|
|
Post by moopigsdad on Dec 9, 2013 12:48:34 GMT -5
Has any ALJ experienced the new training being done by SSA OGC, in coordination with the AC, with the intent to increase Federal court affirmation rates of ALJ decisions and decrease Federal court remands in Regions II or Region V? It is my understanding that this training is occurring due to some larger numbers of ALJ decisions (affirmed by the AC) being overturned by the Federal courts. How extensive is the training and how are you being trained to make and write decisions differently?
|
|
|
|
Post by decadealj on Dec 9, 2013 13:44:10 GMT -5
Amazing- I don't anticipate the Federal courts deferring to the AC's interpretation of the law but then again SSA OGC has never had a lot of respect from the courts. If the "training" (always reference the SSRs and SSA policy, not case law) is anything like we used to get occasionally from visiting OGC attorneys, it will be another self-inflicted wound.
|
|
|
|
Post by moopigsdad on Dec 9, 2013 15:19:59 GMT -5
Amazing- I don't anticipate the Federal courts deferring to the AC's interpretation of the law but then again SSA OGC has never had a lot of respect from the courts. If the "training" (always reference the SSRs and SSA policy, not case law) is anything like we used to get occasionally from visiting OGC attorneys, it will be another self-inflicted wound. Evidently, the SSA OGC and AC have met with Federal District Court in the Eastern District of Wisconsin explaining the fact that the court fails to follow the normal decision-making procedures of the rest of the Federal District Courts and is therefore an "outlier" when it comes to overturning ALJ decisions. I don't know how this went over with the members of the court, but "supposedly" there was a meeting. |
|
|
|
Post by maquereau on Dec 9, 2013 17:31:43 GMT -5
I think there is substantial variance in the rate of district court affirmation of SSA decisions across the country. I have yet to see a perfect decision leave ODAR and there are minute points on which most decisions could be returned, I suppose. But different courts have different screening methods and different clerks who do the screening. I have worked in offices where district court agreement is over 90% and in offices where the district court agrees less than half the time. And there can be qualitative differences in the products of the different ODAR locations.
|
|
|
|
Post by privateatty on Dec 9, 2013 17:55:11 GMT -5
Amazing- I don't anticipate the Federal courts deferring to the AC's interpretation of the law but then again SSA OGC has never had a lot of respect from the courts. If the "training" (always reference the SSRs and SSA policy, not case law) is anything like we used to get occasionally from visiting OGC attorneys, it will be another self-inflicted wound. Evidently, the SSA OGC and AC have met with Federal District Court in the Eastern District of Wisconsin explaining the fact that the court fails to follow the normal decision-making procedures of the rest of the Federal District Courts and is therefore an "outlier" when it comes to overturning ALJ decisions. I don't know how this went over with the members of the court, but "supposedly" there was a meeting. That's truly funny. |
|
|
|
Post by counsel on Dec 13, 2013 8:49:38 GMT -5
And there can be qualitative differences in the products of the different ODAR locations. I heard the Wisconsin meeting was because of the quality of decisions coming out of the local office. I guess each side puts its own spin on it. |
|
|
|
Post by bartleby on Dec 13, 2013 11:03:27 GMT -5
There is also a difference in how Regions do things. One Region does not use Vocational Experts. One Region uses a lot of Medical Experts. Another Region discourages the use of Medical Experts. Some offices adhere to eBP (electronic Business Procees). Some basically ignore it. This leads to claimants mailing in change of addresses and them not being changed in the file and then the claimant being dismissed for no show. That is just a blatant example of the things that fall through the crack when an office pushes numbers instead of quality. Another is when staff doesn't properly handle a request to dismiss the request for hearing and a valuable hearing slot is wasted when the Judge notices it the week or day before the hearing. Or a Dire need request is not acted upon and someone loses their home. A lot of the problems in decisions and processing are not the Judges doing, but when they get to the Fed. It all looks like it's the Judges fault. If you think it is bad now, just wait, if we don't get the new Position Description changed we will have no control over anything..
|
|
|
|
Post by sandiferhands (old) on Dec 13, 2013 11:26:41 GMT -5
Evidently, the SSA OGC and AC have met with Federal District Court in the Eastern District of Wisconsin explaining the fact that the court fails to follow the normal decision-making procedures of the rest of the Federal District Courts .... I don't know how this went over with the members of the court... Of course, I wasn't there, either. But, based upon my experience with district courts, I think I have a pretty good idea of how this went over ... |
|
|
|
Post by privateatty on Dec 13, 2013 14:16:21 GMT -5
We are getting two wildly different views on this Meeting. I thought it was funny that SSA/ODAR/OGC would meet with the USDC unless this was a one-way street. Once it became two-way I would think the door would have a magnetic pull. "...explaining the fact that the court fails to follow the normal decision-making procedures of the rest of the Federal District Courts...". I guess this level of arrogance is the next step from ingoring the doctrine of stare decisis and the very existence of any ART. III Federal Court in the decisions. Coupled with the bald assertion that the APA doesn't apply to SSA, why not have "properly trained" supervisors hear cases and write decisions? Heck, you don't have to be a lawyer to be a hearing officer--just look at some states. |
|
|
|
Post by lildavey on Dec 13, 2013 14:59:06 GMT -5
I would have liked to have been a fly on the wall for THAT ONE.
|
|
