|
Post by redryder on Sept 3, 2015 8:42:34 GMT -5
I don't profess to be smarter than the average bear, and my comments won't help those who have already gone through an agency (SSA) interview. I suspect many of the applicants have no understanding or very little of how an ALJ fits into the ODAR scheme. The person who holds this office is a judge. What does that really mean? In my world it means I can give dates for when I want to hold hearings and have control over how much time I allot for each. Once a case is assigned to me, I can order development (medical records, income verification), and decide what experts I would like to have appear. I will conduct the hearing and ultimately make the decision on this claim.
But my job has certain limitations/constraints. I am covered by a union contract with SSA. This means I am a bargaining unit employee (BUE)who is covered by the same time and attendance rules as any other employee. No exception. As a BUE, I have a supervisor who is the HOCALJ who does have certain expectations regarding my productivity. As a BUE, I cannot be treated differently from any other employee. There are no awards for my performance, no matter how well I do my job. I supervise no one but must work with everyone. I have no control over who writes my cases, schedules my dockets, orders the development. Hearing reporters and experts are assigned to me based on a rotation and not my preference. I have no say in the hiring or firing of any employees.
I was in management for many years before receiving my appointment. I interviewed lawyers for positions as writers. There were some who were no doubt qualified to do the job. But their answers to questions made it quite clear that they were not suited to the job. Some could not accept the thought of having a supervisor. Others thought clocking in and out was demeaning. Others could not accept the idea that they cannot spend as much time as they deemed necessary to write a decision.
If you are pursuing this position, you need to understand exactly what you can and cannot do. I am not a judge operating in the same circumstances as those in the state or federal district courts systems. I am well compensated, but ultimately, I am an employee of ODAR with all that this entails.
Any whiff of "I'm THE JUDGE" in your interview, and you are probably toast with ODAR. The day-to-day operation is truly a collaborative one where you have to put your ego aside. You may be the highest paid BUE in the system, but you are still a BUE when it comes to operations.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2015 9:02:46 GMT -5
If I may expand on redryder's excellent observations; further observations that need to be taken into account that can stymie or hinder current interviewees and present ALJs: we are only judges when on the clock. In this job: you are simply your same old self when you walk out of the door at the end of the day.
One does not take work home (outside of telework) One does not discuss details of claims outside of work (PII no no) One does not use one's position for favors (e.g., Come on, I am a Judge, you can get me a better table/seat/deal, etc.) or office personnel actions (e.g. I am the Judge here, all you non-judges must do what I tell you!)
Other than that you will get used to family/friends/fellow attorneys/businesses/telephone sales solicitors/cable TV Installers calling you "Judge" and you do get paid well every other Friday.
|
|
|
Post by sealaw90 on Sept 3, 2015 9:07:18 GMT -5
Redryder, thank you for your post. That is so important for folks to know. I guess if you are coming from private practice and have never worked for the government, it can be quite a shock to the system. Us government types are pretty used to it, and most just 'go with the flow'. Like having to endure hours of online training in topics such as "Constitution Day", Heat Stress prevention, Team Coordination training,etc. If you find it offensive and beneath you to sit through this stuff, then I could see how the adjustment to ALJ life could be a challenge.
|
|
|
Post by Propmaster on Sept 3, 2015 9:15:26 GMT -5
The class that started August 10th had about 12 in it. I really hope the September class has double or triple or more! I seriously cannot believe that they can't find 50 decent candidates amongst the current batch on 74 city certs. If they did find a good candidate, I'd like to hear that ODAR is calling the HOCALJ in that one city this person (unwittingly) selected and asking if they have a broom closet/ coat closet, etc this person can sit at. Maybe they asked for all these cities to find new people sitting on the register. They did, and dozens of folks interviewed. So far, it seems only one or two of the recent interviewees have offers. Hmmmm..... Meanwhile, there is a huge backlog, you have vetted candidates willing to go at a moments notice to start working, and yet they are hiring at a snail's pace. Folks have said that ODAR doesn't want to get stuck with a dud, but from the recent list of 'bad apples' listed in another thread, most of those problems cannot be discovered by interviewing and reference checking. During the many years I prosecuted members at courts-martial, the ones who surfed porn, stole government property or misused their position appeared to be as squared away and 'normal' as anyone else. You cannot predict future behavior! So, let's get on with the hiring! Rant over, it's all good. Life goes on. Still running the marathon. Semper Paratus. It isn't that they cannot find decent candidates... other factors are in play. People take time to respond, some turn it down, some want deferrments, and a LOT have very limited GALs making it all very difficult to get full classes. Except, they literally said that they can't find decent candidates to hire. EDIT: Note: Your definition of "literally" may vary from mine.
