|
|
Post by 71stretch on Sept 12, 2016 0:18:29 GMT -5
the hiring freeze wont last forever. it currently covers everyone except judges and theory is there will be a hiring freeze for judges as of October 1st. Extremely good theory btw especially if there is a continuing resolution. Hiring freeze across the board will probably be lifted summer 2017. In time for the folks testing now to get on the register. Good news/bad news. Speaking purely selfishly, I hope it doesn't last that long. They sure are having a hard time meeting what Congress wanted them to do in terms of hiring and clearing the backlog. |
|
|
|
Post by aljwishhope on Sept 12, 2016 7:11:36 GMT -5
the hiring freeze wont last forever. it currently covers everyone except judges and theory is there will be a hiring freeze for judges as of October 1st. Extremely good theory btw especially if there is a continuing resolution. Hiring freeze across the board will probably be lifted summer 2017. In time for the folks testing now to get on the register. Good news/bad news. Speaking purely selfishly, I hope it doesn't last that long. They sure are having a hard time meeting what Congress wanted them to do in terms of hiring and clearing the backlog. my Pollyanna side feels for the claimants who will ultimate get an adjudication in their favor. I hope they are putting in systems to do more fully favorables on record decisions where warranted. I want a different better job and once the pool gets added from this testing class my odds drop. Regardless hopefully knock on wood I will eat and live well. How many claimants will go hungry and become homeless waiting for relief? |
|
|
|
Post by Gaidin on Sept 12, 2016 9:03:28 GMT -5
Right now there is the general uncertainty that comes with an election year in which we get a new President no matter who wins.
Add in that the House budget would result in furloughing SSA employees and you have serious concerns by TPTB about any hiring. When I was at training they told us that if they could hire more ALJs next year they would. However, I don't expect to see any hiring moves including requesting certs until after election day.
|
|
|
|
Post by bartleby on Sept 13, 2016 7:21:23 GMT -5
A shared e-mail from a Judge in my office:
Judge Bice:
Thank your for this email. In this office we have had some issues with our telework requests this time because the Acting HOCALJ is not taking into consideration the days we have set aside for training at the AALJ Educational Seminar which you have approved and for vacation that several of us have planned around the holidays. One of the ALJ’s is a 20 year SSA employee and has the equivalent of 2 months of leave every year. The Acting HOCALJ is expecting that we would need to schedule up to 60-70 hearings in other months to have a 50 case “average”. He is also telling us that we need to schedule more cases because the scheduling unit may not be able to schedule what we have asked for each month. It would be my thought that if 45-50 is “reasonably attainable” for an ALJ, 50-60 is likely not and it is not the ALJ’s fault that the scheduling unit does not schedule what we ask for. Could you please address these issues when you discuss your expectations with the HOCALJ’s and what constitutes extenuating circumstance and give the rest of us your thoughts on this so we know how to proceed.
Response from Judge Bice:
Will do -. But I expect aljs to manage their dockets around annual leave.
Is this clear as mud or what? Are we expected to do 540-600 cases a year when working 10 months of the year?
In another E-mail from Judge Bice, regarding Questions from the July ALJ training:
3. We used to use Word of the Day to access email remotely, what happened?
The Office of Information Security has been extremely aggressive in preventing opportunities for unauthorized access to our sensitive information. Systems was able to trace some email breaches, viruses and malware directly back to Outlook Web Access (OWA). Systems waited until single devices were deployed before shutting down OWA so, that employees would have an alternate way of accessing emails while in travel status.
By statute, the government cannot accept donated services from its employees:
"an officer or employee of the United States Government . . . may not accept voluntary services . . . exceeding that authorized by law except for emergencies involving the safety of human life or the protection of property" (31 U.S.C. 1342).
Therefore, accessing emails remotely or otherwise performing work while in a non-duty status is not be permitted.
So therefor, We can not perform work while in a non-duty status... Does that mean between 6:00 in the evening and 10:00 in the evening? Does that mean we can forego/lose earned leave to make the "quota"?
Why is everything clear as mud, but we are to understand it??
