|
Post by privateatty on Apr 18, 2014 6:54:12 GMT -5
The issue regarding AJ vs. ALJ is really judicial independence. From the Agency perspective its the ability to "control" the AJ and if neccesary fire and/or discipline him/her. Which of course takes us back to the APA. When you come from an atty position and look at the AJ position vs the ALJ position you may think they are very much the same. Once you get on the inside you realize how important the APA is and that the protections afforded to ALJs are worth fighting for. Back in a previous career I practiced immigration law where I had to work with immigration judges. I believe they are AJs. I never noticed any sort of control that any federal agency had over decisions that immigration judges made, nor did I ever hear any complaints by them. They controlled their courtrooms like it was a federal district court and seemed to have that level of power. I don't think any of them would switch to being an SSA ALJ just to get APA protections. But I am just making assumptions that might be wrong. This is just one article, but illustrative: trac.syr.edu/immigration/reports/194/include/side_4.htmlAnd then there was the hiring scandal in the last Administration-surely you remember that?
|
|
|
Post by workdrone on Apr 18, 2014 7:29:58 GMT -5
Fortunately if we don't ratify the new Contract, I think we will fall back under the old Contract which may really be the best solution. I hope you realize that the Agency won most of the adverse articles via the impasse panel, and ratification is not necessary. So even if the remaining provisions are not ratified, the ones we don't like are here to stay. Sometimes, there is no magic wand to make things go back to the way it was, and wishful thinking doesn't help.
|
|
|
Post by privateatty on Apr 18, 2014 16:55:46 GMT -5
I've been an AJ and an ALJ. The pay is different and I had a performance evaluation. The evaluation was based largely on goals which were non-quota quotas - i.e. case closures. Otherwise, I haven't noticed that much of a difference. Interesting--thanks grassgreener. What was the better gig for you? You get to define "better".
|
|
|
Post by minny on Apr 18, 2014 21:20:13 GMT -5
I don't know why sandifer that DOI hires it's staff differently. You would need to contact them to ask why they do not hire off the Register. They don't hire off the register because the AJ is a different job classification than the ALJ one. Why they use the AJ instead of the ALJ position in their offices, who knows. I suspect someone who meets the ALJ requirements would also meet the AJ ones, but an AJ position requires a separate application. The AJs generally handle internal federal administrative business, and do not mix much with the private sector public. In this DOI position it appears they treat the Indian tribes as federal entities for these purposes. I have to agree with pubdef, many of the AJs that I appear before run their hearings more like a federal district court, particularly MSPB, and used to hold their hearings in vacant federal courtrooms before videoconferencing took over during the budget crisis.
|
|
|
Post by minny on Apr 18, 2014 21:28:30 GMT -5
I think that AJ position at DOI sounds great but, alas, not on my limited GAL. Minny it doesn't have to be on your GAL for this present Register, except the only opening for the position is in Arlington, VA. Hence, you would have to move there to accept the position if it is offered to you. It is a position that will be hired not from the newly created OPM Register, but from the all applications submitted from those interested in the position. However, based upon your response, I am assuming you do not wish to work in Arlington, VA. I just wanted to make it clear they will not be hiring from the new Register. mpd, I used the "GAL" a bit loosely there and didn't mean to make it sound like I thought they would pull off the ALJ register. I just can't go to Arlington, VA for any job at this point.
