agency hoping for 250 ALJ hires this FY...

[acttwo]

Hmm, very interesting...

[jagvet]

Here's my 2 cents: First cent: Everything is speculative, and all unfinished bills die when Congress adjourns. The next Congress will have to reintroduce all bills, and they will reflect priorities of incoming and returning congressmen, not those retiring now. It may or may not have Obama or Trump administration input.  This is important because Obama will be president for a few weeks of the new congressional session. Second cent: If they add ALJ slots to the NHCs and retain the experience requirement, then they will transfer experienced existing HO ALJs and backfill in the HOs with that money. That should be great news to people like Christina and Gary, because I am sure that there are some great ALJs in cities that don't get as much GAL interest who would jump on a chance to move to an NHC slot in a big city.

[christina]

new judges have started in a NHC in the past. not sure how common it was but it was possible.

policy to my memory changed about 5 years ago that NHC judges needed some ALJ experience or whatever the precise requirement is.

and yes, as Bart noted, NHC judges are managers

[redryder]

Today is the last day of the current continuing resolution on the budget. The House passed another CR that would fund through end of April 2017. That would leave only 5 months of the current fiscal year. Quite frankly I won't be surprised if this entire year is covered under continuing resolutions and we have no budget until next October. It won't be the first time this has happened. If this is the route we follow, there won't be any hiring in FY 2017 without some special dispensation from Congress.

Once again, you should apply for the position you seek. But the pattern of hiring since 2008 is an anomaly, given that there was essentially no hiring from 1994 to 2008; leaving a corps of less than 1,000 judges. With the profile of the current hires (younger with longer careers), there will be fewer judges lost to retirement and the number of judges will stabilize.

[Thomas fka Lance]

While some openings occur due to retirement, others occur as a result of promotion or illness, and still others occur because some folks decide this isn't the type of job for them afterall.
There will always be openings.

[hopefalj]

Dec 9, 2016 13:13:51 GMT -5 redryder said:

Today is the last day of the current continuing resolution on the budget. The House passed another CR that would fund through end of April 2017. That would leave only 5 months of the current fiscal year. Quite frankly I won't be surprised if this entire year is covered under continuing resolutions and we have no budget until next October. It won't be the first time this has happened. If this is the route we follow, there won't be any hiring in FY 2017 without some special dispensation from Congress.

Once again, you should apply for the position you seek. But the pattern of hiring since 2008 is an anomaly, given that there was essentially no hiring from 1994 to 2008; leaving a corps of less than 1,000 judges. With the profile of the current hires (younger with longer careers), there will be fewer judges lost to retirement and the number of judges will stabilize.

With about 45% of the corps being 61 or older and 25% being 66 or older, I would be surprised if there wasn't a steady stream of retirees over the next several years. I don't see any reason why the typical attrition of 90-100 judges per year would stop in the near future, whether retirement, changing agencies, or death. Certainly many folks will hang on as long as they can in the job and enjoy it because, even with the continually added stress/menial work, it's still a great job, but there are quite a few beyond retirement age that grow tired of the current situation and would rather be golfing/fishing/traveling than getting e-mails about moving cases in their status.

[montyburns]

Dec 9, 2016 13:13:51 GMT -5 redryder said:

Today is the last day of the current continuing resolution on the budget. The House passed another CR that would fund through end of April 2017. That would leave only 5 months of the current fiscal year. Quite frankly I won't be surprised if this entire year is covered under continuing resolutions and we have no budget until next October. It won't be the first time this has happened. If this is the route we follow, there won't be any hiring in FY 2017 without some special dispensation from Congress.

Once again, you should apply for the position you seek. But the pattern of hiring since 2008 is an anomaly, given that there was essentially no hiring from 1994 to 2008; leaving a corps of less than 1,000 judges. With the profile of the current hires (younger with longer careers), there will be fewer judges lost to retirement and the number of judges will stabilize.

Unfortunately I think you are right about the CRs for the rest of FY17. Not looking like there's a lot of interest in doing a FY17 budget while still working out the details of other big plans. While there might be hiring under some CRs, I'm or sure how much money there is to do it under this one and they haven't hired under it yet.

Good news is that unreplaced attrition in 2017 means more hiring to backfill at some point. Bad news is that as ODAR continues to thin (and here talking especially about writers/support staff) the work becomes increasingly overwhelming and ODAR a less welcoming place to work.

[redryder]

Dear Hopefalj: I don't know where all of those judges are. Those stats are certainly not representative of my office. We have two who have 30+ years with CRS and one of them has a child in college. There are two more who have been judges longer that I have but have less government service under FERS. And I can go out in two years with 30 years service. The other six are looking at careers spans of 20 years plus before they reach full retirement and/or 30 years under FERS. Only 1 is over 66 years of age of 11. THe corps in this office is definitely younger and not looking to leave any time for a long while.

So there will be attrition over the year. But replacing them still is a lot less than the large hires ODAR has had for the last several years.

[foghorn]

To throw in another likely trend--the President elect may not submit a budget--rather he may wait to see what Congress does. This again makes it important for those that care to do some lobbying, liaise with Congress, work out coalition positions with claimant groups (constituent voters to Senators & Congresspeople).

display of ignorance time; what is an NHC? National Hockey Council?

