empty alj offices

[chris]

TG, I would be inclined to tell you to check out the private sector, but here's an example of what goes on there. I have a friend who works for a large multinational corporation, one of the largest in the world. He has 10 or 11 different passwords for different functions on his company's system. All of these passwords are changed at different intervals, some monthly, some quarterly etc. All passwords have different rules for designing the passwords. It's impossible to use the same password in more than one function because the rules for designing the passwords are so different. He just keeps a list of the passwords by his computer as does almost everyone else in the company.

[civilserpent]

ruonthelist wrote

"Also, if the new DC based VTC hearing unit is established, every new judge assigned there is one that will not require an office in an existing field office; and every current judge transferred to the new unit will free up an office in the field."

But no newly selected judges will go to DC, because the vacancy announcement required one year experience as an ALJ.

[deltajudge]

The size of ALJ offices has always been a matter of contention. It goes to the general atmosphere of OHA/ODAR. ALJs since the unions came in back in the early 80s have been continually downgraded, lost their staff and responsibility, and it will continue. If ODAR has its way, ALJs will have a nice cubicle from which they will step out off, stroll down the hall to the video room and conduct their little TV session. It's coming.

[Pixie]

deltajudge said:

The size of ALJ offices has always been a matter of contention. It goes to the general atmosphere of OHA/ODAR. ALJs since the unions came in back in the early 80s have been continually downgraded, lost their staff and responsibility, and it will continue. If ODAR has its way, ALJs will have a nice cubicle from which they will step out off, stroll down the hall to the video room and conduct their little TV session. It's coming.

Yes, TG, it is coming. Once the TV sessions become accepted practice, the great minds will realize it is much simpler and less expensive to have telephone hearings. No need then for the judge to even leave her cubicle; the phone is already there. So is the computer. Don't need all of that other expensive equipment.

After the hearing, scroll through the screens typing in the various fields for about thirty minutes, press send, and there is the decision! After the judges are supervisors, and that worthless union is busted, it will all become so simple.

To illustrate the lack of understanding of the ALJ function in Baltimore, there periodically is the original idea that if the Agency could get Congress to legislate away the due process requirement, as it applies to SSA hearings, the ALJs would no longer be needed. Such is their understanding of constitutional concepts. Pix.

[chieftain]

That really is a frightening scenario, Pixie. Videoconference hearings are one thing; not even being able to see the claimant before you render the decision would be, at best, uncomfortable. I can see telephonic hearings for minor discovery issues, and I have done plenty of them, but never to adjudicate anything on the merits.

[techgeek]

chris said:

TG, I would be inclined to tell you to check out the private sector, but here's an example of what goes on there. I have a friend who works for a large multinational corporation, one of the largest in the world. He has 10 or 11 different passwords for different functions on his company's system. All of these passwords are changed at different intervals, some monthly, some quarterly etc. All passwords have different rules for designing the passwords. It's impossible to use the same password in more than one function because the rules for designing the passwords are so different. He just keeps a list of the passwords by his computer as does almost everyone else in the company.

Chris, this is no different than what your HOSA goes through. The agency is no different with respect to passwords. Drap units are one way, flexiplace laptops another.ssa netwrok another way. Some tech sites require passwords. At least private industry may still pay more. But, then the job security issue comes up. We used to feel secure in the gov't. I don't anymore,especially with the union busting.

[techgeek]

pixie said:

deltajudge said:

The size of ALJ offices has always been a matter of contention. It goes to the general atmosphere of OHA/ODAR. ALJs since the unions came in back in the early 80s have been continually downgraded, lost their staff and responsibility, and it will continue. If ODAR has its way, ALJs will have a nice cubicle from which they will step out off, stroll down the hall to the video room and conduct their little TV session. It's coming.

Yes, TG, it is coming. Once the TV sessions become accepted practice, the great minds will realize it is much simpler and less expensive to have telephone hearings. No need then for the judge to even leave her cubicle; the phone is already there. So is the computer. Don't need all of that other expensive equipment.

After the hearing, scroll through the screens typing in the various fields for about thirty minutes, press send, and there is the decision! After the judges are supervisors, and that worthless union is busted, it will all become so simple.

To illustrate the lack of understanding of the ALJ function in Baltimore, there periodically is the original idea that if the Agency could get Congress to legislate away the due process requirement, as it applies to SSA hearings, the ALJs would no longer be needed. Such is their understanding of constitutional concepts. Pix.

Pixie,

I understand what you are saying. AFGE has already been busted. NTEU is on the way. Part of the problem was that the union must defend everyone,union member or not, bad employees as well as good employees. Many people use the union to go after mgmt or fellow employees that they don't like. This has caused the gov't much grief for many years. We all have seen employees that abuse the system. About the only way to get rid of a trouble employee or a mediocre employee is to promote them. Some people used the system to get out of producing results figuring that the union will fight for them. Some people are just difficult to work with.

Now, the gov't is fighting back, albeit , not fairly. They are going to penanlize whoever they can wherever they can until they prune the ranks of dead beats, troublemakers and people they just don't like. No one is immune to the rules and regulations and whims of HQ.

[3orangewhips]

I've argued plenty of federal district court MSJ's and a few 11 circuit court of appeals cases by phone. An ALJ hearing is different, but the idea of a phone hearing isn't that out there.

[doctorwho]

3orangewhips said:

I've argued plenty of federal district court MSJ's and a few 11 circuit court of appeals cases by phone. An ALJ hearing is different, but the idea of a phone hearing isn't that out there.

At a Motion for Summary Judgment hearing and at a Court of Appeals argument, witnesses are not being presented. Part of the ALJ's determination requires observing the claimant and making a determination as to whether or not the individual is telling the truth. It's apples and oranges.