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2016 7:31:02 GMT -5
On must remember the following facts:
CALJ is on her way out. There is little to no impetus for the CALJ to respond in any more clear of manner prior to her departure. Let the next CALJ handle the mess appears to be the SOP.
The current Administration is on its way out. Regardless of who wins at the election, one can assume a massive overhaul of Agency heads as SOP with the hiring of any new boss. Let the next Administration handle the mess appears to be the SOP.
Summary: Your current queries are valid and important.
Will they be addressed and resolved before November 2016? No.
Will they be addressed and resolved before November 2020? Maybe.
|
|
|
|
Post by bartleby on Sept 13, 2016 7:48:46 GMT -5
according to Judge Bice's e-mail:
"Looking at current data, a majority of you are scheduling an average of 45-50 hearings a month and completing the work in a legally sufficient and policy compliant manner."
If one works 251 days a year, which is not working only weekends and the 10 legal Holidays, that would equal 540 cases a year and would be 2.15 per day, 600 cases would be 2.39 per day.
However, according to "How am I doing" stats, Region 4 is averaging 1.69 cases a day and nationwide ODAR is averaging 1.64 cases a day.
I am sorry, but the figures do not support Judge Bice's statement that a majority are scheduling an average of 45-50 hearings a month. It would appear that statistically the average of 1.64 equals 34.30 cases a month and 1.69 equals 35.34 cases a month. Remember, that is figuring one works 251 days a year.
Methinks something stinks in Denmark (and possibly ODAR)...
|
|
|
|
Post by Gaidin on Sept 13, 2016 10:09:10 GMT -5
Looking at cases scheduled for October the national average is 35.5 hearings a month. It is certainly possible that most ALJs not on the training ramp up are holding 45 or more hearings per month. Remember the How mi doing stats include baby judges who are just starting the process. The other thing to remember is that it doesn't take many people hearing a much smaller number to drag the average down. I know my fairly light load drags the office average down.
Now getting back to the point about using leave and scheduling its ridiculous that there is no exception made for earned leave.
|
|
|
|
Post by tripper on Sept 13, 2016 10:17:38 GMT -5
Looking at cases scheduled for October the national average is 35.5 hearings a month. It is certainly possible that most ALJs not on the training ramp up are holding 45 or more hearings per month. Remember the How mi doing stats include baby judges who are just starting the process. The other thing to remember is that it doesn't take many people hearing a much smaller number to drag the average down. I know my fairly light load drags the office average down. Now getting back to the point about using leave and scheduling its ridiculous that there is no exception made for earned leave.[/quote] Is the union taking a position on this? |
|
|
|
Post by bowser on Sept 13, 2016 11:45:51 GMT -5
I'm always surprised (and amused) when ALJs repeatedly seem to try to assess specific numerical standards that will either put them at some specific risk or guarantee them some specific protection. Have ANY of you seen such clear equations in your work for the federal gov't? Given the dual requirements of quality and quantity, there are a ton of grey areas. There are no guarantees. Instead, there are things you can do to give yourself some protection and make it more difficult for mgmt. to give you a hard time. This "mathematic" approach also impresses me as laughable - and in fact insulting - for someone who wishes to be considered a responsible professional, worthy of the respect they are given and their sizeable salary and benefits. Maybe spend less time counting and trying to predict, and just do the best job you can in what you think a reasonable amount of time. Has there yet been anyone denied telework for failure to schedule at some specific rate? Has any ALJ been disciplined who issued 400+ dispositions per year absent excessive remands? If your inability to schedule/decide at the expected level is due to some special circumstances such as poor scheduling/workup/writing/technical support - document the heck out of it. Me, I'm going to work hard enough to get out at least 500 dispositions, and close as many of my AGED as possible - looks like I should get all of them closed. Despite pretty lousy clerical and writing support in my office, I'm able to do that without working huge overtime. Maybe I don't get every minute of leave/credit hours I'm entitled to, but I think the other aspects of my job make that a fair exchange. I'm glad there are so many folk under 500, and hassling mgmt. about bean-counting to provide me cover!  |
|
|
|
Post by bartleby on Sept 13, 2016 12:15:37 GMT -5
bowser, I hope your "This "mathematic" approach also impresses me as laughable - and in fact insulting - for someone who wishes to be considered a responsible professional, worthy of the respect they are given and their sizeable salary and benefits.' was not directed at me as I am not the one who came up with this crap, it is your friend Judge Bice and her cronies...
