|
Post by daisyjane on Oct 8, 2015 11:40:34 GMT -5
Having been a Senior Attorney since the inception of the program in 1995, I beg to differ - the program was NEVER a disaster. To the contrary, it was extremely successful across the country, even though there were variations in how the program was administered in some ODAR offices. To further substantiate my position, the Senior Attorney position was so successful in my ODAR office, it upset some of the the ALJ's because of the number of cases we got out each month, and the HOCALJ absolutely could not stand it. So much so, he undertook to completely destroy/eliminate the program in our office in 1997.
As the most Senior of the SA's, I stood firmly and proudly in his way and won by merely writing up a grievance, and sharing it with him, the union and RO. Central office in Falls Church caught wind of it and immediately put a stop to his illegal effort to destroy the Senior Attorney program in our office. He was part of a corrupt management team, along with the HOM, under the old OHA umbrella. Unfortunately, these corrupt managers continued to engage in Prohibited Personnel Practices during their tenure in those positions, and thus far, they have never been held accountable for their misconduct.
Just like 1997, I will not stop until they are held accountable. They destroyed the careers of many great Federal employees through their cronyism and misconduct, including criminal misconduct, and I only recently discovered I was one of their targets. Hence, the trouble I have encountered in trying to become an ALJ with ODAR. For the record, I was never a trouble maker and an extremely high producer through the years. Moreover, in 1998, most of the ALJ's and prior managers in my office filed a legal petition to remove these managers. The Agency's only response was to allow the HOCALJ to be "Acting HOCALJ" rather than HOCALJ. Really??? Writing up a complaint and sharing it with the powers that be in 1997 to stop an illegal action the HOCALJ and HOM were deadset on taking in our office, and not taking it any further, was hardly an indication I am unworthy of furthering my career. From this history and the Agency's failure to take action in 1998, it does not take a rocket scientist to see there have been serious issues, i.e., cronyism, willingness to engage in Prohibited Personnel Practices and even criminal misconduct among ODAR's highest managers for many, many years which must finally be addressed and changed for a dent to be made in the backlog of disability cases.
Because these top managers have intentionally refused to credit the Senior Attorney program for the remarkable success it has consistently been through the years, I am confident significant changes will soon be made which will enable the Senior Attorney program to thrive once again. The Agency simply cannot deny the statistical success the Senior Attorney program has maintained through the years, and the necessity of the program to tackle the increasing backlog of disability cases while at the same time providing a career ladder for the Attorneys.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 9, 2015 6:18:29 GMT -5
Mamaru: We see the same thing in this HO. No replacement for a retiring writer. From the big picture, it looks like the FTEs from the HO are going to the centralized writing units and pulling units. Which are being put in space that ODAR already has under lease. No increase in the foot print there. Plus it gets these HO ready for downsizing in square footage when the leases come due. From an expense standpoint, it makes good sense. The backside of this building is basically vacant with the writers working at home as much as possible. If the techs ever get to work at home on e-files, the front will be too. The only ones here are on a regular basis are the judges (most of whom choose not to work at home), the staff for the front desk, IT, managers and the guard. No doubt there are changes coming in the way the hearing offices look and operate. Video hearings. Expert witnesses dialing in for hearings. More and more emphasis on learning to do as much as one can on the computer. Flexibility is definitely a much desired trait in the new hires in all positions. No doubt, ODAR is headed toward some physical downsizing at the HO level to save on leasing costs. I learned that my former region would only allow for new AA hiring if the Decision Writer to ALJ ratio went below 1:1. I'm not sure if "Decision Writer" included our handful of senior attorneys. I suppose this policy will lead to more cases being funneled to the NCAC, which I understand is an awful place to work.