|
|
|
Post by jigjigjig on Apr 18, 2014 22:52:39 GMT -5
I've been an AJ and an ALJ. The pay is different and I had a performance evaluation. The evaluation was based largely on goals which were non-quota quotas - i.e. case closures. Otherwise, I haven't noticed that much of a difference. Grass greener, did you switch from AJ to ALJ or vice versa? What attracted you to one over the other? Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by sealaw90 on Apr 21, 2014 16:05:37 GMT -5
Contrary to many sitting aljs' post, an alj job at Odar is great if you are a hard worker, hold hearings and issue timely and quality decisions. If you took a job as aj and you were not a hard worker, did not hold enough hearings and/or did not issue timely and quality decisions, the agency will document you, suspend you and then remove you from federal service in about 6 months to a year. If that same individual was alj rather than aj, the removal process will take 3 years or more. As an alj at Odar and to fall into that removal process, you have to be pretty bad, ie issue less than 200 cases a year or you totally discard all policies. Odar will initiate a worst offender to remove and others will have to wait in line ie many many year. Now many benefits as alj at Odar. Odar gets a lot money from congress compared to dol, doi, epa, omha, etc. they provide a paid per diem trg in DC, if selected as hearing office chief judge they pay for your relocation. Other agencies named can't do that because they have no money. You can laterally transfer to any city with a little wait at your moving cost. Vast majority of us at Odar are not worry about recent changes (albeit I don't like it) because we do the work. I attribute the changes to removal candidate aljs and backlog of cases. If all the Odar aljs did less than 200 a year, I will be out of a job and there will be no more alj register. You can't have people waiting 4 years for a hearing and expect no changes by congress or the ssa commissioner. Don't believe the minority of judges at Odar drawing a doom picture. I will assure you the alj job will be better than what you are expecting. From the ALJs I personally know, who do not post on this board, they say the same thing - they love it and have no regrets and can't wait till I get an interview and join them. Thanks for the post northerner.
|
|
|
Post by anotherfed on Apr 21, 2014 17:25:42 GMT -5
Sealaw, you will interview well and please join the corp and help us bring down the backlog without sacrificing integrity and quality. We have over 10 judges in our office and all of them love their job. Folks awaiting the imminent cert, this is the job you have long waited and it is well worth many huddles and GERD. The marathon is almost over and myself and my colleagues will be waiting to cheer 90 of you at the finish line. Thank you for a positive and upbeat message. I hope to shake hands with you one day.
|
|
|
Post by auroraborealis on Apr 25, 2014 12:33:01 GMT -5
I appreciate hearing the pros and cons of being an AJ v. an ALJ and would encourage others to share if they have other information to add. I applied for both and am still officially "in the running" for an AJ position. It offers some consolation since having been eliminated during the ALJ examination process (even though I have appealed). Just to forewarn those who may apply for one of the AJ positions, it has been over 6 mos. and while my status was updated to state that I met the minimum qualifications and a panel review was taking place, there have been no interviews or decisions made (according to the agency contact). I just mention this so that folks can prepare themselves that it may take a long time to go through the process just as it has for the ALJ process.
|
|
|
Post by gary on Apr 25, 2014 12:37:38 GMT -5
I appreciate hearing the pros and cons of being an AJ v. an ALJ and would encourage others to share if they have other information to add. I applied for both and am still officially "in the running" for an AJ position. It offers some consolation since having been eliminated during the ALJ examination process (even though I have appealed). Just to forewarn those who may apply for one of the AJ positions, it has been over 6 mos. and while my status was updated to state that I met the minimum qualifications and a panel review was taking place, there have been no interviews or decisions made (according to the agency contact). I just mention this so that folks can prepare themselves that it may take a long time to go through the process just as it has for the ALJ process. I have also applied for an AJ position and have the same status as you. And it's been over 7 months since I applied.
|
|
|
Post by sealaw90 on Apr 25, 2014 14:20:24 GMT -5
I appreciate hearing the pros and cons of being an AJ v. an ALJ and would encourage others to share if they have other information to add. I applied for both and am still officially "in the running" for an AJ position. It offers some consolation since having been eliminated during the ALJ examination process (even though I have appealed). Just to forewarn those who may apply for one of the AJ positions, it has been over 6 mos. and while my status was updated to state that I met the minimum qualifications and a panel review was taking place, there have been no interviews or decisions made (according to the agency contact). I just mention this so that folks can prepare themselves that it may take a long time to go through the process just as it has for the ALJ process. Aurora (and Gary) are you referring to federal AJ jobs or state AJ jobs. If its fed, I know one person in our agency that got hired about 3 months ago to be an AJ at MSPB.
