|
Post by peterprinciple on Apr 4, 2014 13:46:27 GMT -5
Ok thanks to Baglady and OK1956 I have managed to get this ready. I double checked my GAL against it to try test it but the data is what the data is. There may be an ODAR office that does not appear on the list if so it is a satellite office and ODAR doesn't list it in their data for number of judges per office. The break down for Number of judges per office versus people requesting transfers in or out is on Sheet 1 of the workbook. Happy data mining. Also the ALJ office numbers are courtesy of this website: www.ssa.gov/appeals/DataSets/03_ALJ_Disposition_Data.htmlI didn't look through Gaidan's entire list, but I did look at a few cities and, of course, the city to which I'm stationed. I offer a small caveat when viewing this list. The SSA dataset for ALJ dispositions shows the names of all the judges that have worked at a given location, to date, since the beginning of the fiscal year (FY), without noting judges that have left or indicating judges that just came on board. That means that, if a 12-judge office started the FY with only 10 judges and has only lost, but not regained judges, you will see 10 names, but not the 12 and not the number currently in the office. You will not know how many judge positions actually exist in that office and likely will not be able to ascertain the # of vacancies. By contrast, if a 12 judge office starts the FY with 12 and 5 have retired and now 4 have transferred in, the dataset will show 16 judges for an office with actual space for only 12. Example: I work in West Highly Desirable. The SSA Disposition dataset lists the names of 14 judges for this city (where we started the FY), but we are a 16 judge office. We've had two retirements since FY's beginning (one more next month) and so we have 4 vacancies (soon to be 5). Looking at the datatset names, alone, will give you the impression we're a 14 judge office and no idea as to # of vacancies.
|
|
|
Post by Gaidin on Apr 4, 2014 14:20:53 GMT -5
Ok thanks to Baglady and OK1956 I have managed to get this ready. I double checked my GAL against it to try test it but the data is what the data is. There may be an ODAR office that does not appear on the list if so it is a satellite office and ODAR doesn't list it in their data for number of judges per office. The break down for Number of judges per office versus people requesting transfers in or out is on Sheet 1 of the workbook. Happy data mining. Also the ALJ office numbers are courtesy of this website: www.ssa.gov/appeals/DataSets/03_ALJ_Disposition_Data.htmlI didn't look through Gaidan's entire list, but I did look at a few cities and, of course, the city to which I'm stationed. I offer a small caveat when viewing this list. The SSA dataset for ALJ dispositions shows the names of all the judges that have worked at a given location, to date, since the beginning of the fiscal year (FY), without noting judges that have left or indicating judges that just came on board. That means that, if a 12-judge office started the FY with only 10 judges and has only lost, but not regained judges, you will see 10 names, but not the 12 and not the number currently in the office. You will not know how many judge positions actually exist in that office and likely will not be able to ascertain the # of vacancies. By contrast, if a 12 judge office starts the FY with 12 and 5 have retired and now 4 have transferred in, the dataset will show 16 judges for an office with actual space for only 12. Example: I work in West Highly Desirable. The SSA Disposition dataset lists the names of 14 judges for this city (where we started the FY), but we are a 16 judge office. We've had two retirements since FY's beginning (one more next month) and so we have 4 vacancies (soon to be 5). Looking at the datatset names, alone, will give you the impression we're a 14 judge office and no idea as to # of vacancies. Peter thanks for that insight. I have to say that I hope West Highly Desirable is on my GAL because it sounds like it might be a possibility for a lucky winner. I also will note that a number of ALJs in the ALJ disposition data set appear in more than one ODAR office. I can only assume that they were serving details or doing video hearings for another office.
|
|
|
Post by aljwatch on Apr 4, 2014 14:28:15 GMT -5
Yes, thanks to Gaidin for compiling this information. Of course there will always be some degree of speculation regarding what cities will actually show up on the Cert, but people can review this list and get a clear picture of what offices are NOT likely to show up on the Cert. Just one tool to pass time awaiting the Cert and (hopefully) narrow down what cities on our own GALs might be there when it eventually is issued.
|
|
|
Post by dpageks on Apr 4, 2014 16:58:09 GMT -5
Sheesh. Looking over this transfer list, I can see that the cities on my GAL are like cemeteries. Everyone's dying to get in! Now if some of those ALJs just retired (died off) you would be all set. LOL! That could happen!
|
|
|
Post by cougarfan on Apr 4, 2014 18:43:10 GMT -5
The April list is out
|
|
|
Post by peterprinciple on Apr 4, 2014 23:18:28 GMT -5
Peter thanks for that insight. I have to say that I hope West Highly Desirable is on my GAL because it sounds like it might be a possibility for a lucky winner. I also will note that a number of ALJs in the ALJ disposition data set appear in more than one ODAR office. I can only assume that they were serving details or doing video hearings for another office. There are a few reasons why one judge's name may be in more than one office. Gaidan is correct with the first one, being that they may do video hearings for another office. The judge gets the tally for those, but so does the originating office. A detail is not likely, as there are not very many these days, and even if another office needs assistance, it also is usually provided through video hearings. The highest producing judge's are often on many offices, because they are sought out to assist, usually within their own region. Another reason may be a temporary workload realignment. I don't keep up with these unless they affect my own workload and they don't happen often. I believe at one time, e.g., Moreno Valley, or some other left coast city, was doing Kansas region cases. Again, both the originating office, and the judge who hears them, get the tally. Makes it look on the dataset like that judge was actually in that office, when they may have not been. The primary reason that one judge's name would be on more than one city is that a transfer occurred for the Judge during that fiscal year.
