs but don’t cost as much, which is why I think the agency lobbied to get them.
Several of those examiners, who had *thousands* of hearings under their belts and *tons* of subject-matter expertise, made it onto the old register. The agency refused to hire them off the register, insisting that they "do their time" at ODAR because we only hire "experienced" ALJs.
|
|
|
Post by privateatty on Mar 21, 2013 6:40:34 GMT -5
I believe that to be true although I haven't seen it written down anywhere as formal policy. The federal agency where I work has a statutorily-created lower-level grade of hearings examiner. The examiners issue decisions carrying the same weight as those of ALJs. The examiners conduct formal hearings on the record. Their decisions are appealed through the same channels. They have the same job (at our agency) as the ALJs, lacking only the pay and status. They work side-by-side with ALJs but don’t cost as much, which is why I think the agency lobbied to get them. Several of those examiners, who had *thousands* of hearings under their belts and *tons* of subject-matter expertise, made it onto the old register. The agency refused to hire them off the register, insisting that they "do their time" at ODAR because we only hire "experienced" ALJs. These non-SSA agencies who hire off the Register require a cert from OPM. These candidates have to have a 80+ score to be considered. But it is true that the vast majority of agencies would never hire off the Register for the simple reason that they have way too much to lose in employing an ALJ who could later embarass them or be a dud. Hiring off the Register is a "last resort" if after advertising the job in USAJobs there are not enough applicants. Only the agencies I mentioned have had that problem.
|
|
|
Post by hamster on Mar 21, 2013 16:57:09 GMT -5
I suspect what he means is that agencies which have relatively few ALJs would rather hire a current ALJ away from an agency like the Social Security Administration, which has 1400 ALJs or so. That is, you can "poach" a seasoned ALJ from a different agency instead of rolling the dice on a newbie from the register.
Hamster
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 21, 2013 17:08:53 GMT -5
Are you saying that some agencies hire ALJs straight from USA Jobs and not off the register? My reading of the law is that all agencies that are required by statute to hold hearings "on the record" are required to hire an ALJ to hold those hearings by either hiring an existing ALJ or hiring off of the Register. Is that not correct? There are plenty of agencies (MSPB, EECO, Immigration))that hold hearing that are on the record those hearings are held by AJs and Hearing officers. I do not know what hearing requires an ALJ though.
|
|
|
Post by privateatty on Mar 21, 2013 21:30:50 GMT -5
Are you saying that some agencies hire ALJs straight from USA Jobs and not off the register? My reading of the law is that all agencies that are required by statute to hold hearings "on the record" are required to hire an ALJ to hold those hearings by either hiring an existing ALJ or hiring off of the Register. Is that not correct? There are plenty of agencies (MSPB, EECO, Immigration))that hold hearing that are on the record those hearings are held by AJs and Hearing officers. I do not know what hearing requires an ALJ though. Those that do APA Hearings by Statute or Rule. The fact that an Agency may do a Hearing under the APA without an ALJ should be a concern to all of us, IMHO. This is not to denigrate any AJ or Hearing Officer. They do excellant work. But they do not have the protections of the APA and for that reason alone the Agency has the upper hand. This is a huge issue in some Agencies.
|
|
|
Post by elmerfuddgantry on Mar 22, 2013 11:29:37 GMT -5
What my agency does is post an opening on USA Jobs that limits applicants to current or retired federal ALJs. I guess that could be considered "not hiring off the register" or "poaching" from other agencies, mainly ODAR.
I agree 100%. The hearings examiners I referred to in my earlier post are de facto ALJs without the protections. The agency director keeps a tight leash on them because they remain "excepted service" employees subject to termination at will. They have large decision quotas openly imposed and little latitude to rule contrary to agency policy. There's probably a lawsuit in there somewhere but I'm sure there are enough loopholes in interpretation of the APA and other statutes that the agency feels it could prevail. I certainly could not afford to sue on my salary, but it seems like a blatant attempt to avoid hiring ALJs to conduct APA hearings.
|
|
|
Post by privateatty on Mar 22, 2013 21:11:46 GMT -5
I suspect what he means is that agencies which have relatively few ALJs would rather hire a current ALJ away from an agency like the Social Security Administration, which has 1400 ALJs or so. That is, you can "poach" a seasoned ALJ from a different agency instead of rolling the dice on a newbie from the register. Hamster Exactly, except while SSA sees it as "poaching", the transfering ALJ sees it as career change. Gosh knows there's a lot of precedence for this.
|
|
|
Post by hamster on Mar 23, 2013 16:28:35 GMT -5
Well, I for one hoped to be appointed to the United States Supreme Court by now. Regrettably, that has not yet materialized (but Mr. President, if you're reading this thread, I am still available). In the meantime, until the President does give me a call, being an ALJ is pretty good. No complaints.
|
|
|
Post by adjudic8r on Apr 5, 2013 6:18:47 GMT -5
Best of luck to you (and everyone else) in the process!
|
|
|
Post by counsel on Apr 6, 2013 21:29:49 GMT -5
After reviewing all of the great comments above, I think I will continue with the application process for the fun of it, and if I happen to come out on top and get an offer with SSA (assuming no other agency hires me) in a city that my wife will agree to move to, I will take it. This is a great attitude for anyone. Jump through the hoops and see where you land. There are people who take the position and leave after a year, it is not for everyone. I suspect they are better lawyers for the experience. And, you are unlikely to experience anything like this OPM hiring process anywhere else.
|
|
|
Post by judgeallan on Apr 15, 2013 16:16:29 GMT -5
Good to read this thread as I'm a newbie here, arriving today. I spent most of my career as corporate counsel and became a state ALJ 13 years ago. My state work is very varied and interesting: electric, gas, water and telecommunications utilities and maritime pilots and involves disciplines of economics, law, technology, science and public policy. But I have to commute a hundred miles roundtrip daily and I don't get the last word on my decisions, since I operate upon delegated authority from the state commissions and boards.
