Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2013 7:16:18 GMT -5
Hey All,
Out of sympathy for those following the list and waiting, waiting, waiting,... (I remember how it was!)I thought I should share a conversation I had with a member of management regarding a recent conference in Atlanta.
The scuttlebutt is that the Agency was trying to get the 30 hires in before October, but I got the impression that may or may not happen. The truly sad news is that given the sequester and other budget issues it was said that there would probably not be any hiring in the coming fiscal year. It was suggested that there may be some hiring after October 2014 and into early 2015.
Can anyone independently confirm? If the information is accurate and nothing changes, it's very sad for those waiting on the call. Hang in there, guys!
R
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Jul 10, 2013 8:41:15 GMT -5
Good morning Robg. I have a friend that is a GS in a region 4 office and she is attending training in ATL this week. When I read your post I texted her. She said she didn't hear such yesterday but it could have been one of the many times she dozed off. lol. Supposedly DC Sklar is speaking today and may address ALJ hiring. I know a couple months ago my office was visited by a Falls Church Bigwig and our ROCALJ. They spoke on the effects of the sequester and were pretty gloomy. It was said though, that ALJ vacancies were close to critical mass and expected to increase early next year and SSA is planning to make cuts in other budgeted expenditures to replace retiring judges while not increasing the size of the ALJ corps.
Of course, I also heard from another friend that the field offices are so understaffed that they too have been promised some act of budgetary musical chairs to fix that.
Who knows?
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Jul 10, 2013 9:19:34 GMT -5
As an example of what I mean by a critical mass of ALJ vacancies I will use my office.
We are 30% short of our allotted # of ALJs. Contrarily, we have lost no support staff. As a result, we have writers and SCTs we are struggling to keep busy. Our writers spend almost as much time writing for other offices as our own. The SCTs have also been given work from other offices. Our Seniors have been turned loose to review and pay OTRs as we don't need them in the writing pool but do need dispositions. As I understand, most offices are still operating under the old directive to have Seniors just write for the judges.
Our ALJs are miserable because our dispositional "goals" haven't been decreased in an amount reflective of our loss of ALJs. Claims continue to increase and claimants await hearings for months longer.
If there is no ALJ hiring for over a year, all the progress toward the backlog and decreasing processing time will be lost.
Don't know if other offices are as bad or worse. If mine is symbolic there is gonna be trouble.
|
|
|
Post by slainte on Jul 10, 2013 10:34:37 GMT -5
Thank you robg and funkyodar for your thoughts and intel.
It is sad that there may be no hiring for one year +, especially since I am on the current cert and trying to get on the new register. However, my political and news junkie mind thinks that no hiring until FY 15 at the earliest is more likely than not.
I was a fed employee in the mid 1990s so I remember divided government. I think that we are going through the same process now, which is a drive to a balanced budget through spending restraint-cuts. Fortunately the deficit is being cut fast but it may be a while until we get to $0, so perhaps no hiring until then. Political pressure in the form of increased hearing backlogs could help but most agencies are suffering furloughs or vacancies. Furthermore, the situation at the SSA field offices is dire which I have experienced first hand as a legal services attorney. In my area, their hours have been cut and there is limited appointment availability. Given that more of the public interact with the field offices than with ODAR, they may get hiring authority preference.
I will go forward with my life and continue to pursue the ALJ position as a long shot given the budget + stiff competition from potentially thousands of qualified candidates.
But even with all these afore-mentioned barriers, it is important to keep hope alive for what I think is a dream job.
|
|
johnx
Full Member
Enter your message here...
Posts: 65
|
Post by johnx on Jul 10, 2013 11:06:37 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Jul 10, 2013 11:08:30 GMT -5
I certainly agree the politics and budget indicate no hiring. I'm just hopeful that the impact is limited to new positions.