|
|
|
Post by christina on Oct 9, 2015 6:29:36 GMT -5
No doubt, ODAR is headed toward some physical downsizing at the HO level to save on leasing costs. I learned that my former region would only allow for new AA hiring if the Decision Writer to ALJ ratio went below 1:1. I'm not sure if "Decision Writer" included our handful of senior attorneys. I suppose this policy will lead to more cases being funneled to the NCAC, which I understand is an awful place to work. AA to dw 1:1 ratio. that is not good. things do seem to be heading more towards people working in a ncac
|
|
|
Post by mamaru on Oct 9, 2015 10:33:45 GMT -5
Two quick points. First, NTEU HO's are going to start a program of office sharing/hoteling that will consolidate writers, making room for more ALJs. Second, I started at an NCAC and it was not an awful place to work, although it was not a cube farm like the new NCAC in Baltimore. I transferred to a HO only because, at the time I left, I thought a HO had more stability.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 9, 2015 12:47:58 GMT -5
Two quick points. First, NTEU HO's are going to start a program of office sharing/hoteling that will consolidate writers, making room for more ALJs. Second, I started at an NCAC and it was not an awful place to work, although it was not a cube farm like the new NCAC in Baltimore. I transferred to a HO only because, at the time I left, I thought a HO had more stability. Yes, I meant Baltimore. I forgot there was more than one.
|
|
|
Post by redryder on Oct 9, 2015 14:59:31 GMT -5
Don't knock the cube farm. The set-up may not be to your liking, but someone must be doing something right up there. The work product I have seen from them is excellent.
|
|
|
Post by redryder on Oct 9, 2015 15:05:53 GMT -5
If the cubicles in Baltimore are anything like the ones in the hearing offices, you at least have a little space to move and work in. In 1975 I worked for the state government in a cubicle that was the width of the desk chair. You had to pull the chair out into the walkway, sit down and scoot into your cubicle. Walking though the workroom at any time of the day could be hazardous as you never knew when someone would back out of one of those and run over you with a chair. But at the end of the day, it was like a stampede at a rodeo with 30 or so of us busting out of those slots.
|
|
|
Post by prescient on Oct 9, 2015 15:34:04 GMT -5
Don't knock the cube farm. The set-up may not be to your liking, but someone must be doing something right up there. The work product I have seen from them is excellent. having some of the best SAAs and AAs QA the drafts before they are returned to the HOs may skew the ability to properly evaluate how exactly the cube farmers are doing. IMO
|
|
|
Post by nappyloxs on Oct 9, 2015 17:20:06 GMT -5
Currently the SAA program is on hold and has been for years. Unfortunately, it took blame after the WV investigation because according to someone's stats the program had a 75% agree rate. The program was accused of "paying down the backlog." in addition, the old regime was not a fan of the program and thought too many people were SAA who didn't deserve to be. They thought SAA were milking it and that if it were to return it should be based on performance. I have also heard that part of it dealt with ALJ compliants that SAA were getting all the easy favorable which impacted their numbers because they were left with mostly unfavorable or difficult/voluminous cases. I think it will come back after the ALJ hiring but will be different than what it was.
As to question about HO DW hiring, the general rule is 1 dw:1 alj. This includes SAA and currently no hiring DW unless under that ratio. It has little to deal with down sizing real estate, it is about office space. There needs to be more offices for the new ALJ and the best way of doing that is turning DW offices into ALJ offices. Most leases are signed for 10+ years. With telework and NCAC, they don't need offices for DW at the HO but they still need them for ALJ.