|
|
|
|
Post by redryder on Sept 13, 2016 14:18:38 GMT -5
When I read these arguments against any productivity standard/goal/expectation, I am astounded. What the naysayers never address and have no alternative theory for is how ODAR is funded. The budget proposal is not just some arbitrary number. It is based on a calculation of how many cases the entire staff (techs/writers/judges) can dispose of in a fiscal year. What the naysayers either do not know or refuse to recognize is that there are formulas used to determine what the costs are to produce one decision. This includes the materials and manpower. So guess what, if you want to wrap yourself in the quality banner and do less than an average of 500 dispositions per ALJ for the year, the ODAR budget will be less. It takes fewer people to do less work. Basic business.
And when the SSA folks go to Congress to present their budget, it is based on specific numbers of dispositions. If 600,000 are promised and ODAR produces 350,000, do you really think Congress is going to maintain the same budget the next year? More likely, depending on how badly the actual production misses the prediction, there will be a no-growth budget or a reduction. Nothing says government workers are goldbrickers better than doing less work than promised.
When I started with ODAR in 1989, the judges had strict disposition targets from the RO. Or at least the office and region I was in had them. The judges were to produce 32 dispositions per month. Then it crept up to 34 and then finally 36. If the office did not produce, it got no authority to fill vacancies. Those went to productive offices. The supply budget for the office was cut because we did not produce enough work to warrant the amount of paper we were allocated.
And if you don't believe the formulas exist, just cut a telephone cable. ATT has used a specific formula to determine the costs of cable repairs for years. To my knowledge, no one who ever litigated against them on the costs of repairs in a damage case ever got their formulas overturned or thrown out.
|
|
|
|
Post by jagvet on Sept 13, 2016 14:37:08 GMT -5
I'm always surprised (and amused) when ALJs repeatedly seem to try to assess specific numerical standards that will either put them at some specific risk or guarantee them some specific protection. Have ANY of you seen such clear equations in your work for the federal gov't? Given the dual requirements of quality and quantity, there are a ton of grey areas. There are no guarantees. Instead, there are things you can do to give yourself some protection and make it more difficult for mgmt. to give you a hard time. This "mathematic" approach also impresses me as laughable - and in fact insulting - for someone who wishes to be considered a responsible professional, worthy of the respect they are given and their sizeable salary and benefits. Yes, I have. My last job, in a different agency for 12 years, my regional office was expected under GPRA (Al Gore's "Reinventing Government") to conclude X number of investigations within 180 days, and have no more than Y% of open cases over 180 days. We worked very hard and always managed to meet the GPRA standards for the first 10 years, and so did most of the other regional offices. Then the current administration expanded the scope of certain type of cases for political reasons, and we failed to achieve those goals, as did most of the other regional offices.
With SSA, I don't see the numbers as impossible, so I am going to try. I am going to ignore all of the national figures and just plow my own row. Maybe I can do it!
