|
Post by Thomas fka Lance on Feb 8, 2016 16:48:16 GMT -5
Sorry, Tripper, I do not know when or if OT will resume, other than "sometime" and "probably" lol
|
|
|
Post by montyburns on Feb 8, 2016 19:16:20 GMT -5
Sorry, Tripper, I do not know when or if OT will resume, other than "sometime" and "probably" lol Oh man that stinks. Not only for my checking account, but if they are suspending OT and there's not going to be any surge of hiring? Yikes, we were barely (if that) containing the backlog as it was with unlimited OT. That said, they had a 10 hour/week limitation in the past few years (where I am anyway), ad was pretty surprised they were offering basically unlimited OT, I think I did 100 hours since November. Hopefully they'll return to the limited OT at least.
And thanks for the info. The suddenness of the cessation (I had been approved for 20 hours last week and it was taken away the next day) made me think the "HQ doesn't know what the ROs/HOs are doing" theory might have traction.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeRatty on Feb 8, 2016 20:37:25 GMT -5
They have OT when they can and offer it when they can. Don't read too much into any of it and certainly do not connect it to hiring or opening spots for SAAs or otherwise. Budgets are fluid and subject to changing tides. In 2007-2010 we had 18 hours a week OT. Yes per week. Then we had a dry spell. Then it was sporadic. Now it is sporadic again. It means nothing. Just money management at a higher level.
|
|
|
Post by christina on Feb 9, 2016 8:09:50 GMT -5
well, OT was cut AFTER the 2010 hires, which involved a lot of new hires. i remember our HOD, who was an old timer, being wide eyed on how may people he could hire and the hiring that would be agency wide. He said he had never seen anything like that.
But as i pointed out, we maintained OT until we had actually hired people. Still judreatty's point is well taken. OT is more due to money mangt at higher levels than anything else. and also at some level, Regional calls and even the local office as to how they want to use it.
There have been times where OT was focused more on the district offices than ODAR's and vice versa. Also, when it does get cut back, Feb/March is not that unusual due to March being the fiscal mid year and then in those years, OT can pick back up later in the year.
|
|
|
Post by bac on Feb 9, 2016 8:23:31 GMT -5
Is this all on the QT?
|
|
|
Post by Propmaster on Feb 9, 2016 11:11:06 GMT -5
Sorry, Tripper, I do not know when or if OT will resume, other than "sometime" and "probably" lol Oh man that stinks. Not only for my checking account, but if they are suspending OT and there's not going to be any surge of hiring? Yikes, we were barely (if that) containing the backlog as it was with unlimited OT. That said, they had a 10 hour/week limitation in the past few years (where I am anyway), ad was pretty surprised they were offering basically unlimited OT, I think I did 100 hours since November. Hopefully they'll return to the limited OT at least.
And thanks for the info. The suddenness of the cessation (I had been approved for 20 hours last week and it was taken away the next day) made me think the "HQ doesn't know what the ROs/HOs are doing" theory might have traction.
Writers in our office have not had overtime for weeks because of a "drought" of decisions to be drafted nationally (according to our management). Only work-up was qualified for OT (and comp, and, oddly, credit hours). One would think there is a backlog of decisions to write, but the real backlog seems to be felt to be in the ALJ area, not the drafting.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2016 11:25:13 GMT -5
At NCAC we were given 12 hours of decision writing OT per week for January and told at the time there would be OT like this available for the "foreseeable" future, maybe till September. All OT was cancelled after the third week of January.
As far as the writing backlog, the most recent figure I heard from a supervisor is that there is still a 25,000 case backlog waiting to be written, down from 50,000 last year.
However, the "million case" backlog is a national tragedy that will ONLY be fixed within our current system by hiring 500 to 2,000 new ALJS.
|
|
|
Post by fingerscrossed on Feb 9, 2016 12:10:23 GMT -5
This may sound like a silly question, not sure. I am a newbie and I am just trying to understand the backlog issue. If ALJs are "required" to disposition 500 cases a year and SSA has 2000 ALJs (not sure of the total number of ALJs currently), can't the backlog be addressed in one fiscal year (2000 x 500). I know it's not that simple because cases get rescheduled, claimants are no-shows, records may need to be developed further etc. I guess I am trying to understand this issue more. I know more ALJs are needed (judges retire, transfer, office are understaffed, etc.) and new cases are filed each year so the cases in inventory is always a moving target. Can anyone shed additional light on this?
|
|
|
Post by Gaidin on Feb 9, 2016 12:35:38 GMT -5
Oh man that stinks. Not only for my checking account, but if they are suspending OT and there's not going to be any surge of hiring? Yikes, we were barely (if that) containing the backlog as it was with unlimited OT. That said, they had a 10 hour/week limitation in the past few years (where I am anyway), ad was pretty surprised they were offering basically unlimited OT, I think I did 100 hours since November. Hopefully they'll return to the limited OT at least.
