|
|
Post by sealaw90 on Jan 26, 2017 22:59:52 GMT -5
It happens. A cardiologist once scrawled, "Patient is applying for disability but secretly works as a bodyguard." I've also seen a "GOMER" (Get Out of My Emergency Room) once or twice, as well as "frequent E.D. visitor because crazy." I've certainly seen a claimant who testified he couldn't do sedentary work tell the doctor how often he plays basketball or the guy who had a hard time getting to the doctor because it was his busy season at work. Don't forget the claimant who can't make it to their hearing because they can't get off from work... I also had a claimant tell me about the quilting hobby (which requires a lot of activity that supposedly couldn't be done in a work setting) that occupies her time now that she doesn't have to go to a stressful job anymore... Wish I could pursue my hobbies instead of working. Wait, that's retirement. Oh well, that's a decade or so away. In the meantime, I'll just shut up and color while waiting for these folks who lead busy lives to show up for their hearing. My ultimate goal is to be able to schedule as many unrepped folks in a morning and blow through the cases since they usually ask for a postponement to get a rep. - we call it a rocket docket. Doing that once in a while can really keep your scheduling numbers up. We have one ALJ who does that here and it seems like a very efficient way to go. |
|
|
|
Post by thankful1 on Jan 27, 2017 0:15:09 GMT -5
every day I think it can't get more insane, and every day my expectations are exceeded!
|
|
|
|
Post by A.L. Cool J on Jan 27, 2017 5:29:39 GMT -5
What is the "agree rate?"
|
|
|
|
Post by hopefalj on Jan 27, 2017 6:45:29 GMT -5
What is the "agree rate?" Your affirmation rate or the percentage of times the AC agrees with your decision. |
|
|
|
Post by bayou on Jan 27, 2017 8:18:55 GMT -5
This is probably a contentious issue, so Pixie please delete if unwanted. I don't understand the interplay between the APA and the AC. The AC are not appointed ALJs, correct? How does the fact that the AC remands cases because they disagree with the ALJs opinion not seen as encroaching on the decisional independence of granted to ALJs by the APA? If the AC remands, the ALJ must issue a decision in compliance with the AC remand, correct?
|
|
|
|
Post by jonsnow on Jan 27, 2017 8:43:08 GMT -5
And wouldn't it be more efficient to just get rid of the AC all together and let ALJ decision go straight to the USDC without having to stop at the AC? Then you can just judge/rate/access/view/[insert term here] ALJs by their remand rate from the courts. It is a little silly to think about a claim that is denied/denied on reconsideration/denied by ALJ/denied review by AC/affirmed by USDC/decision of USDC affirmed by USCA.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pixie on Jan 27, 2017 9:11:12 GMT -5
This is probably a contentious issue, so Pixie please delete if unwanted. I don't understand the interplay between the APA and the AC. The AC are not appointed ALJs, correct? How does the fact that the AC remands cases because they disagree with the ALJs opinion not seen as encroaching on the decisional independence of granted to ALJs by the APA? If the AC remands, the ALJ must issue a decision in compliance with the AC remand, correct?The AC is charged with ensuring the ALJ decisions are compliant with Agency policy. In a remand the AC doesn't tell the judge how to rule, only that the decision is not policy compliant. It is up to the judge to rule one way or the other, after complying with whatever Agency policy was not followed in the initial decision. Agency policy is expressed in the regulations, rulings, acquiescent rulings, HALLEX, memos and perhaps a few others. Congress has charged the Agency with determining how the disability program is to be administered. The Commissioner has charged its judges with following the policy as promulgated by the Agency. The AC is charged with ensuring the judges follow Agency policy in making determinations on behalf of the Commissioner. Pixie |
|
|
|
Post by Pixie on Jan 27, 2017 9:17:14 GMT -5
And wouldn't it be more efficient to just get rid of the AC all together and let ALJ decision go straight to the USDC without having to stop at the AC? Then you can just judge/rate/access/view/[insert term here] ALJs by their remand rate from the courts. It is a little silly to think about a claim that is denied/denied on reconsideration/denied by ALJ/denied review by AC/affirmed by USDC/decision of USDC affirmed by USCA. Not being snitty here, but I can tell you never clerked for a district court judge! To say the elimination of the AC would not go over well, would be the understatement of the month. It won't happen. Pixie |
|
|
|
Post by jonsnow on Jan 27, 2017 9:32:57 GMT -5
I have no idea what snitty means so you don't have to worry about me thinking you are snitty! And actually, I have clerked for two . . .
|
|
|
|
Post by meateater on Jan 27, 2017 13:17:06 GMT -5
I am still awaiting my NOR, so I don't have standing to complain, but an ALJ friend of mine told me that the agency WANTS the ALJS to work from home 3 days a week. Is that inaccurate, or limited to that particular office/person?
