|
Post by saaao on Mar 2, 2015 19:25:58 GMT -5
I wonder if SSA were to take control, would OPM still have involvement at the early qualification stages, like it does with the hiring of AJs or IJs, with MSPB, immigration, etc. I would imagine that SSA would push to have any AJ position, classified as a 0905 (Attorney) excepted service position, and make it a GS-14 or GS-15 level position, which would take OPM out of the equation, or at least no more in the equation than they are for any other 0905. However I doubt that will happen. I doubt the current commissioner wants to undertake all the headaches that would be involved. If it were really a feasible thing to do, Astrue would have done it when he was the commissioner.
|
|
|
Post by Missundaztood on Mar 2, 2015 19:32:54 GMT -5
I wonder if SSA were to take control, would OPM still have involvement at the early qualification stages, like it does with the hiring of AJs or IJs, with MSPB, immigration, etc. I would imagine that SSA would push to have any AJ position, classified as a 0905 (Attorney) excepted service position, and make it a GS-14 or GS-15 level position, which would take OPM out of the equation, or at least no more in the equation than they are for any other 0905. However I doubt that will happen. I doubt the current commissioner wants to undertake all the headaches that would be involved. If it were really a feasible thing to do, Astrue would have done it when he was the commissioner. I know that is how the MSPB AJ positions are classified, and OPM does the initial determination of whether an applicant meets the GS 13/14/15 qualifications, then qualified applicants are referred to MSPB potentially for interviews. I believe immigration is the same way for its IJ positions.
|
|
|
Post by saaao on Mar 2, 2015 19:49:27 GMT -5
I would imagine that SSA would push to have any AJ position, classified as a 0905 (Attorney) excepted service position, and make it a GS-14 or GS-15 level position, which would take OPM out of the equation, or at least no more in the equation than they are for any other 0905. However I doubt that will happen. I doubt the current commissioner wants to undertake all the headaches that would be involved. If it were really a feasible thing to do, Astrue would have done it when he was the commissioner. I know that is how the MSPB AJ positions are classified, and OPM does the initial determination of whether an applicant meets the GS 13/14/15 qualifications, then qualified applicants are referred to MSPB potentially for interviews. I believe immigration is the same way for its IJ positions. The closest equivalent within ODAR I am aware of are the Administrative Appeals Judges (AAJ's) at the Appeals Council. I know that they are classified as 0905's and I am pretty sure that OPM is not involved in their selection, other than to approve the PD and required qualifications. Of course that is an internal only hire, so that might make a difference.
|
|
|
Post by Missundaztood on Mar 2, 2015 20:08:40 GMT -5
I know that is how the MSPB AJ positions are classified, and OPM does the initial determination of whether an applicant meets the GS 13/14/15 qualifications, then qualified applicants are referred to MSPB potentially for interviews. I believe immigration is the same way for its IJ positions. The closest equivalent within ODAR I am aware of are the Administrative Appeals Judges (AAJ's) at the Appeals Council. I know that they are classified as 0905's and I am pretty sure that OPM is not involved in their selection, other than to approve the PD and required qualifications. Of course that is an internal only hire, so that might make a difference. And maybe the number of applicants makes a difference? Will be interesting to see what develops with the register, SSA, and the other agencies that hire off it.
|
|
|
Post by workdrone on Mar 2, 2015 21:11:21 GMT -5
I vaguely remember several years ago when OPM reopened the ALJ Register for new applications, one of the conditions was that if a previously disqualified candidate reapplies for the Register refresh, he/she is waiving any pending appeal from the previous cycle.
It would not surprise me if this happens again when OPM reopens the ALJ Register in the future.
Good luck to all!
|
|
|
Post by anotherfed on Mar 2, 2015 23:00:58 GMT -5
Might that be an incentive for opening a refresh sooner rather than later?
|
|
|
Post by 71stretch on Mar 3, 2015 0:21:02 GMT -5
Might that be an incentive for opening a refresh sooner rather than later? Well, that would be one way (but a very expensive one) of taking a lot of appeals off the table. Because of the cost, though, I still don't see that happening any sooner than we've predicted in the past.
|
|
|
Post by Loopstok on Mar 3, 2015 10:59:09 GMT -5
The following post is based entirely on the suppositions contained earlier in this thread, but maybe the info being discussed is a little more than just plain smoke.
