|
Post by saaao on Jun 16, 2013 12:04:55 GMT -5
I have worked with many SAA and AA's and while many may be able to write a defendable decision, some cannot do so consistently. Also, many lack people skills and the ability to connect to claimants one-on-one. Many don't have the demeanor to conduct ALJ hearings. Some are so use to the little world of ODAR, they forget about the real world of dealing with severely disabled claimants. A lot of them are very introverted and lack the confidence to deal with different people on a consistent basis. Many are very capable and many are not. So, insiders working at ODAR don't necessarily have any more ability to be an ALJ, than someone from outside the agency. I have been following the back and forth on this insider v. outsider debate and I'm not sure what the point is. In all iterations of the OPM ALJ selection process the qualification standards have been varying degrees of arbitrary and not particularly suited to selecting the best match needed for judicial temperament, ODAR or otherwise. While it's not universally true, attorneys are stereotyped as having poor personalities for generally pretty fair reasons. The contentious, aggressive and demanding demeanor that serves a successful litigator well in practice will be a detriment as an ODAR ALJ. The introverted, never leave your office, hates to talk to people personality that does draw some AA's and to a lesser extent SAA's to their job will not be helpful to conducting a hearing and dealing with reps. Personality issues are personality issues and are unfortunately prevalent in this profession, whether insider or outsider. The obvious advantage that insiders bring is their knowledge of the law and ODAR business processes, both of which can be baffling to those from the outside. Obviously cutting down on the learning curve is a big deal for an agency where production is paramount. There is also the obvious advantage of hiring a known quantity for a position where termination literally becomes a Federal Case. When the conduct of ALJs results in congressional hearings before a congress that is already disposed to be unfriendly to the disability program, you can't really blame the agency for wanting to hire the known over the unknown. It doesn't mean that ODAR insiders are magical paragons of ethical excellence, but when references are called the agency is going to have the benefit of talking to a HOCALJ who has seen that attorney at work and interacting with staff. Having said that new ALJ's coming in from outside should not have any problems learning the system, if they will make a good faith effort to learn it. The law is pretty simple compared to most other areas of law, and once learned the business processes are fairly mechanical. Those who have been signing into CLE just to get breakfast for the past twenty years will have problems if they bring that attitude to training, but if you will pay attention and check your ego at the door it won't be hard. The outside litigation experience is invaluable for good credibility evaluations and legal analysis, neither of which are skills that an AA who has done nothing else since law school will have had the opportunity to hone in a real world environment. Since SAA's have adjudicative responsibilities they should be better at that but sometimes they are socially promoted and also don't get this. This of course ignores that many AA's and SAA's also worked outside the agency prior to their current position. So there are two arguments for either side of the coin. It's pretty much moot. OPM is going to do what OPM is going to do, and the SSA is going to pick the people that it feels best meet the needs of the agency. They will probably grab as many insiders as they can, but I am sure quite a few insiders will also get passed over despite high scores because they got a thumbs down from someone. I also have no doubt that the first ALJ class off the new register will have plenty of people who have no experience at all with disability law beyond seeing the Binder and Binder commercials. And I have no doubt that the majority will be professional and productive in their jobs whatever their backgrounds, and that there will be a small but highly visible contingent who will be aggressively terrible and spark a series of highly critical news coverage in various news outlets. And then OPM, SSA, and the ALJ union will point their fingers at each other and scream how it everyone else's fault.
