|
Post by Administrator ALJ on Jul 1, 2013 15:46:55 GMT -5
After reading the testimony from last week's subcommittee hearing, I'm a little nervous about this (relatively) new policy of SSA allowing or even encouraging claimant allegations against the ALJs. It's not claims of bias that concern me. Bias and discrimination should be rooted out. This nebulous concept of "misconduct," on the other hand, is a bit harder to swallow. The term lends itself to use by claimants simply upset with an unfavorable ruling. Do current ALJs have some idea of what the agency will consider a "serious" complaint of misconduct or do the ALJs live in fear that one day they will rule against the wrong claimant or incur the wrath of a particularly venomous rep?
|
|
|
Post by Administrator ALJ on Jul 1, 2013 15:47:27 GMT -5
And I should point out, I'm not talking about Daugherty-ish misconduct.
|
|
|
Post by trekker on Jul 1, 2013 20:07:24 GMT -5
After being a representative at countless hearings and hearing the complaints about lazy reps on this forum and elsewhere for many years, I can tell you there are only a handful of complaints I would have filed regarding judicial misconduct. Erring on the side of respect for all of the ALJ's I respected, I only filed two complaints. Both were deserved. Both ALJ's were way out of line in their badgering and disrespect towards the young claimant and one was disrespectful to a non-English speaker. While I would file countless AC Review of Hearing Decision appeals, that was not based on judicial misconduct but rather a misunderstanding of the facts and the law. The vast majority of ALJ's were at least polite if not respectful. I believe I learned to be a better representative from those ALJ's who were respectful to my less than ideal clients.
|
|
|
Post by deltajudge on Jul 1, 2013 20:53:59 GMT -5
8-)It's all on tape, and now I suppose, on video.
|
|
|
Post by usnjudge on Jul 2, 2013 8:45:22 GMT -5
From what its worth department:
I neither fear or expect a complaint but I plan for the worse and expect the best. I have insurance; its cheap and keeps mama bear happy as she fears that we would dissipate our meager wealth defending that which I believe is unassailable. But, for a few bucks, there is peace in the valley. A fellow trial court judge told me years ago, and I have adopted this philosophy. While I most likely misquote the late Winston Churchill, I offer the sentiment: “When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.”
Being a nasty SOB, vindictive, condescending, abusive, corrective, holier than thou (add your favorite bad trait here) gains nothing for the hearing, the claimant, or the process.
And in closing, as another great philosopher Sgt. Hulka would say, “lighten up Francis”.
|
|
|
Post by spirit on Jul 2, 2013 8:50:36 GMT -5
usnjudge, where did you obtain insurance? I had always carried malpractice insurance as an attorney, but was not aware it was available for the Judiciary. Thanks
|
|
|
Post by bartleby on Jul 2, 2013 9:33:41 GMT -5
This is one of the ones recommended by the Union: Career Guard from Mass Benefits
It is fairly inexpensive for what you get..
|
|
|
Post by Administrator ALJ on Jul 2, 2013 10:07:17 GMT -5
Thanks all for the information. As a state ALJ, I can't be sued personally for actions I've taken in my official capacity. Thus, I don't carry insurance.
Trekker, you mentioned complaints against judges whose behavior/conduct was disrespectful to the claimants. Without revealing judge or claimant, can you give general examples (you mentioned badgering, I think)?
For privacy reasons, these records typically don't become public unless they enter the lawsuit stage. So, unless you're an insider (which I'm not) and have actual knowledge of the circumstances giving rise to the complaint (which I don't), you will remain in the dark as to what the agency is looking for in a bona fide complaint.
Just wondering what I'm getting myself into... Any additional information would be helpful.
|
|
|
Post by bartleby on Jul 2, 2013 10:32:08 GMT -5
The examples I have seen, pointing out that smoking may not be good for their health (this makes them feel bad); when their earnings record shows that they have not had any earnings in 15 years and you ask what they have been living on (this makes them feel bad); asking why their earnings record shows earnings each year and they profess that it isn't their earnings and then having the gall to suggest perhaps they filed accidently to acquire earned income (this makes them feel bad); asking how long and why they were in prison (this makes them feel bad); asking how many others in their house are on disability (this makes them feel bad); asking them when they quit drinking or abusing drugs as the record is full of evidence (this makes them feel bad); asking them why they have not been seeking any medical care (this makes them feel bad); ie. basically everything that you need to do your job and anything that could make them feel bad while you are doing it... We are non-adverserial, we are to protect the trust fund, we are to determine the truth, unless it makes them feel bad... The beauty of it is that management encourages them to file complaints when they feel bad.. Kind of like a Catch 22???