When my HOCALJ returned from that conference he reported being told that the replacement of retiring judges could be accomplished but not the creation of new ALJ positions. This was so, he was told, due to the net financial gain of replacing a higher salaried retiring ALJ with a lower salaried new hire. As to the higher expenses of hiring a new judge (relo expenses, training, per diem, etc) the agency was reportedly looking at cutting other expenditures. He was told the VSU was on the block and would be unlikely to be continued as an example. That would eliminate the cost of that training and program supervision. Additionally, the leadership development program's budget was cut so that selectees no longer get assignments in diff offices and must be paid travel and per diem. Instead they will get new responsibilities in their existing offices. Cuts in OT were also mentioned though there is debate on whether it would be more detrimental to production than the ALJ shortage.
I could def see a complete freeze. But with the expected number of retirements next year I don't think such is likely.
|
|
|
Post by sealaw90 on Jul 10, 2013 14:51:18 GMT -5
funky, not all of us work for SSA so can you tell me what VSU is? I may be military and know a lot of acronyms, but that one stumped me.
|
|
|
Post by bartleby on Jul 10, 2013 14:55:29 GMT -5
VSU = Virtual screening Unit??
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Jul 10, 2013 15:00:49 GMT -5
VSU = Virtual screening Unit?? Bingo
|
|
|
Post by sealaw90 on Jul 10, 2013 15:09:02 GMT -5
Thanks to both of you.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeRatty on Jul 10, 2013 15:28:55 GMT -5
funky, not all of us work for SSA so can you tell me what VSU is? I may be military and know a lot of acronyms, but that one stumped me. The VSU is comprised of senior attorneys who review cases for possible "OTR" or On the Record decisions...meaning there is enough evidence on the record as it stands without the need for hearing testimony. Senior attorneys in many offices review cases on a regular basis, but this depends on what the needs of the particular office are at the time. They can sign the decision under their own name as they have signatory authority for fully favorable decisions with some technical exceptions. The training for the VSU was highly encouraged for all senior attorneys whether or not they had a detail to the VSU since it benefits the hearing office....good training. I am sad to see this may go away and have seen the scattered discussion in other places, but I can see where cuts have to be made somewhere. I was fortunate enough to have been a part of the VSU and found it extremely helpful...learned quite a bit.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeRatty on Jul 10, 2013 15:34:13 GMT -5
And there is another similar process in place that I hear is toward its end or has already...the "informal remand" process. These individuals also screened cases but at a different level, prior to the hearing office getting the case (at least I think as I have only seen this to be true) but they are NOT attorneys and are a mix of trained individual and some docs. Very similar process as the VSU just by a different group at a different level with the same thing as the goal...to pay cases that can be paid without a hearing. Many cases gain additional favorable evidence as the process goes along and there is enough to pay during the in between waiting of having a hearing (which can be a lengthy wait) and this helps the backlog, gets those who are disabled on benefits faster, cuts costs of having experts etc.
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Jul 10, 2013 16:00:39 GMT -5
My region 4 friend that is at GS training this week is supposed to call tonite with the hilights of DC Sklar's presentation. I will post anything not said in confidence.
Already been told by her that the word is not good for Senior Attorneys and not just VSU related. No details beyond that warning yet.
|
|
|
Post by cafeta on Jul 10, 2013 17:22:58 GMT -5
My region 4 friend that is at GS training this week is supposed to call tonite with the hilights of DC Sklar's presentation. I will post anything not said in confidence. Already been told by her that the word is not good for Senior Attorneys and not just VSU related. No details beyond that warning yet. Funky, do you mean not good for senior attorneys in general, or specifically related to their ALJ possiblities? Although I guess it is not likely he is weiging in on the application process, so we must be talking sequestration budget cuts?