|
|
|
Post by moopigsdad on Jun 16, 2013 13:01:15 GMT -5
I have worked with many SAA and AA's and while many may be able to write a defendable decision, some cannot do so consistently. Also, many lack people skills and the ability to connect to claimants one-on-one. Many don't have the demeanor to conduct ALJ hearings. Some are so use to the little world of ODAR, they forget about the real world of dealing with severely disabled claimants. A lot of them are very introverted and lack the confidence to deal with different people on a consistent basis. Many are very capable and many are not. So, insiders working at ODAR don't necessarily have any more ability to be an ALJ, than someone from outside the agency. I have been following the back and forth on this insider v. outsider debate and I'm not sure what the point is. In all iterations of the OPM ALJ selection process the qualification standards have been varying degrees of arbitrary and not particularly suited to selecting the best match needed for judicial temperament, ODAR or otherwise. While it's not universally true, attorneys are stereotyped as having poor personalities for generally pretty fair reasons. The contentious, aggressive and demanding demeanor that serves a successful litigator well in practice will be a detriment as an ODAR ALJ. The introverted, never leave your office, hates to talk to people personality that does draw some AA's and to a lesser extent SAA's to their job will not be helpful to conducting a hearing and dealing with reps. Personality issues are personality issues and are unfortunately prevalent in this profession, whether insider or outsider. The obvious advantage that insiders bring is their knowledge of the law and ODAR business processes, both of which can be baffling to those from the outside. Obviously cutting down on the learning curve is a big deal for an agency where production is paramount. There is also the obvious advantage of hiring a known quantity for a position where termination literally becomes a Federal Case. When the conduct of ALJs results in congressional hearings before a congress that is already disposed to be unfriendly to the disability program, you can't really blame the agency for wanting to hire the known over the unknown. It doesn't mean that ODAR insiders are magical paragons of ethical excellence, but when references are called the agency is going to have the benefit of talking to a HOCALJ who has seen that attorney at work and interacting with staff. Having said that new ALJ's coming in from outside should not have any problems learning the system, if they will make a good faith effort to learn it. The law is pretty simple compared to most other areas of law, and once learned the business processes are fairly mechanical. Those who have been signing into CLE just to get breakfast for the past twenty years will have problems if they bring that attitude to training, but if you will pay attention and check your ego at the door it won't be hard. The outside litigation experience is invaluable for good credibility evaluations and legal analysis, neither of which are skills that an AA who has done nothing else since law school will have had the opportunity to hone in a real world environment. Since SAA's have adjudicative responsibilities they should be better at that but sometimes they are socially promoted and also don't get this. This of course ignores that many AA's and SAA's also worked outside the agency prior to their current position. So there are two arguments for either side of the coin. It's pretty much moot. OPM is going to do what OPM is going to do, and the SSA is going to pick the people that it feels best meet the needs of the agency. They will probably grab as many insiders as they can, but I am sure quite a few insiders will also get passed over despite high scores because they got a thumbs down from someone. I also have no doubt that the first ALJ class off the new register will have plenty of people who have no experience at all with disability law beyond seeing the Binder and Binder commercials. And I have no doubt that the majority will be professional and productive in their jobs whatever their backgrounds, and that there will be a small but highly visible contingent who will be aggressively terrible and spark a series of highly critical news coverage in various news outlets. And then OPM, SSA, and the ALJ union will point their fingers at each other and scream how it everyone else's fault. I can't disagree with any of this thinking either. I do agree there is an advantage for someone who knows Social Security law (whether an insider or outsider) over someone who has never practiced it or very little of it.
|
|
|
Post by 71stretch on Jun 16, 2013 16:04:28 GMT -5
I think a medical legal background is useful, whether it's from SSA or worker's comp or medical malpractice or personal injury. The medical stuff takes some time to get comfortable with... those of us who've been doing it for a long time and can "speak doctor" and are still fascinated by the medical issues and the way people deal with them, are good candidates in that respect, in my unbiased opinion.
|
|
|
Post by workdrone on Jun 16, 2013 19:12:31 GMT -5
So there are two arguments for either side of the coin. It's pretty much moot. OPM is going to do what OPM is going to do, and the SSA is going to pick the people that it feels best meet the needs of the agency. They will probably grab as many insiders as they can, but I am sure quite a few insiders will also get passed over despite high scores because they got a thumbs down from someone. I also have no doubt that the first ALJ class off the new register will have plenty of people who have no experience at all with disability law beyond seeing the Binder and Binder commercials. And I have no doubt that the majority will be professional and productive in their jobs whatever their backgrounds, and that there will be a small but highly visible contingent who will be aggressively terrible and spark a series of highly critical news coverage in various news outlets. And then OPM, SSA, and the ALJ union will point their fingers at each other and scream how it everyone else's fault. Well said! People have been arguing this issue on this board since 2007, and this is still the way things are...