|
|
|
Post by moopigsdad on Jul 2, 2013 10:40:23 GMT -5
The examples I have seen, pointing out that smoking may not be good for their health (this makes them feel bad); when their earnings record shows that they have not had any earnings in 15 years and you ask what they have been living on (this makes them feel bad); asking why their earnings record shows earnings each year and they profess that it isn't their earnings and then having the gall to suggest perhaps they filed accidently to acquire earned income (this makes them feel bad); asking how long and why they were in prison (this makes them feel bad); asking how many others in their house are on disability (this makes them feel bad); asking them when they quit drinking or abusing drugs as the record is full of evidence (this makes them feel bad); asking them why they have not been seeking any medical care (this makes them feel bad); ie. basically everything that you need to do your job and anything that could make them feel bad while you are doing it... We are non-adverserial, we are to protect the trust fund, we are to determine the truth, unless it makes them feel bad... The beauty of it is that management encourages them to file complaints when they feel bad.. Kind of like a Catch 22??? Now, Bartleby your post above "made me feel bad" about the ALJ position. LOL! Some people will always feel bad no matter what you say. There is nothing you can do about that fact.
|
|
|
Post by decadealj on Jul 2, 2013 10:40:55 GMT -5
I can't remember the cite but there is a Supreme Court decision finding ALJs have limited immunity from suit. Don't read it because it compares ALJs to other federal trial judges and may give you the impression you have more authority than SSA permits you, i.e. the APA. The problem is of course, will the government defend you and the government's first defense is often to leave you hanging. As for misconduct complaints, I had two both from unrepped claimants who viewed my courtesy as an indication I was sympathetic and would pay their case. The HOLCALJ reviewed the tapes and sent a "no basis" response to region and that was the end of that.
|
|
|
Post by Administrator ALJ on Jul 2, 2013 11:58:53 GMT -5
The examples I have seen, pointing out that smoking may not be good for their health (this makes them feel bad); when their earnings record shows that they have not had any earnings in 15 years and you ask what they have been living on (this makes them feel bad); asking why their earnings record shows earnings each year and they profess that it isn't their earnings and then having the gall to suggest perhaps they filed accidently to acquire earned income (this makes them feel bad); asking how long and why they were in prison (this makes them feel bad); asking how many others in their house are on disability (this makes them feel bad); asking them when they quit drinking or abusing drugs as the record is full of evidence (this makes them feel bad); asking them why they have not been seeking any medical care (this makes them feel bad); ie. basically everything that you need to do your job and anything that could make them feel bad while you are doing it... We are non-adverserial, we are to protect the trust fund, we are to determine the truth, unless it makes them feel bad... The beauty of it is that management encourages them to file complaints when they feel bad.. Kind of like a Catch 22??? Thanks, Bartleby! That's exactly what I've been wondering about. It's a pollution of the system, to be sure, to have one's employer encourage complaints. That's not to say that genuine complaints don't exist. I'm positive they do. However, the situations you describe are worrisome. At least, G-d willing I get an offer, I'll go into the job knowing what I'm up against with management and 13-1p.
|
|
|
Post by Administrator ALJ on Jul 2, 2013 12:08:56 GMT -5
I can't remember the cite but there is a Supreme Court decision finding ALJs have limited immunity from suit. Don't read it because it compares ALJs to other federal trial judges and may give you the impression you have more authority than SSA permits you, i.e. the APA. The problem is of course, will the government defend you and the government's first defense is often to leave you hanging. As for misconduct complaints, I had two both from unrepped claimants who viewed my courtesy as an indication I was sympathetic and would pay their case. The HOLCALJ reviewed the tapes and sent a "no basis" response to region and that was the end of that. Decade, thanks! Your experience with HOCALJ gives me hope. I googled "SSA judges" and "complaints against," and was treated to the disabilityjudges.com website. What a disappointing website. After reading the comments posted by claimants I can honestly say, Decade, you are not the only one this has happened to. Several comments indicate that claimants are sure the ALJ will rule favorably for them since he/she was so nice. Wow! Those who were not so lucky attempt to relitigate the case through a comment. I'm not so delicate that I can't handle such a display, but really? The anonymity of the web strikes again!