|
|
|
Post by daisyjane on Oct 10, 2015 10:40:41 GMT -5
Currently the SAA program is on hold and has been for years. Unfortunately, it took blame after the WV investigation because according to someone's stats the program had a 75% agree rate. The program was accused of "paying down the backlog." in addition, the old regime was not a fan of the program and thought too many people were SAA who didn't deserve to be. They thought SAA were milking it and that if it were to return it should be based on performance. I have also heard that part of it dealt with ALJ compliants that SAA were getting all the easy favorable which impacted their numbers because they were left with mostly unfavorable or difficult/voluminous cases. I think it will come back after the ALJ hiring but will be different than what it was. As to question about HO DW hiring, the general rule is 1 dw:1 alj. This includes SAA and currently no hiring DW unless under that ratio. It has little to deal with down sizing real estate, it is about office space. There needs to be more offices for the new ALJ and the best way of doing that is turning DW offices into ALJ offices. Most leases are signed for 10+ years. With telework and NCAC, they don't need offices for DW at the HO but they still need them for ALJ. You are correct, and what you stated elaborates on some of the things I was trying to articulate in my earlier post. The "old regime," as you refer to it, resented the Senior Attorney program, and yes, many ALJ's disliked it because the Senior Attorney's got almost all of the favorable cases leaving them with the more difficult affirmations, partially favorables and non-disability cases. Moreover, many of those considered the "old regime" remain in high power positions in Falls Church and Baltimore today, which is why the Agency continues to be mismanaged and misguided. (Think Acting Commissioner Carolyn Colvin, age 75+; at least someone in Congress caught wind of this problem and did not allow her to become Commissioner, or Obama to reappoint her for Commissioner). It is true the Senior Attorney program had a 75% +/- agree rate and helped pay down the backlog of disability cases. Folks, that was the purpose of the program, i.e., to reduce the backlog of disability cases and that is exactly what we accomplished. This gets to the very heart of the trouble we had with this "old regime," who now encompass many of the highest management positions in the Agency, which is their blindsided focus on "production numbers," rather than on what reduces the overall backlog (number) of disability cases in the most efficient manner. The "numbers" focus must be on the "numbers" which reduce the backlog - not individual ALJ and DW "production numbers." The "old regime" who now hold many of the highest management positions in the Agency are either blindsided by this, or intentionally refuse to acknowledge the facts. The whole idea behind the original Senior Attorney program was for the SA's to get out all the favorable cases we possibly could by screening for O-T-R's; settling potentially favorable cases by simply contacting claimant's representatives and conferencing with them over such matters as onset date, DLI, etc.; ordering CE's, Psych. CE's with tests we deemed appropriate, and other pre-hearing work-up to be returned to us once the evidence was in to see if the case could be favorably decided; and writing a brief analysis of the cases we could not pay for the ALJ and include recommendations for VE, Me, etc. By having the SA's perform these tasks, the whole idea was to give the much HIGHER paid ALJ's more time to handle and deal with the more difficult and challenging unfavorable, partially favorable and non-disability cases. The Senior Attorney program was a remarkable success from the very start in 1995 across the country. The problem, however, was caused by members of this "old regime" and the misguided manner in which they focused on "production numbers" and micromanaged. Instead of looking at the forest through the trees and how effective the Senior Attorney program helped reduce the overall backlog of disability cases, they continued to harass the ALJ's and non-Senior Attorney decision writers writing for them over the lower "production numbers" they obviously had because they were only dealing with the more difficult unfavorable, partially favorable and non-disability cases the Senior Attorney program allowed them to spend more time. The idiots never understood this then, nor do they today. Stupid does as stupid is. Until the "old regime" who encompass many of the highest power positions in the Agency today are replaced with leaders who do not micromanage based on each individual ALJ's and DW's "production numbers," but on the most efficient "numbers" which reduce the overall backlog of disability cases, the backlog will continue to grow. One can only hope sanity will prevail and the quickest and most efficient way to begin to reduce the backlog of disability cases is to reinstate the Senior Attorney program with signature authority and all the original glory it had until these misguided micro-mismanagers began chopping off bits of the program over the years.
|
|
|
Post by mamaru on Oct 11, 2015 0:03:25 GMT -5
I give the Agency credit for providing mentoring for the new writers at the Baltimore NCAC. When I started at a new writing center, we went directly to training without ever having seen, much less read, a decision. Only two of 10 supervisors were writers. While their newbies were effectively mentored, the rest of us were kind of like the blind leading the blind and we struggled. I was asked to sign off on a progressive system of training new writers (a logical sequence of increasingly more complex cases) which was excellent, but was never used in our group because our supervisor had no idea how to train writers since she had never been a writer. She just made us sign the paperwork. I am glad the Baltimore DWs are getting effective training.