|
|
|
Post by Orly on Jun 16, 2013 20:12:52 GMT -5
And then OPM, SSA, and the ALJ union will point their fingers at each other and scream how it everyone else's fault This:
|
|
|
Post by valkyrie on Jun 17, 2013 9:58:33 GMT -5
You're on a roll Orly! But each one should be pointing one gun at his foot...
|
|
|
Post by valkyrie on Jun 17, 2013 10:02:37 GMT -5
I'll go ahead and throw my chips in with the agreement crowd. I just have a cruel streak where sometimes I just can't keep myself from poking a dumb, scared, cornered animal with a stick just to see what will happen...
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Jun 22, 2013 10:15:38 GMT -5
I have followed this thread with real fascination. Why some experience counts and some doesnt. Why a "litigator" would want to be an ALJ. Whether a person with ODAR experience would make a better ALJ than a former "litigator." Apparently these battles have been going on as long as this board has been in operation. Thus, I am hesitant to step on toes that have been entrenched for so long. But what the hell, I am glutton for punishment (which is why I endure the OPM terror in the first place).
As background, and in amswer to why a litigator would want to work at ODAR, I will give a quick biography. Right out of law school I worked for a massive firm that did nationwide class action litigation representing plaintiffs. For 12 long years i put in long hours, six days a week, and made pretty good bank. Then Tort Reform hit and firms started laying off hundreds of attorneys. i wasnt laid off, but i realized the partnership i had been led to believe was just around the corner was no longer realistic. So, like many others I decided to hang a shingle. i then spent 5 years fighting for car wrecks, DUIs and divorces with every other street lawyer. The income wasnt bad, but the lack of benefits and the inability to get health insurance was a strain. i then found ODAR, applied and was hired as a decision writer. My two years in that position was a blessing and a curse. Great for family life, pay was less than I was used to but not horrible and teh benefits were great. But it was, as others note, boring. Later, i was promoted to Senior Attorney. I remain in that position. I get to make some decisions, do some of my own work up and generally perform all the functions of an ALJ except the hearing. I love it. It gives me the personal satisfaction of actually making a difference that being a simple decision writer couldnt. So, thats how an experienced "litigator" decides to try for ALJ. The fact is, times are tuff out in the private sector. More and more kids graduate law school to find no jobs. And the towns and cities can only support so many street lawyers fighting eachother for clients. Gov work is an oasis and, if you find a niche that appeases your professional desires, is quite rewarding in a way working in the private sector can never be.
As to the question of which type of ALJ, one with ODAR experience or litigation experience' is best....really it cant be generalized. my office has 10 judges. 6 have only prior ODAR experience, 1 has other gov experience and 3 were private "litigators". The nonODAR ones do make a lot of mistakes right out of the gate. But its on things involving technical program requirements, not the big stuff. And after a year or so they have handled enough cases that those mistakes are remedied. the ODAR folks dont make those mistakes, but they also are prone to look more at production numbers than the details. I'm not trying to generalize, they are all concientious judges that try to do the right thing, and I'm not saying any of you fit either of these molds. Its just what i see in my office. I think the office works cause we have a combination of both. i wouldnt say one track to ALJ is better than another.
