What to expect at the Interview.

[aljsouth]

Since many of you will be going through this process, I thought it a relevant topic.

I went through the interview in 2001. It was 20 to 30 minutes. All questions were canned and the panel had to ask those questions. I was at the end of the day and there was another candidate in the interview room, me and one other candidate came in as I was going into the room. Obviously some of this could have changed since then. I very much suspect that the questions will be canned and must be asked of all candidates.

Expect questions about your ability to use a computer. Willingness to sign in and sign out. Other questions trying to see if you feel as a judge you don't have to be treated like other SSA employees. I suspect you will be asked about producing tons of cases in some fashion. They also ask about dealing with all sorts of people -- all races, all religions, different sexual orientation, etc. Also expect to be told again about moving to a new site and expecting to stay there. Use your head and don't say you will agitate for a transfer from the moment of appointment.

If the panel asks if you have any questions then certainly you can ask about the process of selection and when you might hear. The panel members may well not know the answer to this. Don't ask about overtime (you don't get it) or credit time (you do only because of the union contract) or work at home (you do after 1 year because of the union contract). I would avoid relocation expenses as well. SSA is cheap, don't remind them you might be more expensive than a nongovernment hire.

I was once told that in an interview the questions the employer ask you reflect the fears of that employer. Remember this when you are asked a question. What fear of SSA does the question reflect? Of course, the same applies to your questions.

Finally, as you are interviewed post here to let people know the structure of the interview.

[testtaker]

Thank you, ALJ South, that is sage advice.

I hope other Judges post their past interview experiences here, including any questions (that they can remember) that were asked of them.

[jagghagg]

Here is what Pixie posted in answer to this question previously:

"They will be looking to see if you are the type to come on board with the agency initiatives and what they consider important in a judge. In other words will you sing along with the party line.

Video hearings will probably be a big one. Also can you use a computer to type your own decisions (not that you ever will). How do you feel about traveling to hear cases, time and attendance requirements, production (quantity vs. quality), electronic files, pooled support staff, and the list goes on.

Whatever they feel is important at the moment will be asked, and they will trot out some of the old standards mentioned above. Perhaps others will come up with some additional topics that may be on the list. "

[conanthebarbarian]

aljsouth & jagghagg: Excellent insights. Thank you. CTB

[Pixie]

Thanks Jagghagg, I couldn't have said it better myself!

And thanks for the comment in an earlier thread about the military people having to relocate far from families and home on a regular basis. We tend to forget how easy we have it in relation to others, especially the military "others." Semper Fi. Pix.

[oldtimer]

Q. If you're in a hearing with a claimant, an attorney, and a medical expert, who is the most important person in the room?

A. The claimant.

My memory isn't as good as some of the others, especially since my interview was in 1995; however, some of the previously posted questions sound familiar. Others include what to do with an uncooperative attorney, whether you're comfortable handling a large docket, and whether you're generally willing to be a "team player," i.e., following personnel rules for all employees, such as time and attendance requirements (no, just because you're a mature professional, you can't go home when you're out of work), accepting that you may not have specific staff assigned to do your work, nor little if any control over any staff (who, btw, are actually supervised not by you but by the office's management team).

And, FWIW, the current goal of the agency is for each judge to issue at least 500 dispositions per year, which probably means scheduling and holding at least 50 hearings monthly.

[oldtimer]

Private, all good ideas, but in my opinion, I'd emphasize your crushing case load, ability to follow orders/chain of command, and dedication/energy, i.e., travel to Anchorage, etc. And, yes, the tap dance is exactly the right attitude, i.e., I am a humble but highly skilled professional with zero ego!

I have to disagree slightly with Jagghagg, quoting Pixie; perhaps things have changed in recent years, but at one point judges were REQUIRED to draft a certain number of their decisions during their first months on the job, so they would better understand both the decision-making process and the drafting process.

[morgullord]

As historical footnote, I was the acting supervisory staff attorney for my region when the requirement for new ALJs to write decisions was phased out. The requirement had been initiated so that ALJs would have a better understanding of the decision-writing process and therefore would (it was assumed) prepare "better" instructions. The requirement was killed because "it was too much of a burden on the new ALJs".