|
|
|
|
Post by hopefalj on Sept 13, 2016 18:52:56 GMT -5
Could one schedule 80 days as hearing days (7 - 8 hearings a day average) and 151 days of everything else or is that completely unrealistic? Assuming 231 working days and 20 vacation days a year? Possible? Yes, though it may not be for everybody in every office. There are certainly ALJs on this board that hold that many hearings on a daily basis. I'm not personally capable of doing so at this point in time, but I can definitely do 90 days of 6 hearings per day somewhat comfortably. I try to do 92 hearing days a year, which leaves six non-hearing weeks as of now. It takes some planning ahead of time, but it can be done. It's something that you won't know until you get going on your cases, but there are judges that do 7, 8, or even 10+ per hearing day. |
|
|
|
Post by JudgeRatty on Sept 13, 2016 19:28:24 GMT -5
Could one schedule 80 days as hearing days (7 - 8 hearings a day average) and 151 days of everything else or is that completely unrealistic? Assuming 231 working days and 20 vacation days a year? Possible? Yes, though it may not be for everybody in every office. There are certainly ALJs on this board that hold that many hearings on a daily basis. I'm not personally capable of doing so at this point in time, but I can definitely do 90 days of 6 hearings per day somewhat comfortably. I try to do 92 hearing days a year, which leaves six non-hearing weeks as of now. It takes some planning ahead of time, but it can be done. It's something that you won't know until you get going on your cases, but there are judges that do 7, 8, or even 10+ per hearing day. I echo this and add for those not an ALJ yet that all the scheduling depends on availability of hearing rooms and coordinating scheduling with other staff and contractors. Frankly 8 or more a day is a bit much. I will not do more than 7 a day. I need time to finish instructions for the day. Some can do hearings in 45 minutes but some last over an hour. You have to give a fair hearing and if you think 15 minutes is fair.... Hmmm. I get that from seeing some bad practices from long ago when I was a rep. Hearings must be held within the times there is security available. And security officers are contracted as well. There is more to consider than cramming as many in one day as you think you want. There is much to learn when you don the robe! Good luck to all! |
|
|
|
Post by prescient on Sept 13, 2016 19:38:44 GMT -5
A shared e-mail from a Judge in my office: Judge Bice: Thank your for this email. In this office we have had some issues with our telework requests this time because the Acting HOCALJ is not taking into consideration the days we have set aside for training at the AALJ Educational Seminar which you have approved and for vacation that several of us have planned around the holidays. One of the ALJ’s is a 20 year SSA employee and has the equivalent of 2 months of leave every year. The Acting HOCALJ is expecting that we would need to schedule up to 60-70 hearings in other months to have a 50 case “average”. He is also telling us that we need to schedule more cases because the scheduling unit may not be able to schedule what we have asked for each month. It would be my thought that if 45-50 is “reasonably attainable” for an ALJ, 50-60 is likely not and it is not the ALJ’s fault that the scheduling unit does not schedule what we ask for. Could you please address these issues when you discuss your expectations with the HOCALJ’s and what constitutes extenuating circumstance and give the rest of us your thoughts on this so we know how to proceed. Response from Judge Bice: Will do -. But I expect aljs to manage their dockets around annual leave. Is this clear as mud or what? Are we expected to do 540-600 cases a year when working 10 months of the year? In another E-mail from Judge Bice, regarding Questions from the July ALJ training: 3. We used to use Word of the Day to access email remotely, what happened? The Office of Information Security has been extremely aggressive in preventing opportunities for unauthorized access to our sensitive information. Systems was able to trace some email breaches, viruses and malware directly back to Outlook Web Access (OWA). Systems waited until single devices were deployed before shutting down OWA so, that employees would have an alternate way of accessing emails while in travel status. By statute, the government cannot accept donated services from its employees: "an officer or employee of the United States Government . . . may not accept voluntary services . . . exceeding that authorized by law except for emergencies involving the safety of human life or the protection of property" (31 U.S.C. 1342). Therefore, accessing emails remotely or otherwise performing work while in a non-duty status is not be permitted. So therefor, We can not perform work while in a non-duty status... Does that mean between 6:00 in the evening and 10:00 in the evening? Does that mean we can forego/lose earned leave to make the "quota"? Why is everything clear as mud, but we are to understand it?? Regarding accessing email through outlook web access, this still can be done.... |
|
|
|
Post by JudgeRatty on Sept 13, 2016 19:55:35 GMT -5
Looking at cases scheduled for October the national average is 35.5 hearings a month. It is certainly possible that most ALJs not on the training ramp up are holding 45 or more hearings per month. Remember the How mi doing stats include baby judges who are just starting the process. The other thing to remember is that it doesn't take many people hearing a much smaller number to drag the average down. I know my fairly light load drags the office average down. Now getting back to the point about using leave and scheduling its ridiculous that there is no exception made for earned leave. This is an important point. The National average is not indicative of what can be expected from ALJs. SO many issues factor into that average. Just like Gaidin states, every ALJ is factored in and there may be issues with some ALJs.... illness, extended leave, very large case files, newbie ALJs who count less than a full ALJ.... If you can tell me ALL of that is factored into that National average, ok, I will listen. But I have been at this gig for a little over a year now and I can say I will have no problem meeting the 500. I should hit close to 450 this year and that is with the ramp up that I was given at the beginning just like every newbie. Now, I took on extra cases from other ALJs to get that high, but I was able to manage it. I am not a genius, yes I had prior agency experience, and yes I have a medical background.... but all that is a wash after new ALJs with no medical backgrounds or agency experience have been at this for a while. It all evens out. It can be done.