As for the cube farm concept, I am unfortunately one of those people who is pretty easily distracted by noise. I would not enjoy spending the day in headphones listening to white noise so I could get my work done. One person within earshot using dragon and I can't focus. I know I would not be as productive in that type of work environment, but kudos to those who can roll with it.
|
|
|
Post by anotherfed on Oct 12, 2015 12:22:58 GMT -5
I don't think the cube farm idea is limited to SSA. I'm familiar with another agency that is also undergoing such a transformation -- cubes for everyone. I was under the impression that it was a government-wide executive order, to reduce the fed footprint by having more telework, office sharing, and cube farms. I'm with you, mamaru, I hate cubicles. Regardless of how considerate your co-workers are, there is always a low buzzing of noise. And forget about making the occasional personal business call -- everyone knows your business. At one workplace, we all knew a co-worker was pregnant before her husband did.
|
|
|
Post by maquereau on Oct 13, 2015 8:22:59 GMT -5
I agree with Daisyjane's point regarding the old SA program. It's OKAY if the SAs got most of the fully favorable decisions in the office processed - since that was what they were supposed to be doing; they were not given authority to sign off on UF decisions. Yes, that meant that ALJs and the other writers had a higher proportion of difficult and possibly UF cases. And that, in turn, meant that the ALJs could not produce at as high a rate as management perhaps desired. That's because UFs take much much more time to process. This is so obvious a point that it shouldn't need to be highlighted, but I don't think that management ever grasped it.
Baltimore: the decisions that I've received from that writing unit are quite good. I can't say the same for some other writing units.
Writers need to be supervised by people who have done the job and were really really really good at it. If you go to an office as either a writer or a judge and the management people have never been writers, that is generally not a good situation.
|
|
|
Post by george on Oct 15, 2015 6:33:08 GMT -5
I think the original questioned asked concerned the Senior Attorney program. I have been a SA for the past five years. My job has evolved over these years to issuing fully favorables, doing non disability reviews, handling complex court remands, training at the local and national level, mentoring, answering ALJ questions, and assisting management in daily tasks. I still am asked to look at on the records but judges in my offices must agree with me and sign the decision for himself or herself. I still develop cases to make these OTRs worthy to be paid. Finally I just completed an 8 month detail reviewing those decisions coming out of NCAC Baltimore. This detail also included a mentoring component. So as a senior, duties vary but it is not like a DW where tasks revolve around only writing. Prehearing conferences are to start nationwide fiscal year 2016 as Judge Bice had indicated in a newsletter. My office has yet to begin this program, however.
In regards to the NAT program, there are only 20 SAs doing this year long detail out of over 500 or so SAs. ( 3 percent actually of the SAs in the Agency). It is my understanding there is internal review, regional review, and Appeals Council review of each decision issued from one of these 20 folks. So the pay rate is very low in comparison to how many are reviewed. Time will answer whether this detail will be expanded to include other SAs or for it to change to something else all together. The fact remains the Agency has over a million cases pending and in my opinion, every idea should be explored including expanding SA adjudicatory authority to more than 3% of the SAs.
Pertaining to hiring, I point out there were over 600 SAs when I was promoted; now it's around 500 plus. Some are retiring or getting promoted and not being replaced. At the moment, the Agency has decided to not fill positions where a spot was once opened with a SA. You can go on the internal job site and management positions are generally advertised for attorneys. Once again, time will be the answer on what the Agency will do with the SA program.
|
|
|
Post by daisyjane on Oct 15, 2015 13:24:13 GMT -5
George,
Your description of your SA duties were all part of the original SA Program when it first began in 1995 except for the Quality reviews and Signature authority.
I wanted to address your comment, "So as a senior, duties vary but it is not like a DW where tasks revolve around only writing." I could not agree more; however, would someone please tell this to the managers and powers that be in Falls Church and Baltimore because they apparently did not get that message!
Throughout much of the nation's ODAR offices, Senior Attorney DW "production numbers" are still compared to full time decision writers, and they continue to be repeatedly harassed when their numbers do not measure up to full time DW's, which they obviously are not with all the other duties we perform. In fact, in my office and others, managers have engaged in illegal Prohibited Personnel Practices with the encouragement and support of Regional Office managers to FORCE some Senior Attorneys out the door into an involuntary "Constructive Discharge or Retirement" solely because their DW production numbers run lower than those of full time DW's. Many of the targeted Senior Attorneys have a reputation and documented history of several years with ODAR of performing superior work in terms of quality and the number of cases they are able to review and evaluate. As I stated in my earlier posts, this problem exists because members of the "old regime," and/or the minions/cronies they appointed to these power managerial positions, detest the SA program and misplace their obsession with "production numbers" on individual ALJ's, SA's and DW's rather than the most efficient method of production which will reduce he overall "NUMBER/backlog" of disability cases. Changes must be made at the highest levels in the Agency. With any luck, that is coming very soon.