As someone previously noted, SSA lobbied hard to get their decision writers expereince counted as qualifying. OPM obliged...sort of. If you have 7 years of DW experience you should make it past phase 1 on the new testing. But, OPM added a pretty significnat wrinkle. In the past, ALJ testing required the Accomplishment Record and it was such that you could use Admin law (including decision writing) to meet the threshold requirements. the new testing is different. The only experience concnern involved litigation experience. So, DWs might have gotten by stepo 1, but without litigation experience i dont see how they get by step 2. of teh six ALJ's I referenced before in my office that have exclusively ODAR experience, all six have admitted to me that they would not have gotten past step 2 of this testing because they didnt have qualifying "litigation experience." Why OPM has gone that route or whether its a good thing is as unkown to me as what OPM will do next.
Getting one of these jobs is like getting superpowers from being struck by lightening while on the way to cash your winning lottery ticket. In the end those that have the job and those that get a job obvioulsy had whatever objective and subjective factors some subjective person at OPM thought would make a good ALJ. That template changes with who you ask and when you ask it.
Just my humble opinion.
|
|
|
Post by valkyrie on Jun 22, 2013 17:06:14 GMT -5
Funkyodar, I don't think anyone has really questioned "why" a litigator would take an ALJ position. Earlier in this thread it was questioned why a federal court clerk would take an ALJ position, but that is a completely different animal. Actually, I completely understand why a litigator would find the job enticing for many of the reasons you cited, along with many others. Honestly I think ODAR's best ALJ prospect is a former litigator with two years of decision-writing experience. The problem former litigators are the ones who fail to leave their aggressiveness and egos at the law firm. Obviously not every former litigator has this problem... but it is interesting to see how many of those sensitive egos get bruised on this board, and tremendously entertaining to see how they react.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeRatty on Jun 22, 2013 18:47:47 GMT -5
I think valkyrie has a great point in that applicants with varied experience, both litigation AND experience at ODAR will be ODAR's best ALJ prospect. I noticed that in our ODAR office, many of the recent (within the past 7 years since I have been there) hires have been attorneys with experience as representatives. I was one. These attorneys hit the ground running with decision writing and seem to get the senior attorney positions when they are eventually posted. I made senior attorney quickly, over several individuals who did not have prior representative experience. I wonder if this was one of the reasons, although sometimes there is no way to tell "why" one person is chosen above another. Those who are not familiar with ODAR, the senior attorney position comes with the ability to screen cases for a possible on the record decision without a hearing, and the senior attorney signs the decision under his/her own signatory authority. This is good experience toward the ALJ position, but standing alone without courtroom experience.... maybe not the "best" experience. Nothing can replace good ole courtroom experience especially when the position of ALJ revolves around controlling the courtroom. So in a long winded way, I see why ODAR fought for the experience as a writer to count, but I also see why they put in the new requisite that gives more points to those with outside litigation experience. And don't forget, "litigation" was open to how you defined it. Many different types counted...courts using the Rules of Evidence were not absolutely required, so attorneys with practice experience with disability cases or the like (other administrative experience) could count that as litigation if they supported it as such. Whether that was complex depended on your ability to support your experience level. So in earlier postings, some made statements about insiders that could not possibly get a high score on the experience assessment may not realize there are insiders who also have prior litigation experience, both as representatives and otherwise. Hopefully, all those who strive for this position will have worded their answers well enough to give themselves the credit they deserve! Good luck to all!
|
|
|
Post by maquereau on Jun 23, 2013 10:07:52 GMT -5
Some may consider getting an ALJ position akin to winning the lottery. I really don't know about that, and I'm still waiting for the alleged superpowers.
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Jun 23, 2013 10:35:33 GMT -5
Some may consider getting an ALJ position akin to winning the lottery. I really don't know about that, and I'm still waiting for the alleged superpowers. Ask a few of the truly disabled claimants that are losing their homes while they wait for someone to really look at their case and you grant them benefits. Pretty sure they think you are a superhero.
|
|
johnx
Full Member
Enter your message here...
