|
Post by JSteele on Mar 21, 2013 7:21:36 GMT -5
I am currently a state employee who 'defends' against disability claims so my days are spent reading medical records, participating in hearings and writing briefs. I think the ALJ position will be a seamless transition but with way more pay! I do have a question for all you current ALJs, our Hearing Officers conduct hearings and write their own opinions but from what I have been reading on other threads, it seems like the SSA ALJ only conducts the hearing, presumably rules on procedural issues, but a staff attorney actually writes the opinion. Is that correct? If so, sheesh that will be like falling off a log for me as I have done this for 17 years Could you give me a "day in the life?" Thanks much ;D
|
|
|
Post by philliesfan on Mar 21, 2013 10:04:32 GMT -5
An SSA ALJ, in addition to holding a non-adversarial hearing, assures that the record is complete, which requires reading all of the documentary evidence; after the hearing, when the record is complete, writes instructions to the decision writing staff as to the result, with a statement as to the reasoning behind that result; edits the draft decision; and, when the draft decision is complete and satisfactory, signs it.
|
|
|
Post by JSteele on Mar 21, 2013 10:24:06 GMT -5
Thanks philliesfan! Wow, that sounds like what I do now, except I would be in a decision making roll. Course I understand that actually getting an ALJ position seems to be like winning the lottery. As others have suggested, are you able to work on any type of flex schedule (4 days a week etc)?
|
|
|
Post by eyre44 on Mar 21, 2013 10:35:46 GMT -5
You can work alternative work schedules, such as 4/10. There is also work at home after a year, usually at least one day a week. There is also credit hours, so flexibility of the work schedule is one of the great perks of the job.
I wouldn't get so excited about the staff attorneys writing your decisions though. The value of that is really office dependent. I've been in offices with good writing staff and bad writing staff. Currently it is the latter and I spend A LOT of time editing, if not completely rewriting decisions.
|
|
|
Post by JSteele on Mar 21, 2013 11:26:00 GMT -5
Thanks eyere44 - would there be any prohibition to the ALJ doing a skeletal response and then having the staff writer fill in the pertinent details like citations to specific medical records? I am not sure how detailed your opinions are. For instance, sometimes our opinions are 35 pages long, with citations to specific pages, etc.
|
|
|
Post by philliesfan on Mar 21, 2013 15:21:29 GMT -5
It depends on the result. A fully favorable decision, where the claimant gets eveything he asks for, in the offices I have been in, are usually 5-7 pages long, with minimal cites to evidence. However, an unfavorable or partially favorable or one involving drugs and alcohol abuse can be much longer than that, anywhere from 7-8 pages up to 20 or so with a lot cites. There are also occasional cases that do not involve disability and how long the decision is in that type of case depends on the case.
|
|
|
Post by JSteele on Mar 21, 2013 18:04:09 GMT -5
Thanks again for your insight! From the way others and you have posted, with the caveat in certain offices, it doesn't seem like there is much standardization then? Am I reading between the lines correctly?
|
|
|
Post by eyre44 on Mar 21, 2013 19:05:44 GMT -5
There is a basic template that is standardized by the agency, which covers most decisions. The staff attorneys and paralegals then fill that in with the actual rationale using the judge's instructions. The breakdown comes in at that point. There is no standardization on the qualifications of the writers or management's willingness to deal with poor writers. In my office many were hired without submitting writing samples, so the quality varies widely. Management has not been effective in dealing with the problem.
|
|
|
Post by McLovin' on Mar 21, 2013 19:50:33 GMT -5
You can work alternative work schedules, such as 4/10. There is also work at home after a year, usually at least one day a week. There is also credit hours, so flexibility of the work schedule is one of the great perks of the job. I wouldn't get so excited about the staff attorneys writing your decisions though. The value of that is really office dependent. I've been in offices with good writing staff and bad writing staff. Currently it is the latter and I spend A LOT of time editing, if not completely rewriting decisions. Is the ALJ position manageable if you do a lot of your own writing and editing? I am a former ODAR writer/supervisor and I am concerned about this and concerned about how ALJs who are not assigned good assistants get the job done. I have seen the range of writing abilities at ODAR.