So, if we're talking about SSA asserting control over the judge hiring process, and downgrading the position from ALJ to AJ ... what does that mean for sitting ALJs?
We all know that back in the 1970s, the position was upgraded from Hearing Officer to ALJ, with sitting hearing officers being grandfathered in and becoming ALJs. But now it seems to me that we're talking about the reverse, changing the postion from ALJ back to AJ (i.e. a glorified way of saying "Hearing Officer"). What would that mean for the present ALJ corps? If sitting ALJs get to remain ALJs, then you'd have a judging corps partly made of ALJs and partly of AJs... that seems immensely confusing.
If this ever happens at all, of course, is the caveat to the speculation in this thread.
I remember hearing a similar rumor from NOSSCR people almost ten years ago, and obviously nothing came of the push to replace ALJs with AJs back then. But, if you look at the proposed changes to the ALJ Position Description that were floated on this board last year, and the way that HALLEX has changed the "Notice and Order to Show Cause" to the amusingly toothless "Request to Show Cause", it seems, perahps, that maybe the AJ push is gathering momentum once again?
Or perhaps I'm just being overtly paranoid.
|
|
|
Post by saaao on Mar 3, 2015 11:50:38 GMT -5
The following post is based entirely on the suppositions contained earlier in this thread, but maybe the info being discussed is a little more than just plain smoke. So, if we're talking about SSA asserting control over the judge hiring process, and downgrading the position from ALJ to AJ ... what does that mean for sitting ALJs? We all know that back in the 1970s, the position was upgraded from Hearing Officer to ALJ, with sitting hearing officers being grandfathered in and becoming ALJs. But now it seems to me that we're talking about the reverse, changing the postion from ALJ back to AJ (i.e. a glorified way of saying "Hearing Officer"). What would that mean for the present ALJ corps? If sitting ALJs get to remain ALJs, then you'd have a judging corps partly made of ALJs and partly of AJs... that seems immensely confusing. If this ever happens at all, of course, is the caveat to the speculation in this thread. I remember hearing a similar rumor from NOSSCR people almost ten years ago, and obviously nothing came of the push to replace ALJs with AJs back then. But, if you look at the proposed changes to the ALJ Position Description that were floated on this board last year, and the way that HALLEX has changed the "Notice and Order to Show Cause" to the amusingly toothless "Request to Show Cause", it seems, perahps, that maybe the AJ push is gathering momentum once again? Or perhaps I'm just being overtly paranoid. It's hard to imagine such a big change being seriously considered without word leaking out somewhere, though I suppose it's possible. I would think that if it did come to that, sitting ALJ's would be grandfathered in and remain ALJ's, with AJ's phasing in as they retired. That would seem to be the path of least resistance and I don't see how such a plan would succeed otherwise given the complications that would be involved in altering the ALJ protections, and the real possibility that too many would just quit, dragging production to a standstill. Given the massive influx of brand new ALJs coming this year and probably the next, it's hard to see a way for them to implement an AJ system and get it to viably take root. If they were going to do it, I would think they would have had to do it, when the back log was sky rocketing and OPM was dragging their feet on building a new register. With the congressional hearings on ALJ conduct that would have been the perfect time to advocate that SSA could no longer afford to wait on OPM or trust their assessment system. That moment appears to have passed. If they did it now, they would be in the position of asking for a major change from Congress after they had (from a superficial perspective at least) gotten everything they wanted, with a fresh register and new hires flooding (or least trickling) in.
|
|
|
Post by anotherfed on Mar 3, 2015 12:40:45 GMT -5
I don't see how the agency could phase in AJs. Work force and union issues aside, I think it would be a PR nightmare. Can you imagine? "I thought I was getting an independent ALJ; instead, I got another agency employee toeing the company line. My due process rights have been denied." Imagine the claimants' rep ads: "I make sure all my clients get truly independent ALJs who will make a fair decision, not second-class AJs who have to do what the Agency tells them to do." I exaggerate to make the point, but hope these scenarios have been given due consideration by TPTB.
|
|
|
Post by numbersix on Mar 3, 2015 15:44:57 GMT -5
In my last few years of federal sector law practice, I have only appeared before EEOC and MSPB AJs - no ALJs. The distinction between the "kind" of judge any of them are has never come up. I don't think the possibility of SSA and other agencies moving toward more AJs is that far fetched.
