|
|
Post by Pixie on Jan 3, 2021 18:29:46 GMT -5
When you say "outsider," do you mean someone not already working for SSA or someone who is not a federal employee? To me, the term "Outsider" is that group outside of SSA. Pixie |
|
|
|
Post by Prrple on Jan 4, 2021 11:42:28 GMT -5
We're in a strange time. The disability filings are low, despite record unemployment and people legit disabled by the disease. The "long haulers" will be filing.
Friends who do bankruptcy law say bankruptcy filings are lower than normal, even though people are paying their rent with credit cards and no income to pay the debt. The wave of evictions has not hit yet because of the eviction moratorium, but we know it will. Bankruptcy bar thinks a wave is coming. Legal Aid orgs know a wave is coming, and are already seeing it.
The backlog going down is not a long-term trend; it is a good use of this lull before the rush that is coming. |
|
|
|
Post by nylawyer on Jan 4, 2021 14:05:39 GMT -5
Dwindling receipts are an issue for long term hiring, but not the main issue in the short term.
We have an impending change of administration, which might well mean a return to the OPM centric hiring. What if this happens, and it is decided to begin a new register? That means that a full round of testing and interviewing would have to occur before there would be any SSA ALJ hiring.
And that of course brings us to the biggest short term problem- we aren't really in an ideal environment to be testing, interviewing, or training a new class of ALJs. Could it be done remotely?- sure, it could be figured out. But given the fact that there is currently no need for additional ALJs, why would they?
|
|
|
|
Post by Prrple on Jan 4, 2021 14:36:49 GMT -5
Indeed, hiring is not on the short term horizon, only the long term. It will be quite some time before these hypothetical future disability claims get to the point in the process where they become OHO hearings.
Not sure whether the old register would be thrown out if this goes back to OPM. When those of us on the register got notice the hiring process was terminated, we were told we were NOT released from the confidentiality provisions, which implies the old process is still available. I think that the data is still intact, and the old register is available for supplementation with new testing.
But you are right that OPM could still decide to begin an entirely new register. Who knows what they will do? [insert shrug emoji]
|
|
|
|
Post by bowser on Jan 4, 2021 15:34:30 GMT -5
Let's see - I have ZERO cases in ALPO and EDIT, and on a Monday, I am prepping my hearings for NEXT week. In recent weeks I've more than once encountered something I never imagined possible - hrgs scheduled less than a year after the application date.
Hard to imagine any immediate need for ALJ hiring.
|
|
|
|
Post by nylawyer on Jan 4, 2021 17:44:32 GMT -5
Let's see - I have ZERO cases in ALPO and EDIT, and on a Monday, I am prepping my hearings for NEXT week. In recent weeks I've more than once encountered something I never imagined possible - hrgs scheduled less than a year after the application date. Hard to imagine any immediate need for ALJ hiring. We aren't that extreme, but it appears that over the next few months only about 80% of my hearing slots are being filled. And that's including claimants whonhave been scheduled multiple times but for whom we don't have a working phone number. |
|
|
|
Post by aljhopefully on Jan 4, 2021 21:16:37 GMT -5
Crikey, that sounds ominous.
|
|
|
|
Post by bowser on Jan 5, 2021 9:13:52 GMT -5
...And that's including claimants who have been scheduled multiple times but for whom we don't have a working phone number. Hey, you know what those folk need? Video hearings!  |
|
|
|
Post by nylawyer on Jan 5, 2021 9:39:10 GMT -5
...And that's including claimants who have been scheduled multiple times but for whom we don't have a working phone number. Hey, you know what those folk need? Video hearings! Yeah, it's hard for me to get uppity about claimant's access to phones when right now for the umpteenth time I cant start my hearings due to tech issues. I just did a quick calculation, I've lost around 30 hours since the beginning of December. |
|
|
|
Post by tripper on Jan 5, 2021 10:13:03 GMT -5
I can’t see the need for hiring anytime soon. I also am getting only about 80% of my slots scheduled (especially bad starting next month) and many of them have been scheduled three times. Eventually it will turn around, but not likely in the next 9 months or more. We are having training on video hearings this month but to my knowledge none have been scheduled that way yet for “line” judges.
|
|
|
|
Post by tom b on Jan 5, 2021 10:15:00 GMT -5
Beckett may have a better answer for you, but I would say it will be a long time for outsiders before Godot actually appears. Pixie Never happened. Happy New Year, though! Sorry, coming a little late to this game. With all due respect to sunshinedaydream and Pixie (who I know could silence me in an instant), you're both wrong about Beckett and Godot. Sam Gross (cartoonist whose work appeared in both The National Lampoon and The New Yorker) had the answer: Godot was lying bound and gagged on the roadside.
Respectfully, Tom B
|
|
|
|
Post by tom b on Jan 5, 2021 10:16:30 GMT -5
Okay, I did not write "Lamthingy," but somehow the censor program thinks that using a word that means a work of parody is offensive.
|
|
|
|
Post by tom b on Jan 5, 2021 12:26:13 GMT -5
And I wonder whether one can write "harthingy" and not have it censored. Let Queequeg know if that is the case.
|
|
|
|
Post by tom b on Jan 5, 2021 12:27:06 GMT -5
No, apparently one cannot write the name of that implement with a toggled penetrating device either without giving some offense . . . . New Bedford and Nantucket, Massachusetts, and Mystic, Connecticut, had better watch out!
|
|
|
|
Post by Pixie on Jan 5, 2021 12:58:22 GMT -5
Okay, I did not write "Lamthingy," but somehow the censor program thinks that using a word that means a work of parody is offensive. You wil need to fool the censor. Writing it like this will work: Lamp-oon. |
|
|
|
Post by hamster on Jan 5, 2021 14:21:56 GMT -5
Yeah, but then some pedant might point out that Lamp-oon doesn’t have a hyphen in it.
|
|
|
|
Post by nylawyer on Jan 5, 2021 15:50:27 GMT -5
Lamp-oon seems dirtier.
|
|
|
|
Post by SPN Lifer on Jan 5, 2021 19:35:22 GMT -5
"Lampoón", "harpoón", and "spoón" all evade the forum auto-censor, I ássume!
That is my ássumption.
----------------------
"Lampoon", "harpoon", and "spoon" all evade the forum auto-censor, I assume!
That is I disagreeumption.
|
|
|
|
Post by tom b on Jan 6, 2021 9:25:37 GMT -5
I suppose as well that LAMP[DIPHTHONG]N would do the trick, although that really seems cumbersome.
I don't want to go too far into the linguistic or philological weeds, but I imagine that using "ou" instead of "oo" will do in a pinch; interestingly, though, autocorrect (not auto censor) prevents me from misspelling the offending words with the "ou" diphthong instead of the "oo".
Will the circle be unbroken?
Respectfully, Tom B
|
|
|
|
Post by foghorn on Jan 8, 2021 14:13:24 GMT -5
I would have thought lam-poon would be more louche.
I note that autocorrect tends to change not only plain English to ESL English, if that, but also flags as an error any English spellings of the English language.
(I wonder why it's never called the British language, even in Britain?)
Autocorrect on my phone is worse--it seems to make the change a split second before sending, assuring that an illogical choice of phrasing will go to the recipient. I wonder who writes the algorithms that insert a word that is inappropriate for one that fits well.
|
|