[yogibear]

I've been told that they are looking for candicates who can hit the ground running, worker harder and faster than the average bear (forgive me for the pun), are computer and technology literate, adapt easily and quickly to new things, but can mostly get the cases out, whether they have to write them themselves or not.

[jennifer]

What if you can't hit the ground running? What if you've never practiced Social Security law? Should you try to read up on it now?

[privateatty]

jennifer:

I have been told by former SSA judges that that is not a big factor--the training was reputed to be top notch. That statement has been affirmed on this board. Further, I suspect touting a "little knowledge" can be a slippery slope, but what do I know?

It appears that Clark Kent is the personage to be--without the need for a phone booth.

[jagghagg]

People, I could LIVE in Anchorage ......(and have) !

PS - Oldtimer, I was only quoting, not endorsing.

[oldtimer]

Quite alright, so noted, and as morgullord notes, I was in fact obsolete anyway.

[yogibear]

Sorry to confuse. I can see how my statement about "hitting the ground running" was misleading. I really meant hit the ground running after training. They've got to expect a learning curve, but they are looking for candidates with a track record showing a good balance between quality and quantity. We should all be skilled enough to tackle any area of law and gain a certain degree of competence.

[morgullord]

I would never be the one to cast the first stone; oldtimer, I apologize if I have in some way given offense.

[lee]

I can't resist adding my two cents--I went thru the interview process in 2001 and again in 2006. I felt very good about both interviews, but was very limited geographically. Sadly, I did not get an offer. However, the comments posted here about what to expect mirror my experiences exactly. The focus was on being a team player, dealing with a high volume docket, and shared staff. It was my impression that they were trying to identify applicants with a personal agenda, prima donas, or those who could not/would not produce the number of decisions each month necessary to stay afloat. Remember that ALJs do not possess contempt authority and answer accordingly when asked hypotheticals about unruly litigants or impaired attorneys.
Good luck to everyone.

[judicature]

Lee -

How limited were you? I am down to 4 offices myself.

[odarite]

It's not about how many, it's about which few. Naming only Fargo may be less of a disadvantage than naming only Boston or only Chicago offices. If they are on the certificate, you are guaranteed to have tougher competition to get to a popular than an unpopular location.

[dazedandconfused]

oldtimer:

somewhere on this board you recently posted that for ODAR folks who have a reputation for production, the job is theirs to lose. Does that hold true for ODAR folks who are on this cert, but are probably towards the back of the bus score wise? I am in that boat. I am on the cert for 40% of the cities. I am a vet with great ODAR credentials (but with the bulk of my experience outside of ODAR), but worried my score will doom me, as I could in no way be in the top 3 (or 6 or 9 depending on the number of hires) in any city.

[aljsouth]

lee said:

I can't resist adding my two cents--I went thru the interview process in 2001 and again in 2006. I felt very good about both interviews, but was very limited geographically. Sadly, I did not get an offer. However, the comments posted here about what to expect mirror my experiences exactly. The focus was on being a team player, dealing with a high volume docket, and shared staff. It was my impression that they were trying to identify applicants with a personal agenda, prima donas, or those who could not/would not produce the number of decisions each month necessary to stay afloat. Remember that ALJs do not possess contempt authority and answer accordingly when asked hypotheticals about unruly litigants or impaired attorneys.
Good luck to everyone.

Good points. I had forgotten about the unruly claimant/attorney. I was asked that. Their fears will be shown by their questions. Your responses should be to allay those fears.

What they want to hear is someone who doesn't respond in kind and will get the number, oops, case out the door. Say you will suspend the hearing and give them time to cool off, then resume, stessing the importance to the claimant of having a hearing. Don't say you would cancel the hearing, or refuse to ever hear it, or nail the lawyer's tongue to the table (warning: odar managment has no sense of humor).

Also stress that you would seek advice from HOCALJ or mentor. In that regard, I was asked what I would do if staff member told me about problems with a decision, evidence or law. Wow! That really told me the fears they had there. Ranting or raving or complaining about staff behavior is not the correct response.