[privateatty]

Forgive my ignorance, but would the issue of whether of not a video hearing on the merits be something that the Union could grieve?

I agree credibility would be very hard to determine if you could not actually see the applicant/claimant.

Further, if the Administration is interested in more denials, wouldn't video hearings work against this goal?

Perhaps this is something that could at least be brought to Baltimore's attention.

[ruonthelist]

civilserpent said:

ruonthelist wrote

"Also, if the new DC based VTC hearing unit is established, every new judge assigned there is one that will not require an office in an existing field office; and every current judge transferred to the new unit will free up an office in the field."

But no newly selected judges will go to DC, because the vacancy announcement required one year experience as an ALJ.

civilserpent: I'm sorry that I wasn't more clear. You are correct about the job announcement for the Falls Church video center being limited to sitting judges. I was thinking about the fact that it does allow for the possibility of judges from other agencies applying for the new hearing office. That strikes me as unlikely, but it is a possibility. When I said "new judge" I meant new to the newly established office and possibly new to SSA. I did not mean to imply that newly hired judges would go to the Falls Church video office. Thank you for pointing that out.

RU

[ruonthelist]

doctorwho said:

3orangewhips said:

I've argued plenty of federal district court MSJ's and a few 11 circuit court of appeals cases by phone. An ALJ hearing is different, but the idea of a phone hearing isn't that out there.

At a Motion for Summary Judgment hearing and at a Court of Appeals argument, witnesses are not being presented. Part of the ALJ's determination requires observing the claimant and making a determination as to whether or not the individual is telling the truth. It's apples and oranges.

Orange: You are right about the usefulness of telephonic hearings in certain circumstances, and the examples that you give are good illustrations. However, the Doc is correct about SSA practice. An SSA ALJ almost never has a hearing, like an MSJ or appellate argument, that involves a purely legal issue. The ALJ is, in almost all hearings, tasked with the classic jury function of determining the credibility of one or more live witnesses.

That is not to say that phone hearings won't eventually become the norm. I'm sure the agency would like to see that happen. But if they do, it will be a more profound change for SSA than it is for an appellate court, or a trial court deciding an MSJ.

[3orangewhips]

ruonthelist said:

doctorwho said:

At a Motion for Summary Judgment hearing and at a Court of Appeals argument, witnesses are not being presented. Part of the ALJ's determination requires observing the claimant and making a determination as to whether or not the individual is telling the truth. It's apples and oranges.

Orange: You are right about the usefulness of telephonic hearings in certain circumstances, and the examples that you give are good illustrations. However, the Doc is correct about SSA practice. An SSA ALJ almost never has a hearing, like an MSJ or appellate argument, that involves a purely legal issue. The ALJ is, in almost all hearings, tasked with the classic jury function of determining the credibility of one or more live witnesses.

That is not to say that phone hearings won't eventually become the norm. I'm sure the agency would like to see that happen. But if they do, it will be a more profound change for SSA than it is for an appellate court, or a trial court deciding an MSJ.

I agree and that is why i said ALJ hearings are different. credibility of the claimant is the main reason for wanting to actually see the claimant in person. However, it isn't the only way to assess the claimant's credibility in a SSA case. There are plenty of other ways to do it. Claimant's make multiple statements of record through medical records, daily activity questionnaires, pain questionnaires, hearing statements, reports of contact, ect. Even if an ALJ couldn't see the claimant, a credibility determination can still be made based on inconsistent statements of record. Of course, the simpler the case, the easier it would be. It would be impossible to conduct a full adversarial trial by phone. A phone hearing in an ALJ non-adversiarial hearing would be difficult, but possible.

[techgeek]

From a technical stand point, if SSA were to replace our horrid large screen televisions with a state of the art LCD monitor and camera system, I believe we would have great results with good clarity. Correct lighting would be beneficial to help with the desired result. The camera already allows for zooming and is very easy to operate. Constant improvements in technology will only make it better.

Bandwidth for the steaming audio/video is another issue and one I am not sure we can handle without major network upgrades to servers, bandwidth by use of fiber optics into the buildings and gigabit speed on our servers net cards. We are having enough issues with CPMS and EVIEW and I can't imagine our offices handling video in every hearing room although that is the plan as far as I know. However, the cost I have heard for past set ups has been 40K per hearing room. Prices have dropped on some of the equipment in the hearing room but it will still not be inexpensive with contractors costs etc. So, the grand plan may not look so grand now that the reality of systems / bandwidth problems have reared their ugly head. It will be an interesting ride for those of us that remain.

[kingfisher]

I agree with 3Orange that there are numerous ways to judge credibility, and frankly I like to have them all at my fingertips, including the face to face interaction. However, it is still possible to do this via VTC. As techgeek pointed out, it is very easy to pull in for a close shot on the claimant's face, etc. It just takes practice.

On a related matter, I had a problem at a recent VTC hearing the other day and am hoping someone may have a solution. During the hearing, the ME was scheduled to testify via telephone from a 3rd city. After we got him on the line, he could not hear the testimony coming from the remote site, even though the volume was turned up high in my hearing room. After trying all we could think of, I determined that his testimony would have to be provided via Interrogatories after the hearing. If anyone has a suggestion on how to align the telephone and VTC sound, I would appreciate it. Any ideas?

[techgeek]

The hearing rooms all have extra phone lines and the instructions to purchase certain telephones had been sent to hearing offices. Those phones integrate with the mixer control system that is also connected to the digital recorder and microphones. A separate set of speakers (PC desktop style) would amplify the callers voice which is then picked up by the microphones. Region or HQ then told the hearing offices they would do a purchase and that the local offices should not buy them. The phones never came and some office mgmt decided that they should not buy them. So, some hearing offices are paying for phone lines that they can't and don't use.(not that they would be used that often anyway)