|
|
|
Post by lawbird on Mar 3, 2015 18:03:27 GMT -5
Getting off track; disconcerting for those of us anxiously awaiting any new word of movement on appeals. I believe there have been numerous other threads having to do with the distinction between administrative judges and ALJs. Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by karaj on Mar 5, 2015 23:03:44 GMT -5
Like many of you, I waited a long time for the Appeals process. It resulted in "no change" in score. I was an Odar SAA for 14 yrs. & made the register in 2009. I was devastated. My spouse was happy-I had a decent job, I had a minor child, and my schedule was flexible. He could not understand why it was so important to me. Years went by, and in that time, I eventually "let go and let God", and relinquished my dream of becoming an ALJ. It wasn't until I finally let go and was at peace, that in Feb. 2012, while checking my spam folder, I saw an email from Central office telling me I made the SSA cert. I literally fell off my chair. I don't usually check my spam folder, and it self-deletes after a few days, so it was all serendipity. Everything happened quickly after that. I had been an ODAR attorney for most of my career, and had a really low score for that reason - maybe because of no real litigation background-my whole class were low scorers and we were predominantly SSA attorneys. The point of my telling this story is - don't give up hope, but also, when something in life does not go the way you want, surrender it. Learn the Serenity prayer and practice it. Something good will come of your life. An ALJ job is not all that you think it is. SSA is very dysfunctional. I have been an ALJ for almost 3 yrs. now, and to be perfectly honest, I think I was happier as an attorney. I had my freedom, and I wasn't weighed down by so many unreasonable deadlines. I have learned to be careful what I ask for. Good luck, and keep believing in yourself.
|
|
|
Post by hopingforalj on Mar 6, 2015 12:16:04 GMT -5
That is a great story, hope is always a good thing, lose hope and all is lost for good.
|
|
|
Post by 17 on Apr 28, 2015 9:34:40 GMT -5
Well, there goes the 4/24/15 theory. Any other cloudy crystal balls out there care to venture a guess about appeals being decided or appellants notified?
|
|
leo68
Full Member
Posts: 33
|
Post by leo68 on Apr 28, 2015 10:13:41 GMT -5
Wow...thank you so much for sharing. I really needed to read this.
|
|
|
Post by prescient on Apr 28, 2015 10:31:54 GMT -5
My guess is that they won't be processed until most of the spots are filled, near the end of the register.
there's really no other way to justify why people cut at step 1 haven't been addressed. those appeals should be easy breezy, no? at least the other steps, I could understand the rationale for why it's taking so long, but not for step 1s.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeRatty on Apr 28, 2015 10:42:23 GMT -5
My guess is that they won't be processed until most of the spots are filled, near the end of the register. there's really no other way to justify why people cut at step 1 haven't been addressed. those appeals should be easy breezy, no? at least the other steps, I could understand the rationale for why it's taking so long, but not for step 1s. Agree. And after the Adzell litigation, OPM knows that once the administrative process is complete, a candidate could file for injunctive relief and the process of hiring could cease for a period of time. THIS would hit SSA hard in a time where it needs massive hiring right now. A delay like Adzell would put a hurt on the agency and the claimants who already wait way too long for a decision.
EDIT: And I am not saying they will delay on purpose with no action. Instead, I think they are going very slowly dotting all the "I"s so to speak so they do not have issues down the line. With the thousands of appeals, and staffing issues, this will take a LONG time. Years. OPM had budget cuts and this has no doubt been part of it, plus add in the new certification process of single city certs, and there you have quite the delay. I think it is a combination of things, and not just they "want" to delay until the bulk of the SSA hiring is done. The hiring process is no doubt time consuming for OPM.
|
|
|
Post by keepsake on Apr 28, 2015 19:07:15 GMT -5
My take with absolutely no inside info to back it up comports with these perspectives - the appeals are a low priority given the staffing issues at OPM and undertaking a new register and certs. I think it is frankly ridiculous that Stage 1 appeals are not processed but perhaps there were just a massive amount of folks that got axed on that stage so the numbers are somewhat overwhelming. I am afraid that a resolution on anyone's appeals for good or bad will not come until most, if not all, hires are made. Wish it were not so, but it has been a long time with no word or indication otherwise except form responses when the ALJ Appeals desk is queried.
|
|
|
Post by numbersix on Apr 29, 2015 9:21:06 GMT -5
Maybe the better question is, in how many years will they open a new register so we can try again?
|
|