|
|
Post by Pixie on Oct 13, 2019 9:40:57 GMT -5
This morning I received the below message from one of our long time members:
"Good morning. Did you know that the subject law firm is writing articles with links to this forum sharing information such as that all overtime is cut? I am concerned as it seems information about ssa internal workings are often posted and should not be public?
Anyway just letting you know as Chief cat herder. Don’t want forum misused."
So let's limit the amount of inside information we publish on the board. Thanks, Pixie
|
|
|
|
Post by lp101 on Oct 14, 2019 7:26:53 GMT -5
This morning I received the below message from one of our long time members: "Good morning. Did you know that the subject law firm is writing articles with links to this forum sharing information such as that all overtime is cut? I am concerned as it seems information about ssa internal workings are often posted and should not be public? Anyway just letting you know as Chief cat herder. Don’t want forum misused." So let's limit the amount of inside information we publish on the board. Thanks, Pixie I understand the general point, but not the example given. Why would the amount of overtime utilized by the agency be private information? SSA is a public agency, and the public has a right to know how much or how little overtime is being used. Also, isn’t the whole point of this board to share private information about the plans and processes for hiring ALJs? |
|
|
|
Post by theadjudicator on Oct 14, 2019 8:02:21 GMT -5
This morning I received the below message from one of our long time members: "Good morning. Did you know that the subject law firm is writing articles with links to this forum sharing information such as that all overtime is cut? I am concerned as it seems information about ssa internal workings are often posted and should not be public? Anyway just letting you know as Chief cat herder. Don’t want forum misused." So let's limit the amount of inside information we publish on the board. Thanks, Pixie I understand the general point, but not the example given. Why would the amount of overtime utilized by the agency be private information? SSA is a public agency, and the public has a right to know how much or how little overtime is being used. Also, isn’t the whole point of this board to share private information about the plans and processes for hiring ALJs? IMHO, if one is to not share information he or she has learned and instead is to just provide his or her personal WAG on things related to SSA and/or ALJ hiring then the board should probably cease to exist. There is no need to take any chances that something "internal" or "private" might be revealed and provide other members with credible information. - TA |
|
|
|
Post by aljwishhope on Oct 14, 2019 8:36:48 GMT -5
There seems to be a line that is crossed. The concept that OT May be restricted for nonALJs May have some tangential relationship to consideration of pursuit of the position of ALJ. However, is ever email sent to SSA employees relevant to this ALJ forum? Some posts I see make me wonder should the contents being publicized have been marked by the sender as “confidential for internal use only.”
More importantly, I wanted Board members to be reminded that everyone reading this board is not doing so in pursuit of the ALJ position. I was taken aback to see this law firm trolling the data on this forum and linking to comments in support of their positions.
I am always willing to post any information that I find helpful. And will continue to do so with discretion. Hope this information is helpful.
|
|
|
|
Post by intothewild on Oct 14, 2019 12:25:45 GMT -5
Just make it that only members can read the forum. If someone wants to read the posts they should have to sign up with an account 😇
|
|
|
|
Post by superalj on Oct 15, 2019 14:08:22 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by theadjudicator on Oct 15, 2019 16:44:41 GMT -5
If you read the "Hall Blog" he's always had information almost instantaneously. No way he's getting his information from this board. It is like any big firm.... He has someone that SSA has hired and is reporting back. It's been going on for quite awhile....*Yawn*
|
|
|
|
Post by superalj on Oct 15, 2019 17:00:40 GMT -5
Sorry, didn't mean to imply Hall gets info from this board. I was just too lazy to start a new thread.
|
|
|
|
Post by hopefalj on Oct 15, 2019 18:07:43 GMT -5
Is the AC "agreement rate" shaming ALJs now? They can try, but frankly, I don't get any feelings of shame from remands or my affirmation rate. Rather, I generally just feel embarrassed these days when I see a remand, seldom for myself. |
|
|
|
Post by rusty on Oct 16, 2019 18:05:04 GMT -5
Especially not shamed since, after a little digging, I discovered that the reports are not accurate. My agree rate is respectable on these reports; however, none of the remands in this particular report were my cases until after the case was remanded. For this window of time reported, all the remands beside my name were for decisions made by other judges, yet the resulting remand rate is applied to me. Of course, this is the same method for the regular Dart charts and graphs also.
So, like you said, no shame.
|
|
|
|
Post by barkley on Oct 17, 2019 10:19:45 GMT -5
No shame in AC remands, since at least half of them are cases that were remanded due to their not understanding the applicable law and Regulations. It is just easier to hold another hearing and reissue the decision than try to fight the red tape to get it back to the AC.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pixie on Oct 17, 2019 11:08:53 GMT -5
One of our judges had a remand because the A/C found he didn't follow the law in his circuit. Well, as he pointed out, he had a video hearing in a another state that happened to be in a different circuit from the one where his office was located. He had specifically followed the law of the state in which he heard the case. He wanted me to ask region to send it back to the A/C. As he was right, I did so; region agreed and sent it back to the A/C. A month or so later the remand order was withdrawn. Success. Pixie
|
|
|
|
Post by quesera on Oct 18, 2019 12:25:51 GMT -5
Two thoughts here:
1. I am going to risk it all and disagree with our fearless leader, who I highly respect. I feel that government should be very transparent, including our agency. In this day and age, we are highly accountable to the citizens of this nation and they need to know what we do and how we spend money. They also deserve to know how our business process works. It stinks (see #2). Our BP dictates how and when (typically way later than we should) we serve the public. If OGC or other agency counsel labels guidance as attorney work product not to be shared outside the agency, I will respect that guidance. Maybe OHO, a legal division of SSA, should be run by lawyers, rather than Field/Operation ladder climbers who hold no law degree (crazy idea, I know!!).
2. I urge all ALJs or managers concerned about remand rates to advocate for a change in the business process, mandating that attorney advisors be tasked to actually ADVISE and review files within 60 days of RFH. As it stands, with the vast majority of cases, non-attorney staff does a non-substantive workup, and the case languishes until the ALJ does her pressured quick review, holds hearing, and issues instructions. Then the attorney writer finally reviews when it is too late to offer any advise. (Hold your nose and write it, they tell us.) I feel bad that I'm seeing errors and missed evidence that no ALJ could possibly have time to catch if she must adjudicate 500+. How about ALJs and attorneys operate as a symbiotic team? Again, another crazy idea...
|
|
|
|
Post by statman on Oct 18, 2019 13:32:55 GMT -5
We need more transparency in government; not less.
I do not think any of this implicated national security;
therefore it should be public to any interested party.
|
|