SSA work would be very different; more people-oriented and probably less intellectually demanding, just as it would vary from private practice in the same respect.
|
|
|
Post by Unknown on Apr 15, 2013 16:38:18 GMT -5
Oh my. I'm sorry if you think the job will be less intellectually demanding. Those of us who have been working in this area of law 12 to 15 hours a day for fifteen years or more, and then had to wait seven years just to get the application in would most definitely disagree. Many of us have helped make the legal authority which is used to regulate the decision making process used by the administration. Quite intellectually demanding actually.
|
|
|
Post by judgeallan on Apr 15, 2013 17:00:54 GMT -5
Quite intellectually demanding actually. Great to hear that. I was just asking based upon comments I had read in this and other threads.
|
|
|
Post by onepingonly on Apr 15, 2013 17:20:47 GMT -5
The best way to find out if you will enjoy the ALJ job is to enlist in the military and become a JAG. If you succeed at that and enjoy it, you would probably also enjoy the ALJ job, or you might enjoy being a JAG so much that you don't want to leave it. Either way, your children will have reason to be proud of your service. Semper Fi!
|
|
|
Post by judgeallan on Apr 15, 2013 17:46:35 GMT -5
The best way to find out if you will enjoy the ALJ job is to enlist in the military and become a JAG. If you succeed at that and enjoy it, you would probably also enjoy the ALJ job, or you might enjoy being a JAG so much that you don't want to leave it. Either way, your children will have reason to be proud of your service. Semper Fi! Given my current age, if I were anything less than a brigadier general or a rear admiral, I'd have been kicked out already.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2013 22:30:19 GMT -5
Good to read this thread as I'm a newbie here, arriving today. I spent most of my career as corporate counsel and became a state ALJ 13 years ago. My state work is very varied and interesting: electric, gas, water and telecommunications utilities and maritime pilots and involves disciplines of economics, law, technology, science and public policy. But I have to commute a hundred miles roundtrip daily and I don't get the last word on my decisions, since I operate upon delegated authority from the state commissions and boards. SSA work would be very different; more people-oriented and probably less intellectually demanding, just as it would vary from private practice in the same respect. I speak from personal experience in the couple of years that I worked at SSA as and AA. My intent is not to put down the ALJ job, it is a great job, pays well and you do important work. I am certainty interested in the job now that I am looking at retiring in the next few years. The job has perks, you drive your own docket, work at home can go slow one day and bust your butt the next to catch up. You get the prestige of being a judge and are paid significantly more than most State Court Trial Judges. Having said that. in my opinion, the work of an ALJ at SSA is not as intellectually challenging as other places for two reasons: 1) is the harried review of the medical record that you have to do in order to meet the production expectations 2) all you do day in and day out for the most part is review medical records 3) The regulations are not that difficult to learn and then apply to the case--in some cases the decisions are made for you with the so called "grid" rules that automatically disable certain individuals. The files I used to get had the same doctors in the area that were part of the disability industry that had grown to meet the need of SSDI claimants. The stuff was so repetitive that to stimulate myself mentally I would predict what the doctor's opinion would be and many times I hit the nail on the head--the stuff was very repetitive. I did learn a ton about medical terminology and medical records with the majority of them being for muscle skeletal limitations. Talking to folks to discuss novel approaches to cases was not encouraged were I worked, talking meant time away from the file and less cases you would write. The computer template was used for most of the opinions. I used to listen to the 20-30 minutes of the hearing that was held for every case I wrote and it was repetitive in nature for the most part with the majority folks saying they could not do anything for themselves to include their activities of daily living. But like I said, the ALJ job is a very good job, especially if you know what you are getting into. The pay is what SES' get.
|
|
|
Post by goodoleboy47 on Apr 16, 2013 9:29:16 GMT -5
Got to chime in here. The work as an ALJ at one time was intellectually challenging and definately still is for non-SSA newbies. Lots to learn with the med terminology, regs and the many spin-off rules that SSA creates. In our current environment, after the first years, it is simply a race to some abstract goal established by someone, somewhere for some reason. No time to delve into the record and really do a thorough job like you and I did for many years of practice before becoming an ALJ. It is more like prosecuting cases in the state misdeameanor court where you don't even have time to interview witnesses before you're picking a jury for the next case. The system has become a routine exercise in a futile attempt at following your oath. You have no time to be intellectual. Just have to do what you have time to do and move on to the next case. What we do is not rocket science. It is pick-up-sticks against a stop watch.
|
|
|
Post by judgeallan on Apr 16, 2013 10:52:46 GMT -5
Thanks, exafjag and goodoleboy47. I really appreciate the perspective. It reminds me of the old adage "Be careful what you wish for, because you may get it."
|
|