|
|
donk
Full Member
Posts: 42
|
Rant
Sept 3, 2015 9:16:07 GMT -5
Post by donk on Sept 3, 2015 9:16:07 GMT -5
When was that said?
|
|
|
Post by Propmaster on Sept 3, 2015 9:35:41 GMT -5
In my opinion, being familiar with government talk, the following is a blatant indication that they will not hire the avilable candidates for these cities. Discussion follows. MEMORANDUM Date: August 27, 2015 To: All Administrative Law Judges Office of Disability Adjudication and Review From: Mark Sochaczewsky Associate Chief Administrative Law Judge Subject: Administrative Law Judge Vacancy – multiple locations The Office of the Chief Administrative Law Judge (OCALJ) is soliciting volunteers from among Office of Disability Adjudication and Review (ODAR) Administrative Law Judges (ALJs) for reassignment at government expense to the offices identified on the attached list. The identified offices have either had a high “turnover” of ALJs due to transfers to other locations, without sufficient incoming transfers of other ALJs to replace them, or otherwise have not had sufficient eligible “new” ALJs selected to meet the respective service delivery needs.
To help us establish a better continuity of ALJ presence in these offices, we are providing relocation allowances to ALJs who transfer to them, in accordance with applicable federal regulations and policy. We expect that all ALJs who are selected to fill these vacancies will remain in these locations for a two year period, without requesting a transfer to other offices. -edit- . -edit- Analysis: The agency not only has the capacity to transfer workloads around electronically, they love to do it. Despite having only 25-33% of the ALJs my office is supposed to have, ODAR has refused to realign our service area on an ongoing basis, choosing piecemeal stopgap measures of virtual assisting ALJs. If ODAR expected to hire judges in the next year in those cities, they would not pay ALJs to move there. They would move the work away. The reason they would not expect to hire judges in the next year in those cities is that the people who have listed those cities as preferences or in limited GALs obviously do not appeal to them. I hadn't wanted to be too negative, but here's the thing: I don't believe for a second that the OPM system has affected the hiring, nor the responses by offerees. Even if everything said and assumed about those factors is absolutely true, answer me this: Why wouldn't they work the hiring list they had for the putative/abortive August 10 hiring throughout the following month leading up to this time? There's no expiration on their use of the certs (at least in the timeframe at issue). They CHOSE to cancel and get new certs in order to get different people. They did that because they did not have anyone else they wanted to hire. Any ACTUAL effort to hire 150 judges in the last 3 months COULD have succeeded. If the system they adopted precluded that, it's because THEY ADOPTED A SYSTEM THAT PRECLUDES THAT, not because they were forced into it in some way. As I've said before, this is a great job, I want it really darn bad, and others should want it to. But NEVER believe reasons you are given for agency actions unless 1) you have sat in the meetings in which the decisions were made and believe that during those meetings you have heard all of the relevant decision-making information, or 2) the reason makes logical sense and believing it or not makes no difference in your life. I was not in these meetings, and the rationales provided are simply illogical. They had enough people on a cert for whatever city they hired for in August to fill all the office space in that city of that cert. There was not a LITERAL lack of people to hire. Ergo, there was a lack of people they wanted. Ergo, they cannot find decent candidates to hire and need sitting ALJs to move around the country to make sure they never have to hire these dregs. Or, maybe they are going to close the offices. I really can't necessarily identify why they lied misled, only that they obviously have. Us, Congress, media, courts, each other, themselves - who knows the true target. We are simply detritus that happens to contain the occasional walnut.
|
|
|
Rant
Sept 3, 2015 9:35:45 GMT -5
Post by saaao on Sept 3, 2015 9:35:45 GMT -5
I would also like to know this. Edit: answered.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeRatty on Sept 3, 2015 9:52:02 GMT -5
It isn't that they cannot find decent candidates... other factors are in play. People take time to respond, some turn it down, some want deferrments, and a LOT have very limited GALs making it all very difficult to get full classes. Except, they literally said that they can't find decent candidates to hire. I do not agree with this at all. At no time has anyone in management or who has hiring authority said "they can't find decent candidates." I think your extrapolation of this conclusion is flawed. You may "feel" that way, but they have not "literally" said this. They are having a hard time getting an adequate number to fill spots for a variety of reasons already discussed here. But this is putting words in the mouths of those who hire when that is not what they said. Respectfully disagree.