The Senior Attorney program in all its original glory as implemented in 1995 provides a much needed career path for ODAR attorneys. Without it, an ODAR Attorney DW is a dead end position and there is absolutely no motivation for these attorneys to stay with the Agency. Moreover, the Agency is much better served by the legal skills they provide as licensed attorneys.
One can only hope sanity will prevail!
|
|
|
Post by redryder on Oct 15, 2015 15:04:37 GMT -5
I hate to be the bearer of bad tidings, but there will never be a career ladder from any government attorney position into an ALJ position. Becoming an ALJ is not considered a promotion, even if you stay in the same agency. It is a competitive appointment. If you get the ALJ job and don't like it, you cannot go back to your former position. If you can't do the job, the agency can't demote you. They can only move to terminate you.
|
|
|
Post by saaao on Oct 15, 2015 15:39:30 GMT -5
I hate to be the bearer of bad tidings, but there will never be a career ladder from any government attorney position into an ALJ position. Becoming an ALJ is not considered a promotion, even if you stay in the same agency. It is a competitive appointment. If you get the ALJ job and don't like it, you cannot go back to your former position. If you can't do the job, the agency can't demote you. They can only move to terminate you. Unless I am misreading DJ's post I don't think she is describing a career ladder to ALJ but simply a way for ODAR attorneys to not get stuck in a dead end at GS-12's. Let's face it, no one goes to law school to be a GS-12 and even GS-13 as a top out is a matter of lowered expectations. Hiring attorneys just to be decision writers for life is a waste of talent and a great way to insure high turnover.
|
|
|
Post by redryder on Oct 15, 2015 16:32:40 GMT -5
Dear SAAAO: I was responding to a post from Lonely Writer which appears to have been deleted somehow, someway. He specifically raised the issue of a career ladder from DW to ALJ. That being said, I don't have a lot of sympathy with your argument that no one went to law school to be a GS 12 or GS 13. Working for the government is like working for any other employer. No one forces you to take the job or stay in the job. When I came on board in 1989 as a GS 12, there was one GS 13 in the office and I understood from the beginning that my job advancement potential was nil. But the job had other attractions for me--no travel, no weekend or overtime work unless I wanted to do it, better leave/insurance, and a job I could leave in an instant in an emergency (unlike private practice). I am not the only one who apparently has this viewpoint. There is no high turnover in this office. The attorneys stay until they retire or get a promotion or in some cases an ALJ appointment.
|
|
|
Post by mamaru on Oct 15, 2015 22:15:56 GMT -5
I agree that there are good reasons to take the job, especially the ones noted by redryder. In a bad legal market, this job is a wonderful port in a strom. I pinched myself for months about the no travel, no weekends or overtime, telework, etc. As for the low turnover, I think that is due to a combination of people who continue to be satisfied with the combination or pay/benefits/flexibility the position offers and the lack of marketability of the skills developed as a writer. Turnover may be low, but many who would like to leave (for whatever reason) find it difficult to find a new job after years of doing nothing but writing decisions. Not a "transferable skill" in the opinion of lots of law firms.
|
|
|
Post by redryder on Oct 16, 2015 16:36:31 GMT -5
While in the think tank this morning (also known as a hot shower), I was ruminating about the grade given to the decision writers in ODAR and why they differ than the grades in other agencies. I wondered how many of those who follow this board are aware that ODAR does not determine the pay grade for the decision writer job. The job description is prepared by ODAR but the grade is determined by OPM. So it s not a matter of SSA or ODAR simply deciding to upgrade the attorneys. When the senior attorney program came out, there was a specific job description issued with additional duties to justify the increase in grade.
But as Super Bonbon said, there were no metrics applied. Each office seemed to interpret the job differently. And like the ALJ corps and the DW corps, there have been really productive senior attorneys and really marginal ones. But the concept was a great one. The fault was in the implementation.
|
|