|
|
Post by patiently on Jun 25, 2020 9:23:08 GMT -5
I just noticed the DRAP software was pushed out to my laptop; wonder what this portends.
|
|
|
|
Post by jagvet on Jun 25, 2020 12:22:29 GMT -5
I just noticed the DRAP software was pushed out to my laptop; wonder what this portends. Moohooohahahaha! I just noticed that, too. It portends ill, my friend.
The Zombie Appocalypse begins now. ALJs will by themselves, develop files, operate DRAP, call everyone, write determinations, and man the hearing office entrance screening points.
|
|
|
|
Post by recoveringalj on Jun 25, 2020 13:29:57 GMT -5
My non-SSA agency seems to be preparing for indefinite work-from-home (telework) as well. Nothing official yet, but that is definitely the vibe of our staff meeting since the number of cases seem to be headed in the wrong direction.
|
|
|
|
Post by nylawyer on Jun 25, 2020 15:22:40 GMT -5
I just noticed the DRAP software was pushed out to my laptop; wonder what this portends. Moohooohahahaha! I just noticed that, too. It portends ill, my friend.
The Zombie Appocalypse begins now. ALJs will by themselves, develop files, operate DRAP, call everyone, write determinations, and man the hearing office entrance screening points.
Figures. About a week or two ago it seemed like almost all of the people serving as hearing monitors had gotten the hang of it, solnit makes sense to immediately have them stop and make it someone else's job. Preferably a group of people who as a whole are older and less likely to be comfortable with the technology. |
|
|
|
Post by hamster on Jun 25, 2020 15:47:10 GMT -5
I just noticed the DRAP software was pushed out to my laptop; wonder what this portends. Moohooohahahaha! I just noticed that, too. It portends ill, my friend.
The Zombie Appocalypse begins now. ALJs will by themselves, develop files, operate DRAP, call everyone, write determinations, and man the hearing office entrance screening points.
Maybe we’ll also start being responsible for unreasonably, idiotically, and hysterically reproaching and shaming ourselves for getting only 499 dispositions this year, or for letting a case sit in EDIT too long, or for only scheduling 49 hearings the month your parents and in-laws all died, along with your favorite aunt...and faithful dog—that also had two federal holidays and was already a short production month. Truly, an ALJ’s lot is not an easy one. |
|
|
|
Post by hopefalj on Jun 25, 2020 17:10:09 GMT -5
I just noticed the DRAP software was pushed out to my laptop; wonder what this portends. Moohooohahahaha! I just noticed that, too. It portends ill, my friend.
The Zombie Appocalypse begins now. ALJs will by themselves, develop files, operate DRAP, call everyone, write determinations, and man the hearing office entrance screening points.
If they cut the production requirement to 100-120 per year, I'll sign up for that workload. Well, except for manning the front desk. |
|
|
|
Post by jagvet on Jun 25, 2020 17:37:59 GMT -5
On Leap years, they will require 515.
|
|
|
|
Post by barkley on Jun 26, 2020 11:25:26 GMT -5
On a different note, is anyone else getting concerned about the cases that are just sitting there due to policy decisions? Three situations botherin' me, mainly because there is no end in sight to our office closures.
1. I have several ARPR cases that are hitting 90 days because they are paper cases. I remember in ancient times during the beginning of telework when writers would put their paper cases in a suitcase, lock it up, and take them home. Judges would have cases of files to go to remote sites. Hearing Offices would mail cases to each other for work up or writing. As our technology has advanced, TPTB eliminated taking paper cases out of the office citing security reasons. Due to our circumstances, I don't see why management cannot go back to our old procedures. I wish they would mail me my paper cases, so I could work on them and hold hearings on them. No point in them just sitting for the next six to twelve months.
2. I have at least a dozen CDR cases wherein the claimant requested a rep at the first hearing and was scheduled for their second hearing when COVID-19 hit. SSA has suspended holding hearings/issuing decisions on these cases, but I think we are potentially hurting these people. For those cases resulting in an UAFF decision, every month is adding to a potential overpayment. By now, enough time has passed that all these cases will need new workup anyway.
3. I have a number of cases in which our office contacted a claimant via telephone, they agreed to a telephone hearing, and then did not pick up the telephone on hearing day. I understand cutting these people some slack, but I don't understand, if we send a Notice to Show Cause and they do not respond, why we cannot dismiss the case. Especially in cases where the HO prior to the hearing had actual contact with the claimant and verified phone number and addresses.
I just think it is time for TPTN to reassess what we are doing.