|
|
donk
Full Member
Posts: 42
|
Post by donk on Sept 3, 2015 9:53:20 GMT -5
This board has been an absolutely wonderful resource but I think it is time for a long hiatus. If they call, they call. Good luck all! I think we are all great!
|
|
|
Post by cheesy on Sept 3, 2015 9:54:55 GMT -5
The perfect can be the enemy of the good.
|
|
|
Rant
Sept 3, 2015 9:58:15 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by minny on Sept 3, 2015 9:58:15 GMT -5
[/quote]Except, they literally said that they can't find decent candidates to hire.[/quote]
I have not heard that this was said. Who made this comment?
|
|
|
Post by marten77 on Sept 3, 2015 10:10:31 GMT -5
If I may expand on redryder's excellent observations; further observations that need to be taken into account that can stymie or hinder current interviewees and present ALJs: we are only judges when on the clock. In this job: you are simply your same old self when you walk out of the door at the end of the day. One does not take work home (outside of telework) One does not discuss details of claims outside of work (PII no no) One does not use one's position for favors (e.g., Come on, I am a Judge, you can get me a better table/seat/deal, etc.) or office personnel actions (e.g. I am the Judge here, all you non-judges must do what I tell you!) Other than that you will get used to family/friends/fellow attorneys/businesses/telephone sales solicitors/cable TV Installers calling you "Judge" and you do get paid well every other Friday. The above discussed points are all spot on and are all very great pointers. I think one of the judges I work with summed it up best: ALJ: "Do you know what "ALJ" really stands for?" Me: "Aside from the obvious, what?" ALJ: "A Little Judge."
|
|
|
Post by mch135 on Sept 3, 2015 10:24:46 GMT -5
If they truly believe they can't find decent candidates, then why haven't they three-struck anyone yet (that we know of)?
|
|
|
Rant
Sept 3, 2015 10:27:28 GMT -5
via mobile
berk727 likes this
Post by gary on Sept 3, 2015 10:27:28 GMT -5
If they truly believe they can't find decent candidates, then why haven't they three-struck anyone yet (that we know of)? They don't need to--they can just exercise their discretion and not consider anyone who was previously thrice-considered.
|
|
|
Rant
Sept 3, 2015 10:34:26 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by mch135 on Sept 3, 2015 10:34:26 GMT -5
If they truly believe they can't find decent candidates, then why haven't they three-struck anyone yet (that we know of)? They don't need to--they can just exercise their discretion and not consider anyone who was previously thrice-considered. Thanks - I guess I was confused, I thought they had to officially three-strike them, otherwise the person's name would keep appearing on the list.
|
|
|
Rant
Sept 3, 2015 10:38:13 GMT -5
via mobile
mch135 likes this
Post by gary on Sept 3, 2015 10:38:13 GMT -5
They don't need to--they can just exercise their discretion and not consider anyone who was previously thrice-considered. Thanks - I guess I was confused, I thought they had to officially three-strike them, otherwise the person's name would keep appearing on the list. The person will keep appearing on lists of eligibles. SSA has the discretion to consider them or not for any position for which their score and GAL would put them in a top 3 if they've previously been thrice-considered
|
|
|
Rant
Sept 3, 2015 10:43:01 GMT -5
via mobile
mch135 likes this
Post by gary on Sept 3, 2015 10:43:01 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Propmaster on Sept 3, 2015 11:07:20 GMT -5
This board has been an absolutely wonderful resource but I think it is time for a long hiatus. If they call, they call. Good luck all! I think we are all great! I apologize if I contributed to burning you out on the board.
|
|
|
Post by Gaidin on Sept 3, 2015 11:08:31 GMT -5
I think Prop is wrong about some things but he is definitely giving voice to my fears about my viability on the register.
I don't think you can view the list of 18 cities they pay for relo as a determination that they don't like any of the candidates for those cities. I think the relo pay is a response to an inability to get people to stay there. The email says these offices need stability and a constant flow into and out of these offices is probably a huge part of the problem. They can't make a new hire stay but they can keep a transfer there for 2 years.
|
|
|
Post by phoenixrakkasan on Sept 3, 2015 11:18:40 GMT -5
Applicants apply. Agencies select. Applicants decide to accept. Each has discretion. Let them exercise it and do not fill yourself with negativity.
|
|