|
|
|
Post by gary on Apr 25, 2014 14:24:48 GMT -5
I appreciate hearing the pros and cons of being an AJ v. an ALJ and would encourage others to share if they have other information to add. I applied for both and am still officially "in the running" for an AJ position. It offers some consolation since having been eliminated during the ALJ examination process (even though I have appealed). Just to forewarn those who may apply for one of the AJ positions, it has been over 6 mos. and while my status was updated to state that I met the minimum qualifications and a panel review was taking place, there have been no interviews or decisions made (according to the agency contact). I just mention this so that folks can prepare themselves that it may take a long time to go through the process just as it has for the ALJ process. Aurora (and Gary) are you referring to federal AJ jobs or state AJ jobs. If its fed, I know one person in our agency that got hired about 3 months ago to be an AJ at MSPB. I was referring to a federal AJ job with the MSPB, with four locations listed in the announcement. Thanks for the info.
|
|
|
Post by privateatty on Apr 25, 2014 14:37:45 GMT -5
Contrary to many sitting aljs' post, an alj job at Odar is great if you are a hard worker, hold hearings and issue timely and quality decisions. If you took a job as aj and you were not a hard worker, did not hold enough hearings and/or did not issue timely and quality decisions, the agency will document you, suspend you and then remove you from federal service in about 6 months to a year. If that same individual was alj rather than aj, the removal process will take 3 years or more. As an alj at Odar and to fall into that removal process, you have to be pretty bad, ie issue less than 200 cases a year or you totally discard all policies. Odar will initiate a worst offender to remove and others will have to wait in line ie many many year. Now many benefits as alj at Odar. Odar gets a lot money from congress compared to dol, doi, epa, omha, etc. they provide a paid per diem trg in DC, if selected as hearing office chief judge they pay for your relocation. Other agencies named can't do that because they have no money. You can laterally transfer to any city with a little wait at your moving cost. Vast majority of us at Odar are not worry about recent changes (albeit I don't like it) because we do the work. I attribute the changes to removal candidate aljs and backlog of cases. If all the Odar aljs did less than 200 a year, I will be out of a job and there will be no more alj register. You can't have people waiting 4 years for a hearing and expect no changes by congress or the ssa commissioner. Don't believe the minority of judges at Odar drawing a doom picture. I will assure you the alj job will be better than what you are expecting. Thanks for the post, northerner. While not at ODAR, I have always had a problem with the doom picture as well.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeRatty on Apr 25, 2014 16:32:19 GMT -5
Contrary to many sitting aljs' post, an alj job at Odar is great if you are a hard worker, hold hearings and issue timely and quality decisions. If you took a job as aj and you were not a hard worker, did not hold enough hearings and/or did not issue timely and quality decisions, the agency will document you, suspend you and then remove you from federal service in about 6 months to a year. If that same individual was alj rather than aj, the removal process will take 3 years or more. As an alj at Odar and to fall into that removal process, you have to be pretty bad, ie issue less than 200 cases a year or you totally discard all policies. Odar will initiate a worst offender to remove and others will have to wait in line ie many many year. Now many benefits as alj at Odar. Odar gets a lot money from congress compared to dol, doi, epa, omha, etc. they provide a paid per diem trg in DC, if selected as hearing office chief judge they pay for your relocation. Other agencies named can't do that because they have no money. You can laterally transfer to any city with a little wait at your moving cost. Vast majority of us at Odar are not worry about recent changes (albeit I don't like it) because we do the work. I attribute the changes to removal candidate aljs and backlog of cases. If all the Odar aljs did less than 200 a year, I will be out of a job and there will be no more alj register. You can't have people waiting 4 years for a hearing and expect no changes by congress or the ssa commissioner. Don't believe the minority of judges at Odar drawing a doom picture. I will assure you the alj job will be better than what you are expecting. Thanks for the post, northerner. While not at ODAR, I have always had a problem with the doom picture as well. I so agree with this. After all, if the job really was all doom, why oh why would there be so much competition and angst over trying to get on board? Common sense says it is a great career and very desired. Every single job has some sort of an issue but this job in particular has a huge population of folks staying until retirement. That's a big clue!
|
|
|
Post by alj on Apr 25, 2014 17:50:37 GMT -5
I have been doing this job for almost 19 years, with no problems. If I had it to do over again, I would take the same route. I am productive, efficient and get very few remands. I think the agency should have gotten serious about the low producers way before I came on board.