And thanks for the info. The suddenness of the cessation (I had been approved for 20 hours last week and it was taken away the next day) made me think the "HQ doesn't know what the ROs/HOs are doing" theory might have traction.
Writers in our office have not had overtime for weeks because of a "drought" of decisions to be drafted nationally (according to our management). Only work-up was qualified for OT (and comp, and, oddly, credit hours). One would think there is a backlog of decisions to write, but the real backlog seems to be felt to be in the ALJ area, not the drafting. I'd be glad to try and help them out with that. All I need is a mop closet and a computer (and some training).
|
|
|
Post by gary on Feb 9, 2016 12:38:15 GMT -5
Writers in our office have not had overtime for weeks because of a "drought" of decisions to be drafted nationally (according to our management). Only work-up was qualified for OT (and comp, and, oddly, credit hours). One would think there is a backlog of decisions to write, but the real backlog seems to be felt to be in the ALJ area, not the drafting. I'd be glad to try and help them out with that. All I need is a mop closet and a computer (and some training). Before you leave every night, will you empty the mop bucket?
|
|
|
Post by Gaidin on Feb 9, 2016 12:38:25 GMT -5
This may sound like a silly question, not sure. I am a newbie and I am just trying to understand the backlog issue. If ALJs are "required" to disposition 500 cases a year and SSA has 2000 ALJs (not sure of the total number of ALJs currently), can't the backlog be addressed in one fiscal year (2000 x 500). I know it's not that simple because cases get rescheduled, claimants are no-shows, records may need to be developed further etc. I guess I am trying to understand this issue more. I know more ALJs are needed (judges retire, transfer, office are understaffed, etc.) and new cases are filed each year so the cases in inventory is always a moving target. Can anyone shed additional light on this? You're ignoring the constant input of new cases. There are approximately 1400 ODAR ALJs.
|
|
|
Post by Gaidin on Feb 9, 2016 12:39:03 GMT -5
I'd be glad to try and help them out with that. All I need is a mop closet and a computer (and some training). Before you leave every night, will you empty the mop bucket? Heck I would be willing to mop up before I leave.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2016 12:45:54 GMT -5
This may sound like a silly question, not sure. I am a newbie and I am just trying to understand the backlog issue. If ALJs are "required" to disposition 500 cases a year and SSA has 2000 ALJs (not sure of the total number of ALJs currently), can't the backlog be addressed in one fiscal year (2000 x 500). I know it's not that simple because cases get rescheduled, claimants are no-shows, records may need to be developed further etc. I guess I am trying to understand this issue more. I know more ALJs are needed (judges retire, transfer, office are understaffed, etc.) and new cases are filed each year so the cases in inventory is always a moving target. Can anyone shed additional light on this? You're ignoring the constant input of new cases. There are approximately 1400 ODAR ALJs. He was asking about my opinion that 500-2000 more ALJs are needed to actually get rid of the back log. So, with 1400 ALJS plus 2000 ALJs hired, maybe 3,400 ALJs could get rid of the back log in 1-2 years.
Then that creates problems. If the backlog was taken care of, and the balance could be maintained by half that 3,400, say 1,700 ALJs could keep the SSA current if there was no backlog, what do you do with the other 1,700 ALJs?
Would people be willing to serve under a Not-To-Exceed (NTE) 2 year term the way SSA hires new AA/DWs at the NCACs?
Another big reason they won't hire 2,000 more ALJs is the expense of support staff. Forget the physical logistics of where to put them, I've heard it could take as much as 4 support staff to support every ALJ hired. Probably an exaggeration, but the point is valid.
|
|
|
Post by tripper on Feb 9, 2016 13:07:50 GMT -5
You're ignoring the constant input of new cases. There are approximately 1400 ODAR ALJs. He was asking about my opinion that 500-2000 more ALJs are needed to actually get rid of the back log. So, with 1400 ALJS plus 2000 ALJs hired, maybe 3,400 ALJs could get rid of the back log in 1-2 years.
Then that creates problems. If the backlog was taken care of, and the balance could be maintained by half that 3,400, say 1,700 ALJs could keep the SSA current if there was no backlog, what do you do with the other 1,700 ALJs?