|
|
|
Post by philliesfan on Mar 21, 2013 20:31:18 GMT -5
In my current office, the decision writing quality is excellent, so there is not that much editing involvedl. I do my own dismissals and I was a former ODAR attorney/senior attorney/writer/supervisor. If I wrote my own decisions, I would not have time to hear enough cases to make the annual goal.
|
|
|
Post by bartleby on Mar 21, 2013 20:40:30 GMT -5
I think part of the problem is that a lot of the writers are under a great deal of pressure to produce numbers of decisions. You can not have quality and quanity. Something has to give. As an ALJ you will not have the time to write your own decisions. You will be lucky to find the time to edit them. I have seen a writer fired this year for low productivity. He was the best writer in the office and required virtually no editing. The Agency constantly gives lip service to quality and you must remember that the decisions are your decisions and you are liable for the quality. On the other hand, all the Agency cares about is numbers, until you get caught by the press or Congress doing something less than a full quality product or taking a short cut to make numbers and then the Agency will allow all of the blame to fall on your professional shoulders. Many of the recent Judges in trouble were held as shining examples of ODAR until the press brought public attention to them and then they were the red-headed stepchildren.. Nobody says thanks for what you did yesterday, they want to know what you are doing for them today. A fellow Judge covered a day of hearings for a HOCALJ last Monday and then got his butt chewed yesterday for not having some of his own cases moved in the system.. No good deed goes unpunished.. Your mileage may vary..
|
|
|
Post by privateatty on Mar 21, 2013 21:05:16 GMT -5
An SSA ALJ, in addition to holding a non-adversarial hearing, assures that the record is complete, which requires reading all of the documentary evidence; after the hearing, when the record is complete, writes instructions to the decision writing staff as to the result, with a statement as to the reasoning behind that result; edits the draft decision; and, when the draft decision is complete and satisfactory, signs it. I'm curious. I get that the Agency is not represented and that you have a duty to consider their position as an ALJ, but how is it not adversarial? A Claimant wants to get paid and has been denied twice by SSA or its State 'minion'. Is there not adversity in the very process? Does the caption change when the case goes from the AC to the USDC? Does the case really change into something else when counsel represents both sides at the USDC? This insistence that proceedings are "non-adversarial" to me is very strange. Cases are won and lost primarily on evidence adduced (or non-adduced). That to me is lawyering 101.
|
|
|
Post by 71stretch on Mar 21, 2013 23:09:29 GMT -5
It's not adversarial in the sense that there is no one on the hearing whose duty it is to keep the applicant from getting benefits (like a workers' comp hearing). But, jumping through the hoops, especially for the pro per applicant in an SSA hearing, would still feel adversarial, I would think.
|
|
|
Post by McLovin' on Mar 21, 2013 23:55:12 GMT -5
I think part of the problem is that a lot of the writers are under a great deal of pressure to produce numbers of decisions. You can not have quality and quanity. Something has to give. As an ALJ you will not have the time to write your own decisions. You will be lucky to find the time to edit them. I have seen a writer fired this year for low productivity. He was the best writer in the office and required virtually no editing. The Agency constantly gives lip service to quality and you must that the decisions are your decisions and you are liable for the quality. On the other hand, all the Agency cares about is numbers, until you get caught by the press or Congress doing something less than a full quality product or taking a short cut to make numbers and then the Agency will allow all of the blame to fall on your professional shoulders. Many of the recent Judges in trouble were held as shining examples of ODAR until the press brought public attention to them and then they were the red-headed stepchild.. Nobody says thanks for what you did yesterday, they want to know what you are doing for them today. A fellow Judge covered a day of hearings for a HOCALJ last Monday and then got his butt chewed yesterday for not having some of his own cases moved in the system.. No good deed goes unpunished.. Your mileage may vary.. I should know this but..is the annual goal an attainable number? When I was a decision writer in an office with a high number of denials, so few of the writers met the numbers goals every month and no one really averaged above that number. I think that it may be differnet for ALJs, though. I remember comparing the ALJ goals to the published stats and I cannot remember the answer to my own question. Those stats are interesting to me now as a private practitioner in the field.