Not all of the ones who turn out 300 cases a year, or less, are slackers. Most of them work hard, but are inefficient and obsess over things that don't need that much attention. Whether they are either unable or unwilling to meet the reasonable expectations of the agency, shouldn't really make a difference in a disciplinary action. Congress has certain expectations of the agency, and the agency, in turn, has expectations of its judges (and other employees).
Those who fall well below the agency's expectations should find another line of work.
I also fault the agency for not streamlining the system and making us more efficient. Everyone knows where those problems are, but Baltimore has been unwilling to take meaningful steps to bring the hearing process into the modern world.
When I was in my initial training, one of the instructors commented that all judges should be able to hear and decide 40 to 60 cases a month. She said anyone doing less than that was doing something wrong, and anyone doing more than that (on a regular basis) wasn't doing something right. After about a year on the job, I realized she was exactly right. Her comments are as valid today as they were when I first came on board.
|
|
|
Post by privateatty on Apr 26, 2014 8:37:18 GMT -5
I have been doing this job for almost 19 years, with no problems. If I had it to do over again, I would take the same route. I am productive, efficient and get very few remands. I think the agency should have gotten serious about the low producers way before I came on board. Not all of the ones who turn out 300 cases a year, or less, are slackers. Most of them work hard, but are inefficient and obsess over things that don't need that much attention. Whether they are either unable or unwilling to meet the reasonable expectations of the agency, shouldn't really make a difference in a disciplinary action. Congress has certain expectations of the agency, and the agency, in turn, has expectations of its judges (and other employees). Those who fall well below the agency's expectations should find another line of work. I know that alj's prescient and wise counsel applies with equal force to other Agencies. It runs to the very core of what makes an ALJ so very different from other employees (except Federal Art. III Judges) and why our level of responsiblity to the public, the Agency and the Corps is so profound. 90% of the ALJs who serve the public are fine, hardworking public servants. The 10% who chase their tails like dogs, fall well below a reasonable production goal, surf the internet when they should be reviewing cases or bloviate themselves around the Office should indeed find another line of work.
|
|
|
Post by auroraborealis on Apr 26, 2014 13:03:48 GMT -5
Aurora (and Gary) are you referring to federal AJ jobs or state AJ jobs. If its fed, I know one person in our agency that got hired about 3 months ago to be an AJ at MSPB. I was referring to a federal AJ job with the MSPB, with four locations listed in the announcement. Thanks for the info. Sounds like we likely applied for the same AJ position---I called after 6 mos had gone by with no status update and was told the positions were still open (budget constraints/sequestration affected hiring). However, hearing that an AJ was hired 3 mos. ago for the same agency makes me wonder if I was given inaccurate information. Just have to wait and see.
|
|
|
Post by minny on Apr 26, 2014 21:45:04 GMT -5
Aurora (and Gary) are you referring to federal AJ jobs or state AJ jobs. If its fed, I know one person in our agency that got hired about 3 months ago to be an AJ at MSPB. I was referring to a federal AJ job with the MSPB, with four locations listed in the announcement. Thanks for the info. Me, three, except the one I applied for was much more recent. Good luck to you and Aurora on your quest for AJ, also. I'm not too sure that it would not be the better gig for me, but I will not take my name off the ALJ register under any circumstance.
|
|
|
Post by auroraborealis on Apr 27, 2014 7:56:31 GMT -5
Best of luck to you too, Minny! Hopefully we all reach our professional goal.
|
|
|
Post by Highlander on Jun 15, 2014 11:16:18 GMT -5
Sobering observations....especially since initial assignment seems pretty random.
|
|