|
|
|
|
Post by nylawyer on Jun 26, 2020 12:02:01 GMT -5
On a different note, is anyone else getting concerned about the cases that are just sitting there due to policy decisions? Three situations botherin' me, mainly because there is no end in sight to our office closures. 1. I have several ARPR cases that are hitting 90 days because they are paper cases. I remember in ancient times during the beginning of telework when writers would put their paper cases in a suitcase, lock it up, and take them home. Judges would have cases of files to go to remote sites. Hearing Offices would mail cases to each other for work up or writing. As our technology has advanced, TPTB eliminated taking paper cases out of the office citing security reasons. Due to our circumstances, I don't see why management cannot go back to our old procedures. I wish they would mail me my paper cases, so I could work on them and hold hearings on them. No point in them just sitting for the next six to twelve months. 2. I have at least a dozen CDR cases wherein the claimant requested a rep at the first hearing and was scheduled for their second hearing when COVID-19 hit. SSA has suspended holding hearings/issuing decisions on these cases, but I think we are potentially hurting these people. For those cases resulting in an UAFF decision, every month is adding to a potential overpayment. By now, enough time has passed that all these cases will need new workup anyway. 3. I have a number of cases in which our office contacted a claimant via telephone, they agreed to a telephone hearing, and then did not pick up the telephone on hearing day. I understand cutting these people some slack, but I don't understand, if we send a Notice to Show Cause and they do not respond, why we cannot dismiss the case. Especially in cases where the HO prior to the hearing had actual contact with the claimant and verified phone number and addresses. I just think it is time for TPTN to reassess what we are doing. 1) I have no strong feelings, I have only one paper case myself pending. Seems like something can be worked out. Depending on the office set up, maybe the needed staff could go in to deal with the one case. 2) I don't really understand the logic of the CDR cases. Seems to me that the better course would have been to issue the decisions but offer the claimant a stay, with the understanding they will be responsible for the overpayment. As things stand, we will be issuing every CDR decision months after the hearing was held. 3) I agree. Or, at least send a show cause and absent a satisfactory response dismiss the case. Having said that, there isn't a ton of harm in not dismissing, it just means that in the months after we return to normal there will be a higher rate of no show dismissals. |
|
|
|
Post by roonie on Jun 26, 2020 14:06:09 GMT -5
On a different note, is anyone else getting concerned about the cases that are just sitting there due to policy decisions? Three situations botherin' me, mainly because there is no end in sight to our office closures. 1. I have several ARPR cases that are hitting 90 days because they are paper cases. I remember in ancient times during the beginning of telework when writers would put their paper cases in a suitcase, lock it up, and take them home. Judges would have cases of files to go to remote sites. Hearing Offices would mail cases to each other for work up or writing. As our technology has advanced, TPTB eliminated taking paper cases out of the office citing security reasons. Due to our circumstances, I don't see why management cannot go back to our old procedures. I wish they would mail me my paper cases, so I could work on them and hold hearings on them. No point in them just sitting for the next six to twelve months. 2. I have at least a dozen CDR cases wherein the claimant requested a rep at the first hearing and was scheduled for their second hearing when COVID-19 hit. SSA has suspended holding hearings/issuing decisions on these cases, but I think we are potentially hurting these people. For those cases resulting in an UAFF decision, every month is adding to a potential overpayment. By now, enough time has passed that all these cases will need new workup anyway. 3. I have a number of cases in which our office contacted a claimant via telephone, they agreed to a telephone hearing, and then did not pick up the telephone on hearing day. I understand cutting these people some slack, but I don't understand, if we send a Notice to Show Cause and they do not respond, why we cannot dismiss the case. Especially in cases where the HO prior to the hearing had actual contact with the claimant and verified phone number and addresses. I just think it is time for TPTN to reassess what we are doing. Some GSs are having to take them home and write them- I even had my GS scan and OP case for me to do. It’s silly the writers can’t get them. |
|
|
|
Post by marathon on Jun 26, 2020 19:31:05 GMT -5
2) I don't really understand the logic of the CDR cases. Seems to me that the better course would have been to issue the decisions but offer the claimant a stay, with the understanding they will be responsible for the overpayment. As things stand, we will be issuing every CDR decision months after the hearing was held. And if you do issue a decision months after the hearing, it will be remanded because of the time lapse and possibility of new treatment. My money is on the agency requiring us to rehear them all, and/or do more CEOs to justify that policy. |
|
|
|
Post by Pixie on Jun 26, 2020 21:29:11 GMT -5
And I think you are exactly right. The Agency can find novel ways to shoot itself in the foot. Pixie.
|
|
|
|
Post by pumpkin on Jun 27, 2020 17:15:11 GMT -5
Let’s just postpone all the CDR cases that are in pay status, and exclude from overpayment liability all monies paid between the date of the request for hearing and the actual hearing date, whenever that might be.
Now, what to do with the CDR’s that are not in pay status?
|
|
|
|
Post by natethegreat on Jun 28, 2020 10:08:58 GMT -5
Let’s just postpone all the CDR cases that are in pay status, and exclude from overpayment liability all monies paid between the date of the request for hearing and the actual hearing date, whenever that might be. Now, what to do with the CDR’s that are not in pay status? I believe it is business as usual for CDRs not in pay status, right? (Assuming they aren't paper). |
|
|
|
Post by tripper on Jun 28, 2020 20:57:30 GMT -5
That is what is happening in my office.
|
|
|
|
Post by tripper on Jul 1, 2020 11:38:15 GMT -5
Hearings are being noticed as phone hearings through November now.
|
|
|
|
Post by jagvet on Jul 1, 2020 12:26:19 GMT -5
Thank you, tripper! Appreciate the info. |
|
|
|
Post by nylawyer on Jul 1, 2020 13:17:17 GMT -5
I don't have any hearings, phone or otherwise, scheduled after the first week of August. (Rest of my office is the same, so I don't think I'm being let go).
I don't the fact that hearings are being noticed to be by phone through November would preclude the agency from re-opening the offices. They could then just give the claimants the option to either proceed by phone or live.
|
|
|
|
Post by tripper on Jul 1, 2020 13:41:41 GMT -5
My docket is not filled for all of August either. I think I have about 60% and only one or two in first two weeks of September.
|
|
|
|
Post by jagvet on Jul 1, 2020 13:49:49 GMT -5
It is weird how that hopscotches. My guess is that they automatically rescheduled no-shows and refusals for telephone hearing to July-August back in March-April. If that's the case, then August will be really low on hearings.
|
|