|
|
|
Post by Malice Aforethought on Apr 5, 2014 17:15:47 GMT -5
Transfers are still happening.
|
|
|
Post by sealaw90 on Jan 7, 2015 9:30:01 GMT -5
For those of you who are wondering where the old information on transfers for 2014 is located . . . thanks again to Peterprinciple for redacting the list and Gaidin and OK1956 and Baglady and everyone else who massaged the list.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeRatty on Jan 7, 2015 10:43:12 GMT -5
For those of you who are wondering where the old information on transfers for 2014 is located . . . thanks again to Peterprinciple for redacting the list and Gaidin and OK1956 and Baglady and everyone else who massaged the list. And with the new intel of Funky's transfer and many others, this list will be of little use other than to tell folks the history of what cities have many requests either way.
|
|
|
Post by gary on Jan 7, 2015 10:45:55 GMT -5
I wonder if they will hold off on the new city emails until they have responses from those being offered transfers.
|
|
|
Post by hopefalj on Jan 7, 2015 10:47:51 GMT -5
For those of you who are wondering where the old information on transfers for 2014 is located . . . thanks again to Peterprinciple for redacting the list and Gaidin and OK1956 and Baglady and everyone else who massaged the list. And with the new intel of Funky's transfer and many others, this list will be of little use other than to tell folks the history of what cities have many requests either way. Plus the list does not contain any of funky's class, which were added in November/December and likely adds names to certain cities.
|
|
|
Post by sealaw90 on Jan 7, 2015 10:56:15 GMT -5
And with the new intel of Funky's transfer and many others, this list will be of little use other than to tell folks the history of what cities have many requests either way. Plus the list does not contain any of funky's class, which were added in November/December and likely adds names to certain cities. Exactly folks - but we've got new people looking on the board, and I wanted to let everyone have the background information that some of us have had the benefit of knowing waaay back in spring of 2014, when we were waiting for the first set of city certs to come out. It is old and obsolete - hence Sandi's pleas for recent updates, and my bump of his request.
|
|
|
Post by Gaidin on Jan 7, 2015 11:26:08 GMT -5
An anonymous tipster has provided me with the transfer. I am working with it a little bit then I will post it. Don't worry it is properly anonymized.
|
|
|
Post by miljudge on Jan 7, 2015 11:30:44 GMT -5
I am sure that alot of factors play a role in it, but on the average, how long does it typically take for a transfer to go through?
|
|
|
Post by hopefalj on Jan 7, 2015 11:52:01 GMT -5
I am sure that alot of factors play a role in it, but on the average, how long does it typically take for a transfer to go through? As you noted, a lot of factors come into play. There are some from the most recent class (August/September 2014) that have already received transfers. There are several hired in 2012 or 2013 that are still waiting. I would plan on being in your current location at least two years, unless you are trying to transfer to one of the offices on the recent certs. You can always hope to get lucky, though.
|
|
|
Post by miljudge on Jan 7, 2015 12:02:51 GMT -5
Thank you, I will plan for the two years, and hope for some luck.
|
|
|
Post by moopigsdad on Jan 7, 2015 12:38:29 GMT -5
Thank you, I will plan for the two years, and hope for some luck. Assuming you want to go back to Wisconsin if I read your name and posts correctly, it may not take quite as long as two years to get there.
|
|
|
Post by miljudge on Jan 7, 2015 12:49:16 GMT -5
Actually, I am looking to go back to upstate NY, Albany preferrably, or even Springfield, MA. Any insight on those locations?
|
|
|
Post by moopigsdad on Jan 7, 2015 12:53:53 GMT -5
Actually, I am looking to go back to upstate NY, Albany preferrably, or even Springfield, MA. Any insight on those locations? Usually the further East you want to go the harder it may be to get there. Then again I don't see a lot of people clamoring for Albany and it's snowy weather.
|
|
|
Post by sealaw90 on Jan 7, 2015 13:08:24 GMT -5
Actually, I am looking to go back to upstate NY, Albany preferrably, or even Springfield, MA. Any insight on those locations? miljudge, From last years transfer list, this is what I had Albany: Want to Leave:1 Want to Go: 3 ALJs in office: 9 Buffalo: Want to leave: 2 Want to Go: 0 ALJs in Office: 14 Rochester: Want to Leave: 1 Want to Go: 1 ALJs in Office: 4 Springfield: Want to Leave: 0 Want to Go: 1 ALJs in office: 7 (plus they have new hires) Syracuse: Want to leave: 0 Want to go: 1 ALJs in Office: 10 Doesn't look good - but things could be totally different in 2015!! People retire, don't want to move, etc. Good luck!
|
|