|
|
|
Post by prescient on Mar 22, 2013 7:05:10 GMT -5
Well, the higher your pay rate, the easier it is to make goal. But, even if you are a high denier, it's not hard to make it. However, if you are a high denier, and the majority of the other ALJs in your office also have low pay rates, the writers wont be able to handle the work load, so cases will have to be shipped out to other offices. Cases written outside generally are of poorer quality, so you may have to spend more time editing them.
|
|
|
Post by maquereau on Mar 22, 2013 9:19:55 GMT -5
Bartleby is SPOT ON! That is exactly how it works at ODAR. They say they want quality decisions, but the only thing you'll get beat up on is whether you have producd a sufficient number of widgets.
|
|
|
Post by decadealj on Mar 22, 2013 11:09:25 GMT -5
One of the best things an ALJ can do to help the writers and improve productivity is to keep the decision instructions as simple and as brief as possible. ALJ David Hatfield (Ret.) (if you haven't seen his testimony on the hill this week, it was outstanding) did a terrific job of compiling the FIT templates which are esssentially necessary boilerplate and fill in the blanks. Summarize only the essential evidence relevant to your decision. If a writer tries to summarize every headache (unless its a migrane case) and temporary impairment, it will take them forever and there will probably be something new after they write it. Don't deluge them with irrelevant stuff. What they need to know is severe/nonsevere, listing, RFC, PRW or not and the rationale (short and concise- see TS opinion at Ex X, corroborated by EX Y and Z.) A 3 page decision memo is a pain in the rear and if you are goinfg to do it, fill in the FIT template provisions yourself. I rarely reopened a case because any reason meant some reason other than I forgot or I didn't get the mail (there is a rebuttable presumption that a document mailed was delivered).
|
|
|
Post by marten77 on Mar 22, 2013 13:27:22 GMT -5
There is a basic template that is standardized by the agency, which covers most decisions. The staff attorneys and paralegals then fill that in with the actual rationale using the judge's instructions. The breakdown comes in at that point. There is no standardization on the qualifications of the writers or management's willingness to deal with poor writers. In my office many were hired without submitting writing samples, so the quality varies widely. Management has not been effective in dealing with the problem. That's pretty crazy. I had to submit a writing sample in my initial application and then had to submit two more writing samples as the interview process went on. Must be an office preference thing...
|
|
|
Post by hopefalj on Mar 22, 2013 13:38:59 GMT -5
There is a basic template that is standardized by the agency, which covers most decisions. The staff attorneys and paralegals then fill that in with the actual rationale using the judge's instructions. The breakdown comes in at that point. There is no standardization on the qualifications of the writers or management's willingness to deal with poor writers. In my office many were hired without submitting writing samples, so the quality varies widely. Management has not been effective in dealing with the problem. That's pretty crazy. I had to submit a writing sample in my initial application and then had to submit two more writing samples as the interview process went on. Must be an office preference thing... I'm pretty sure outside attorneys do have to submit writing samples. I know I did, although I only had to submit one during my hiring process. However, I don't think paralegals have to submit writing samples before they get the job. I think they just have to produce numbers as an SCT or whatever. I know that there are several that have no more than a high school education. If I were to be selected, I'm pretty sure my biggest concern would be writing quality, although I imagine workup can be interesting, too.
|
|
|
Post by mcb on Mar 22, 2013 13:55:43 GMT -5
|
|