|
|
|
Post by bartleby on Jul 2, 2013 12:20:50 GMT -5
Oh, by the way, your address and phone number are also probably on the internet so they will know where to find you. On top of the Agency posting our pay/deny numbers so the public can form opinions as to our fairness, along with our salaries, the Agency also has a new thing called the STOCK Act, which stands for Stop Congress from benefiting in stock purchases through insider knowledge. Guess who immediately gave themselves a waiver to the STOCK Act, yep, Congress. Now with the stock Act, you get to complete forms for every month you or your spouse have more than $1,000.00 in stock transactions and other personal holdings. These were supposed to be posted to the internet for the public, but so far, legal action has kept them from doing so, although that may change with the future. For one of the ALJ's, this cost him over $700.00 to get an accountant to prepare for him and an additional $300.00 a month to add to it. Certain Agencies have received waivers on this, Congress, IRS, CIA, and almost everybody but SSA ALJ's. We are such a soft target..
|
|
|
Post by sealaw90 on Jul 2, 2013 14:24:28 GMT -5
Bartleby, are you referring to to filing out the OGE 450 every year - sometimes known as the Confidential Financial Disclosure form? Why would those ever be releasable to the public - I have submitted those forms for two agencies and they would never release them. If it is another form, do you know the Form number? I'd like to research this issue. Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by bartleby on Jul 2, 2013 15:37:14 GMT -5
Here ya go..
We are required to post the 2012 OGE Forms 278 and 278-T to the agency website unless, prior to April 15, 2013, Congress takes action to again delay the posting requirement of the STOCK Act. We will provide you an update regarding posting prior to April 15, 2013.
We are under a temporary waiver for posting on line, but that may very well change any time..
|
|
|
Post by trekker on Jul 2, 2013 16:16:42 GMT -5
I would have to admit that none of the examples listed by Judge Bartleby would result in me wanting to file a judicial complaint. In fact, the list is one that I counsel claimants to expect and to honestly answer. Again, I believe in dealing with my clients' faults up front. If I pick up on a "problem" such as COPD and continued smoking by the claimant or no income but a Bill Gates lifestyle (over exaggeration on my part), then I know 99% of the judges are going to pick up on it as well. I would add to the list the nitpicking my client about which bridge/overpass/woods he or she lives under or in. My limited complaints were directed to questioning over a prolonged period (2+ hours for a hearing) that left very fragile claimants in a catatonic state. In both cases, the judge continually berated the client and called him/her a liar. And these were very fragile claimants who did nothing to bring on the insults and barrage of questioning. I have also been in hearings when a judge beats up on a VE who is testifying from the start that there are no jobs the claimant can do. And it is rare that any VE will find no job from the initial hypo. But this is my humble opinion. I was a teacher in a previous career so I know that the excuses and stories people tell are sometimes just too good to be true.
|
|
|
Post by mcb on Jul 2, 2013 16:17:59 GMT -5
Being a nasty SOB, vindictive, condescending, abusive, corrective, holier than thou ( add your favorite bad trait here) gains nothing for the hearing, the claimant, or the process. Arrogant! Flip!
...and some ALJs do get a reputation for being unpleasant (or holding unpleasant hearings).
|
|
|
Post by lurker/dibs on Jul 2, 2013 16:39:31 GMT -5
As a rep for many years before many ALJ's, a few of which I had very little respect for, I have only filed one complaint against an ALJ. In that particular circumstance I filed a complaint against the judge after multiple hearings before him/her, giving him/her the benefit of the doubt after the first, then the second, then the third. On each occasion he/she refused to allow my client to testify, in fact not even swearing him/her in to testify, did not swear in or allow the vocational expert to testify, and questioned my competence as a lawyer/representative. The final "straw" was when he/she stated to a particular client, "There is no way I am paying a claimant who wants to do nothing but sit on his a-- and smoke weed all day" in a case where marijuana was not even in the medical records or at issue. This was stated in front of the claimant (FSIQ 68) and on the record. He/she further argued that I was incompetent in that I would even waste his time bringing such a case to hearing. Note: luckily the exchange was on the record and the AC remanded to a different ALJ. I can handle most judges in most situations. But there are times when a judge is completely out of line. Getting ones feelings hurt is a ridiculous reason to file a complaint. However, there are instances where a complaint is warranted. In this particular case the ALJ, thankfully, retired shortly after I filed the complaint and I believe multiple complaints had previously been filed.
|
|
|
Post by deltajudge on Jul 2, 2013 18:45:26 GMT -5
8-)When I first began my career as an ALJ, I listened to everybody, especially the older ALJs, not only were they entertaining, but very informative. One of the first things I was advised not to do, was list my phone number in the phone book, not only was your number there, so was your address. So I took their advice, and always had a non-published number. I know things are different now.
|
|