Would people be willing to serve under a Not-To-Exceed (NTE) 2 year term the way SSA hires new AA/DWs at the NCACs?[/p]
Another big reason they won't hire 2,000 more ALJs is the expense of support staff. Forget the physical logistics of where to put them, I've heard it could take as much as 4 support staff to support every ALJ hired. Probably an exaggeration, but the point is valid.
Not a chance.
|
|
|
Post by mercury on Feb 9, 2016 13:11:17 GMT -5
Forget the physical logistics of where to put them, I've heard it could take as much as 4 support staff to support every ALJ hired. Probably an exaggeration, but the point is valid. [/p]
Not being snarky, but I heard 4.5, however that includes ALL HO staff, from case techs to HOD.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2016 14:47:01 GMT -5
One of the main criticisms of the program has been that a disability claimant has more levels of appeal than a capital murder defendant. SSA ALJs are radically overpaid and the job is not that hard Any attorney could easily perform the job as well or better after the 6 week training. Leaving the politics out, these three statements, in my mind, undermine your credibility.
|
|
|
Post by valkyrie on Feb 9, 2016 14:57:22 GMT -5
If we were serious about doing away with the backlog we would radically change the system to where its mostly like the DDS. There are no ALJs its just gs-13 disability hearing officers who are attorneys that work for ODAR. One of the main criticisms of the program has been that a disability claimant has more levels of appeal than a capital murder defendant. If you don't like what you get, you still have the appeals council and federal court, they can hire a few more magistrates. You shift a lot of the backlog and most of the difficult cases to the judicial branch and have them decide or the AC decide not simply remand. SSA ALJs are radically overpaid and the job is not that hard (sure I haven't done the job but you get a pretty good sense of the job spending years working with them) The ALJ's value, in theory, stems from those years of experience namely lit experience that informs their ability to make a valuable credibility analysis. The actual law is not all that complicated. That ALJ value is too expensive with how massive the disability program has become. Have the paralegals write the decisions. The ALJ system is outdated with respect to Social Security. Any attorney could easily perform the job as well or better after the 6 week training. ALJs are necessary for those other agencies with lower case loads where cases are much more complex. You performance rate the attorneys based on production not outcomes. Just like they want to do with ALJs (500-700). You can hire and fire attorneys way quicker and you can hire them on 2 year terms. Under this paradigm you blow through the backlog and then you have so many attorneys you CDR the hell out of people to ease republican fraud concerns. But were not serious about ending the backlog because its not a national outrage because these are mostly nonveteran poor people with no voice. and because NOSSCR and the AALJ would never allow it. The VA backlog in my area is basically gone because it was a national outrage. Hell the GOP wants adversarial hearings with someone representing the government. Some even believe part of the functionality of the program is its a total pain in the ass and takes years to get disability. Others want a backlog because it undermines public confidence of the federal government it perpetuates the stereotypes of the bureaucracy. Feeds the idea that government is always the problem and can never do anything right. The program has to be broken in order to shut it down. The backlog is never going away if it does it will be when the program goes insolvent or when the GOP finally figures out a way to outsource the adjudication process to a private insurance company. You seriously want to model something other than a cartoon after the DDS?!?!?! Maybe after that we can reconstruct the Constitution using Hallex as a model! Sorry to be flip, but the DDS is very much subject to managerial pressure regarding its favorable/unfavorable rate, which would probably irritate people more than anything. Back in the old days of the paper cases you could find some sweet little memos from a DDS manager to a DDS medical consultant saying, "Are you sure about the light exertional RFC? This will result in a favorable determination." Following the memo would be a revised RFC for medium. I'll be the first to admit that the AALJ has shamelessly used "Due Process" as a crutch for just about anything, but without an ALJ, SSA can abuse a claimant far worse than they can with an ALJ.