|
|
|
|
Post by thankful1 on Jan 27, 2017 15:50:28 GMT -5
And wouldn't it be more efficient to just get rid of the AC all together and let ALJ decision go straight to the USDC without having to stop at the AC? Then you can just judge/rate/access/view/[insert term here] ALJs by their remand rate from the courts. It is a little silly to think about a claim that is denied/denied on reconsideration/denied by ALJ/denied review by AC/affirmed by USDC/decision of USDC affirmed by USCA. Not being snitty here, but I can tell you never clerked for a district court judge! To say the elimination of the AC would not go over well, would be the understatement of the month. It won't happen. Pixie I clerked for 20 years for a district court judge prior to this. We always thought the AC was a massive waste of time. 1 year to get a one paragraph form letter denying the appeal. We would have preferred no AC. But, to Pixie's point, there are many district judges who hate these cases, and so any mechanism to delay or divert them is welcomed by those judges. My judge, though, actually thought the cases were important. |
|
|
|
Post by thankful1 on Jan 27, 2017 15:54:01 GMT -5
I am still awaiting my NOR, so I don't have standing to complain, but an ALJ friend of mine told me that the agency WANTS the ALJS to work from home 3 days a week. Is that inaccurate, or limited to that particular office/person? That is wholly inaccurate, in my opinion. First of all, they only permit 8 days a month, subject to hocalj discretion for more. Hocalj's were explicitly told to exercise their discretion to deny telework when possible. And unlike any other agency that I am aware of, SSA tries to use telework as a carrot, or a stick. The restrictions they impose are for punitive purposes only, with no relation to whether or not telework would actually benefit the agency or the employee. |
|
|
|
Post by thankful1 on Jan 27, 2017 15:55:15 GMT -5
um and i might add, there are many district court judges who are not Social Security experts. We had some very interesting remands when cases went straight from an ALJ to the District Court. made me grateful for the AC when that lovely pilot ended... It's defacto de novo. |
|
|
|
Post by bartleby on Jan 27, 2017 16:51:50 GMT -5
The expectation is as follows:
Each judge should be issuing 2.0 decisions each day
Each judge should have a minimum agree rate of 85%
Each judge who is teleworking should be scheduling 45-50 cases a month.
A few other things: OCALJ and ODC are evaluating whether we should tie telework to decisions issued as opposed to scheduling, and they are planning to expand the cap on scheduling to 840 with certain limitations."
To give you an idea as to how far off course they are, the national average disposition rate as of yesterday is 1.41 per judge. Doing more with less, soon doing everything with nothing..
|
|
|
|
Post by hopefalj on Jan 27, 2017 17:18:36 GMT -5
The expectation is as follows: Each judge should be issuing 2.0 decisions each day Each judge should have a minimum agree rate of 85% Each judge who is teleworking should be scheduling 45-50 cases a month. A few other things: OCALJ and ODC are evaluating whether we should tie telework to decisions issued as opposed to scheduling, and they are planning to expand the cap on scheduling to 840 with certain limitations." To give you an idea as to how far off course they are, the national average disposition rate as of yesterday is 1.41 per judge. Doing more with less, soon doing everything with nothing.. That average is getting dragged down by the 100+ new hires from October that have issued a minimal number of decisions, if any, as well as typical holiday leave in November/December. Last year, it looks like there were only seven offices out of the 177 that issued 1.5 or fewer decisions per day per ALJ while 57 were at 2.0 or higher. But the decisions per day number takes into account all possible work days (260 minus the 10 federal holidays) rather than the days actually worked. Accounting for used leave, judges would only have to issue anywhere from 448 to 474 to hit 2.0 decisions per day worked, depending on their leave category. Not everyone could or would hit 450, but I believe a significantly greater number of ALJs would be able to clear 450 than currently hit 500. Someone ran the math last fall, but I'm too tired to find it right now. |
|
|
|
Post by meateater on Jan 27, 2017 18:39:14 GMT -5
From many of the posts I have read, this job sounds like a beating. Why do you all do it?
|
|
|
|
Post by montyburns on Jan 27, 2017 18:56:30 GMT -5
From many of the posts I have read, this job sounds like a beating. Why do you all do it? I'm not an ALJ but from my insider perspective, the job certainly seems to be getting less enjoyable. Some newer ALJs, you can hear exasperation in their voices when you listen to the audio. More and more expectations in every area, and a lot more efforts to enforce managements will. I'll just say I don't know any attys in ODAR who are worried about losing their telework or get menacing edicts from management. |
|
|
|
Post by thankful1 on Jan 27, 2017 19:33:18 GMT -5
From many of the posts I have read, this job sounds like a beating. Why do you all do it? I valued the security of the position. I spent 20 years reading bad ALJ decisions and thought I would do better. I knew the job had many crappy aspects, but I thought I could overcome those. I valued the flexibility, the pay, and what I thought would be telework. I did not appreciate how antagonistic management would be not just to ALJ's, but all employees in the agency. I did not appreciate just how non-sensical a bureaucracy could be. I did not anticipate ever looking for another job again, but the current climate just seems untenable to me. I do not quarrel with people who view the job differently. Mine is a very personal response based on what my expectations are for an adjudicative body. The focus on numbers to the exclusion of all else is antithetical to sound adjudication of claims that are very important to claimants. |
|
|
|
Post by judgymcjudgypants on Jan 27, 2017 20:51:55 GMT -5
Thankful1, how long have you been a federal ALJ? Some of these posts are making me count my blessings and, perhaps, stay put, even if I ever were to get a call. I'm naturally driven to excel and to be defeated at the outset by agency climate, culture, and management may well not be acceptable to me. I have to hustle but I do have time when I need it, and my independence is respected, not under assault. State ALJ might just be the better gig, after all. Rate of pay isn't everything.  J |
|
|
|
Post by bartleby on Jan 28, 2017 10:30:03 GMT -5
hopefalj, ok, in my office the newest Judge has been a Judge for over 5 years. Most Judges are 7 years or more, however, disposition rate per Judge is 1.34. So how are you going to explain that away?
|
|