Posts: 65
|
Post by johnx on Jun 23, 2013 11:10:25 GMT -5
when I was in private practice I had an appointed case in child support court of a young man who had an onset of severe diabetes. he lost his job at the grocery store and had to have both legs amputated and had a lot of trouble with his glucose monitoring and other diabetes-related problems. they would make him come to court every three months or so to ask him where his child support was. fortunately, nobody got ridiculous about it, but I do remember it taking a very long time for him to get his disability for him and his kids. I guess he would fit in that category.
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Jun 23, 2013 11:51:49 GMT -5
Johnx,
Exactly. I got much satisfactionin my dozen years doing class action work. Good salary, travel,intellectually challenging. no doubt I helped my clients. But I can't remember a single instance where I felt I changed a life for someone who really deserved and needed it.
In my years doing criminal defense and divorces I got satisfaction cfrom the thrill of litigation. but most rarely didit feel like the client got a better life from the experience.
People can talk about being an ALJ as being a dead area of law and repetitive and boring. Still denying people obviously trying to defraud the system is a true public service. Helping someone get the benefits they need and deserve? Well in todays bureaucratic world it doesn't get much more heroic than that.
|
|
|
Post by Ace Midnight on Jun 23, 2013 12:29:34 GMT -5
People can talk about being an ALJ as being a dead area of law and repetitive and boring. Still denying people obviously trying to defraud the system is a true public service. Helping someone get the benefits they need and deserve? Well in todays bureaucratic world it doesn't get much more heroic than that. This is how I feel about the job, as well.
|
|
|
Post by bartleby on Jun 23, 2013 14:31:42 GMT -5
There are not as many perks or benefits to the job as I thought there would be, but this is definately one of them.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeRatty on Jun 23, 2013 21:39:54 GMT -5
It is truly heartbreaking to see the disabled individuals who have gone bankrupt & homeless as they endure the long process to finally get their benefits. At least we have made some progress on the backlog, cutting the time from initial determination to hearing date. We were at 24 months when I was a rep, and now our office is half that... but I fear that if we don't keep up on the staffing, we will fall back into the longer wait times. I am sure those who have been around a while see this cycle of wait times depending on budget and public outcry. It is frustrating to see abuse when it happens since those instances seems to get more media attention than the good that we do. Even with the cases that come up with individuals trying to scam the system, overall I think we do good work. There are a lot of people at ODAR and other parts of SSA that really do take the public service aspect of the job quite seriously.
|
|
|
Post by hod on Jun 24, 2013 9:24:09 GMT -5
I am sure those who have been around a while see this cycle of wait times depending on budget and public outcry.
Sratty- When I came on board in the late 80's early 90's we, the writers, actually had down time because there were not enough cases to write. And that was back in the day when it was mostly attorney writers and we dictated the cases and then some poor clerical person ( I forget what they were called back then) had to interpret our mumblings and formulate a decision. Woe to you if a mistake was made, because correcting things on WANG required multiple steps. One got used to sending copies of decisons out with typo errors just to avoid the wrath of the person who typed the decision.
|
|
|
Post by privateatty on Jun 24, 2013 9:51:11 GMT -5
Most attorneys with whom I had practised would no more become an ALJ than become an associate to avoid the responsibility--they simply can't afford working for a 1/3rd to 1/4th of what they were making before. In addition, many hold the ALJ Judicicary in contempt due to decisions they are convinced that they could have written better or decided more "justly". I was one of them.
Funny how life changes things. Now I would not more go back to private practice than become a ditch digger. Drama is just that, drama and I've had enough for this lifetime. I always envied those fellow counsel who could shrug off their clients' nightmarish lives--now they are all a distant memory.
However, having said that I would think it would make you a far better SSA Judge to have represented folks who were living on the edge. Equity must be lived, not just studied, IMHO.
|
|
|
Post by mcb on Jun 24, 2013 9:57:25 GMT -5
Anyone remember when the AC could take 40+ months to review an ALJ decision? We've recently, in most instances, eliminated a subsequent application while the AC or Fed Ct reviews an ALJ decision, but this long backlog was the reason a subsequent app was allowed - while the first was reviewed - at the start of the last decade.
|
|