What bothers me about all the negative comments about all of this and all of the complaining about "numbers" is that those "numbers" are PEOPLE. I really just want to say that I think we all need to stop whining and just GET IT DONE. Work hard, work smart, and do what you can do! This job is not a minimum wage job. We all have the skill set to get this done. I will say this again like I have said it many times in the past... this is a PUBLIC .... SERVICE .... JOB. We are expected to produce those "numbers" and serve the public as efficiently and with as much quality as possible, but not sacrificing either one. BALANCE.
If you think this job is a cake walk and a place to retire while in the job.... please, stop now. If you want a never ending caseload of endless medical records from people who are desperate (not all being disabled but they are desperate for an answer)... march on. Please join us if you have the strong work ethic needed to handle all of this. We need people who will work hard and work smart.
Ok off my soap box. I just get really tired of seeing all the complaining. Good luck to all! |
|
|
|
Post by Gram Pop on Sept 14, 2016 7:26:39 GMT -5
Stay on that soap box, Judge Ratty. Your point is generally overlooked on this Board, yet it is extremely important. I recall during training class that we were asked why we took this job. The most common response was: "to serve the public" or something along those lines. Knowing there is a huge backlog, we need to put all of our effort into providing the level of service expected of us. If a judge is working to capacity, but cannot meet the 500 minimum due to factors beyond his or her control, then that judge is doing his/her duty. And for those overachievers like you, please continue to raise the average and make the rest of us look good.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2016 7:45:37 GMT -5
Numbers, schmunmbers....400, 450, 550... [shrug]
JudgeRatty pins it pretty well. For the majority of our actual functions, this is not rocket science. Fire up your computer, get your decisions out, move on.
This is why we get paid the big bucks every other Friday folks.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2016 10:19:02 GMT -5
Supp: I do find it interesting that next month ALJs will begin using WeTA to electronically sign in and out instead of the papertrail sign sheets we have been using.
In light of same, we should realize that in stark actuality our physical presence as ALJs will no longer exist. The record of attendance on the job will not be our true selves, but will actually instead be the recorded attendance of exactly when our laptops logged on and logged off. The agency will be watching our laptops as to work attendance, production, etc., and not "us" bodily per se.
Taken to extreme hypothetical conjectures, one could theorectically propose that ALJs are merely administrative physical "index finger" enactors of logging on and off agency laptops, whereas the laptops themselves are the true agents of actual work time production and events, including numbers of dispositions issued annually.
That said, my laptop is telling me to go ahead and take a coffee and apple fritter break so it can continue to work on scheduling upcoming dockets and move some dispositions. Sounds good to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gaidin on Sept 14, 2016 15:46:50 GMT -5
Supp: I do find it interesting that next month ALJs will begin using WeTA to electronically sign in and out instead of the papertrail sign sheets we have been using. In light of same, we should realize that in stark actuality our physical presence as ALJs will no longer exist. The record of attendance on the job will not be our true selves, but will actually instead be the recorded attendance of exactly when our laptops logged on and logged off. The agency will be watching our laptops as to work attendance, production, etc., and not "us" bodily per se. Taken to extreme hypothetical conjectures, one could theorectically propose that ALJs are merely administrative physical "index finger" enactors of logging on and off agency laptops, whereas the laptops themselves are the true agents of actual work time production and events, including numbers of dispositions issued annually. That said, my laptop is telling me to go ahead and take a coffee and apple fritter break so it can continue to work on scheduling upcoming dockets and move some dispositions. Sounds good to me. I feel like you just said our robot overlords are coming and they will be the least terrifying but most beauracratic overlords ever. |
|