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Jul 10, 2013 17:27:25 GMT -5
My region 4 friend that is at GS training this week is supposed to call tonite with the hilights of DC Sklar's presentation. I will post anything not said in confidence. Already been told by her that the word is not good for Senior Attorneys and not just VSU related. No details beyond that warning yet. Funky, do you mean not good for senior attorneys in general, or specifically related to their ALJ possiblities? Although I guess it is not likely he is weiging in on the application process, so we must be talking sequestration budget cuts? Not sure yet cafeta. I assume not good for SAAs in general. I will know more later tonite, but if I had to guess it is probably them ending the adjudication duties of the position. but that's just a guess.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeRatty on Jul 10, 2013 17:59:04 GMT -5
Hmmm. In every training I have had where Sklar spoke, he always spoke highly of the senior attorney program and the statistics are good for the remand rates. I bet it is more like adding additional positions and not limiting the scope of the present positions. However, the sunset on the adjudication approaches I do believe. Either way, I am glad to have that adjudication under my belt and on the resume. That can't be taken away.
|
|
|
Post by saaao on Jul 10, 2013 17:59:55 GMT -5
Well OIG just released an audit of the Senior Attorney program. They are recommending re-alignment of the position in line with suggestions from a selection of HODs. You can go to OIG's website, or go to Charles Hall's blog which has a link to get the report. My very brief reading suggested that adjudication of disability claims was very low on the HODs' priority list, though they were pushing Senior Attorneys for adjudication of non-disability cases. Mainly though, they wanted them writing complex cases and training new attorneys. An addendum to the report indicated to me that the commissioner's office agreed with the recommendation's, but noted that adjudicating non-disability cases would require a reg change (i.e. unlikely to happen). A major recommendation was to suspend hiring senior attorneys until their role was re-defined and a training program was put in place. I was in VSU a couple of years ago and Sklar also gushed over the program at that time. However a friend of mine who went through GS training this past fall said Sklar told her class that the program was no longer paying off and to plan on it significantly changing. This report would seem to support that.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeRatty on Jul 10, 2013 18:12:10 GMT -5
Well OIG just released an audit of the Senior Attorney program. They are recommending re-alignment of the position in line with suggestions from a selection of HODs. You can go to OIG's website, or go to Charles Hall's blog which has a link to get the report. My very brief reading indicating that in adjudication of disability claims was very low on the HODs' priority list, though they were pushing Senior Attorneys for adjudication of non-disability cases. Mainly though, they wanted them writing complex cases and training new attorneys. An addendum to the report indicated to me that the commissioner's office agreed with the recommendation's, but noted that adjudicating non-disability cases would require a reg change (i.e. unlikely to happen). A major recommendation was to suspend hiring senior attorneys until their role was re-defined and a training program was put in place. I can certainly see the priority of the different HODs differ as to what their individual offices do with the senior attorneys. They play a huge role in deciding exactly what the senior attorneys do in each office. Some primarily write and train, some primarily review cases, it varies dramatically from office to office. Our office has never fully utilized the review process the way they could since that pulls away the more experienced writers and the numbers appear to be affected. The senior attorneys are very careful in what they pay, cognizant of the potential remands, and many do not pay very many cases at all. Plus, this is due to several outside factors....the VSU and the informal remand process is (or was) scooping off the OTR cases, the State agency has been paying more cases at that level as they have been either developing cases better or the reps have been submitting more evidence early on, and that leaves less and less of the potential OTR cases (no hearing). This will and has already affected the award rates of the ALJs since they are left with the more complex cases (as it should be I think).
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Jul 10, 2013 18:21:48 GMT -5
Removal of adjudicative authority is what I expect. My office has been allowing seniors to devote the majority of their time to reviewing since the alj shortage has us writer rich but disposition poor.
If they remove seniors from the ranks of those that can adjudicate (albeit in a limited capacity) that would certainly be another reason they need to hire more judges. Do away with IRs, do away with VSU, do away with SAA OTRs and not hire more aljs? Might as well raise the white flag in the backlog and processing time war.
Then again we are hearing of a change to "quality over quantity". And I suppose there is a little more room in our supplyroom to stick more boxes of hand sanitizer, so why waste $ on aljs?
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Jul 10, 2013 18:27:02 GMT -5
Just to add, if they no longer have SAAs and there is no forseeable alj hiring, SSA may need to prepare itself for losing some quality writers. With no chance at advancement attorney adviser isn't such a sweet gig.
I already know a couple writers not even close to retirement that are exploring doing rep work once they learned their chances of alj are slim to none with the new litigation centric application process.
|
|