[rp]

Dec 9, 2016 17:34:51 GMT -5 foghorn said:

To throw in another likely trend--the President elect may not submit a budget--rather he may wait to see what Congress does. This again makes it important for those that care to do some lobbying, liaise with Congress, work out coalition positions with claimant groups (constituent voters to Senators & Congresspeople).

display of ignorance time; what is an NHC? National Hockey Council?

I think it is National Hearing Center. But yours is better!

[gary]

Dec 9, 2016 17:38:33 GMT -5 rp said:

Dec 9, 2016 17:34:51 GMT -5 foghorn said:

To throw in another likely trend--the President elect may not submit a budget--rather he may wait to see what Congress does. This again makes it important for those that care to do some lobbying, liaise with Congress, work out coalition positions with claimant groups (constituent voters to Senators & Congresspeople).

display of ignorance time; what is an NHC? National Hockey Council?

I think it is National Hearing Center. But yours is better!

You are right.

[nylawyer]

I thought I had read in the past that the agency had a hard time getting enough experienced hires who were willing to transfer to NHC, has that changed?

[christina]

Dec 9, 2016 18:01:45 GMT -5 nylawyer said:

I thought I had read in the past that the agency had a hard time getting enough experienced hires who were willing to transfer to NHC, has that changed?

i doubt that. many are in big cities.  

[christina]

and yes, it is actually the National Hockey Center. anyone who plays hockey too well gets their case denied.

[hopefalj]

Dec 9, 2016 14:48:06 GMT -5 redryder said:

Dear Hopefalj: I don't know where all of those judges are. Those stats are certainly not representative of my office. We have two who have 30+ years with CRS and one of them has a child in college. There are two more who have been judges longer that I have but have less government service under FERS. And I can go out in two years with 30 years service. The other six are looking at careers spans of 20 years plus before they reach full retirement and/or 30 years under FERS. Only 1 is over 66 years of age of 11. THe corps in this office is definitely younger and not looking to leave any time for a long while.

So there will be attrition over the year. But replacing them still is a lot less than the large hires ODAR has had for the last several years.

I am among those who will not be leaving for a long while, and I know several of the folks hired since 2014 also fall into that group, so I see where you're coming from. However, in my former, former office, half the 13 judges were over 60 and more than one was over 70. In my newer former office, there were far more "younger" individuals because it was a high turnover office that never kept anyone for longer than 120-150 days. In my current office, 70% of the judges are into their 60s with half over retirement age and more than one over 70. That said, I'm not entirely sure more than 1 or 2 are looking to get out in the immediate future in spite of their ages, and most of them are still excellent at their job.

Regardless, your main point is true regardless of attrition... we're not likely to see the vast hiring numbers of the last two years continue into FY 2017 and possibly early FY 2018. I can probably look it up, but we're talking about 450-500 hires since August 2014, right? That's a big number that'll be tough to duplicate without a budget.

[gary]

Dec 9, 2016 18:01:45 GMT -5 nylawyer said:

I thought I had read in the past that the agency had a hard time getting enough experienced hires who were willing to transfer to NHC, has that changed?

I doubt this is SSA's idea. If SSA wanted to do this I don't see anything that would prevent them from doing this without the proposed legislation.

It looks like some in Congress think SSA is not making adequate use of the NHCs and are trying to force the issue at the point of hiring new ALJs.

[Gaidin]

Dec 9, 2016 18:12:13 GMT -5 gary said:

Dec 9, 2016 18:01:45 GMT -5 nylawyer said:

I thought I had read in the past that the agency had a hard time getting enough experienced hires who were willing to transfer to NHC, has that changed?

I doubt this is SSA's idea. If SSA wanted to do this I don't see anything that would prevent them from doing this without the proposed legislation.

It looks like some in Congress think SSA is not making adequate use of the NHCs and are trying to force the issue at the point of hiring new ALJs.

I think you're right. I also suspect this may be a back door way to get the agency to open a new NHC. I don't know for sure but is there even enough space in the existing NHCs for 25 new judges and their staff?* If not then maybe you need another NHC in Congressperson Brightidea's district?

It would make a lot more sense from the agency's perspective to simply be able to offer more incentives like relo pay to increase the number of NHC judges and then hire into regular offices for replacements. That way you don't get new judges in management positions.

* I don't mean to imply that 25% of new hiring would be 25 judges. It could easily be a lot more or less.

[carrickfergus]

Dec 9, 2016 12:42:08 GMT -5 christina said:

new judges have started in a NHC in the past. not sure how common it was but it was possible.

policy to my memory changed about 5 years ago that NHC judges needed some ALJ experience or whatever the precise requirement is.

and yes, as Bart noted, NHC judges are managers

In 2010 I'd say about 20% of ALJs in my baby judge training were hired for NHCs

[christina]

Dec 10, 2016 9:50:54 GMT -5 carrickfergus said:

Dec 9, 2016 12:42:08 GMT -5 christina said:

new judges have started in a NHC in the past. not sure how common it was but it was possible.

policy to my memory changed about 5 years ago that NHC judges needed some ALJ experience or whatever the precise requirement is.

and yes, as Bart noted, NHC judges are managers

In 2010 I'd say about 20% of ALJs in my baby judge training were hired for NHCs

yeah, i was thinking there were some new NHC hires in that time frame too.  basically, the people who applied in 2007 and 2008. not even sure the 2009 applicants were on register yet.  

[redryder]

The 2009 applicants were in the 2010 hire. I was one of that number. Got the score in March, was hired in July and started in August.