|
|
|
Post by ba on Feb 9, 2016 15:03:08 GMT -5
If we were serious about doing away with the backlog we would radically change the system to where its mostly like the DDS. There are no ALJs its just gs-13 disability hearing officers who are attorneys that work for ODAR. One of the main criticisms of the program has been that a disability claimant has more levels of appeal than a capital murder defendant. If you don't like what you get, you still have the appeals council and federal court, they can hire a few more magistrates. You shift a lot of the backlog and most of the difficult cases to the judicial branch and have them decide or the AC decide not simply remand. SSA ALJs are radically overpaid and the job is not that hard (sure I haven't done the job but you get a pretty good sense of the job spending years working with them) The ALJ's value, in theory, stems from those years of experience namely lit experience that informs their ability to make a valuable credibility analysis. The actual law is not all that complicated. That ALJ value is too expensive with how massive the disability program has become. Have the paralegals write the decisions. The ALJ system is outdated with respect to Social Security. Any attorney could easily perform the job as well or better after the 6 week training. ALJs are necessary for those other agencies with lower case loads where cases are much more complex. You performance rate the attorneys based on production not outcomes. Just like they want to do with ALJs (500-700). You can hire and fire attorneys way quicker and you can hire them on 2 year terms. Under this paradigm you blow through the backlog and then you have so many attorneys you CDR the hell out of people to ease republican fraud concerns. But were not serious about ending the backlog because its not a national outrage because these are mostly nonveteran poor people with no voice. and because NOSSCR and the AALJ would never allow it. The VA backlog in my area is basically gone because it was a national outrage. Hell the GOP wants adversarial hearings with someone representing the government. Some even believe part of the functionality of the program is its a total pain in the ass and takes years to get disability. Others want a backlog because it undermines public confidence of the federal government it perpetuates the stereotypes of the bureaucracy. Feeds the idea that government is always the problem and can never do anything right. The program has to be broken in order to shut it down. The backlog is never going away if it does it will be when the program goes insolvent or when the GOP finally figures out a way to outsource the adjudication process to a private insurance company. This has to be one of the most absurd posts I have read in a long time. It honestly makes me wonder how the agency can employ attorneys without even a basic understanding of administrative law. Wow. Just. Wow.
|
|
|
Post by valkyrie on Feb 9, 2016 15:10:29 GMT -5
If we were serious about doing away with the backlog we would radically change the system to where its mostly like the DDS. There are no ALJs its just gs-13 disability hearing officers who are attorneys that work for ODAR. One of the main criticisms of the program has been that a disability claimant has more levels of appeal than a capital murder defendant. If you don't like what you get, you still have the appeals council and federal court, they can hire a few more magistrates. You shift a lot of the backlog and most of the difficult cases to the judicial branch and have them decide or the AC decide not simply remand. SSA ALJs are radically overpaid and the job is not that hard (sure I haven't done the job but you get a pretty good sense of the job spending years working with them) The ALJ's value, in theory, stems from those years of experience namely lit experience that informs their ability to make a valuable credibility analysis. The actual law is not all that complicated. That ALJ value is too expensive with how massive the disability program has become. Have the paralegals write the decisions. The ALJ system is outdated with respect to Social Security. Any attorney could easily perform the job as well or better after the 6 week training. ALJs are necessary for those other agencies with lower case loads where cases are much more complex. You performance rate the attorneys based on production not outcomes. Just like they want to do with ALJs (500-700). You can hire and fire attorneys way quicker and you can hire them on 2 year terms. Under this paradigm you blow through the backlog and then you have so many attorneys you CDR the hell out of people to ease republican fraud concerns. But were not serious about ending the backlog because its not a national outrage because these are mostly nonveteran poor people with no voice. and because NOSSCR and the AALJ would never allow it. The VA backlog in my area is basically gone because it was a national outrage. Hell the GOP wants adversarial hearings with someone representing the government. Some even believe part of the functionality of the program is its a total pain in the ass and takes years to get disability. Others want a backlog because it undermines public confidence of the federal government it perpetuates the stereotypes of the bureaucracy. Feeds the idea that government is always the problem and can never do anything right. The program has to be broken in order to shut it down. The backlog is never going away if it does it will be when the program goes insolvent or when the GOP finally figures out a way to outsource the adjudication process to a private insurance company. This has to be one of the most absurd posts I have read in a long time. It honestly makes me wonder how the agency can employ attorneys without even a basic understanding of administrative law. Wow. Just. Wow. Lets not get personal. Working for a moron ALJ(s) can drive anyone to their limits. I agree that the agency cannot just ALJ hire itself out of the backlog. It DOES need to sustain consistent replacement hiring, which it has not been able to do because of OPM and budget issues. The most obvious change that I can think of is just doing away with the AC. While failing to effectively serve its purpose as an appellate unit, it just adds to the backlog.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2016 15:16:45 GMT -5
The most obvious change that I can think of is just doing away with the AC. While failing to effectively serve its purpose as an appellate unit, it just adds to the backlog. I can't believe the relatively few cases that get sent back by the AC affects the back log so much that its worth getting rid of what little ALJ oversight we have.
why don't you think we can hire more ALJs to get rid of the backlog? If we hire 750 to 1000 new ALJs over the next 3 years (with support staff) I think we would be rid of the back log in 6 to 9 years. My opinion from looking at the numbers.
|
|