|
|
Post by mercury on Nov 16, 2020 10:10:14 GMT -5
Does the program analyst position require a law degree? Program analyst is a separate position, but assuming you mean the internal title of hearings and appeals analyst (AC), no, it does not require a law degree, and non-attorneys keep their job classifications as paralegal specialists or social insurance specialists, etc. However, the AC generally stopped hiring non-attorneys around 2011. Last I saw at the AC there is a good mix of newer to experienced attorneys and senior analysts who are not attorneys. FWIW, the best lawyers/analysts I saw there weren’t always lawyers, but neither were the worst. |
|
|
|
Post by lurkerbelow on Nov 17, 2020 17:29:05 GMT -5
This thread is starting to have the flavor of your favorite sports player trade discussions at the local bar (and is probably about as useful!)
|
|
|
|
Post by neufenland on Nov 22, 2020 13:36:35 GMT -5
So i read on the Hall Blog that OMB has approved the regulations from commissioner Terry Grubber fought for to have AAJs hold hearings. If the current administration stays in office there will be hiring of AAJs and they will be assigned to OHO offices and hearing centers. I believe we may have seen the last ALJ hired if we do not have a change of administration socsecnews.blogspot.com I attended the ABA Admin Law virtual conference last week and this development was mentioned. No reading of the tea leaves for how it's going to go in the future, though. For sure, if Biden doesn't address it via an EO, it doesn't bode well for the future of ALJs at SSA (that is, for those of us hoping to become one). One does have to wonder how much he'll care about it. This was a theme in several of the sessions I watched. Panelists had come to the conclusion that consistency in expectations for how the administrative state operates is pretty much gone. Since Congress is likely to be gridlocked and impotent, it will continue to ebb and flow depending on who is in the White House. I have to say, it is very disheartening. |
|
|
|
Post by christina on Nov 22, 2020 16:58:18 GMT -5
So i read on the Hall Blog that OMB has approved the regulations from commissioner Terry Grubber fought for to have AAJs hold hearings. If the current administration stays in office there will be hiring of AAJs and they will be assigned to OHO offices and hearing centers. I believe we may have seen the last ALJ hired if we do not have a change of administration socsecnews.blogspot.com I attended the ABA Admin Law virtual conference last week and this development was mentioned. No reading of the tea leaves for how it's going to go in the future, though. For sure, if Biden doesn't address it via an EO, it doesn't bode well for the future of ALJs at SSA (that is, for those of us hoping to become one). One does have to wonder how much he'll care about it. This was a theme in several of the sessions I watched. Panelists had come to the conclusion that consistency in expectations for how the administrative state operates is pretty much gone. Since Congress is likely to be gridlocked and impotent, it will continue to ebb and flow depending on who is in the White House. I have to say, it is very disheartening. This all makes sense |
|
|
|
Post by superalj on Nov 24, 2020 22:54:01 GMT -5
We don’t even have enough cases for ALJs to hear. They can’t even schedule the 600 for us now. I except the receipts to increase when unemployment runs out and the field offices have more accessibility. However, I’m optimistic. Colvin is advising POTUS elect and I think Congress may get involved especially if our Union makes them aware of the possibility that bureaucrats who are not trained in holding hearings will be ruling on their constituents disability claims from a video screen in the beltway. I’m not referring to our friends at the NHC.
With a global pandemic and a recession, it won’t be a high priority for POTUS elect but eventually ALJs will hear cases and AAJs will do whatever it is they do.
|
|
|
|
Post by roymcavoy on Nov 24, 2020 22:55:13 GMT -5
The other thing... it took several years for the current admin’s attitude to reach SSA and ALJs, remembering that 100+ ALJs were hired in fall 2017.
So absent a broad rescind of EOs, AAJs working as ALJs could continue as a stop gap to whatever the new admin wants to do with ALJs. As someone noted above, it is doubtful there will be concurrence to pass the major legislative overhaul to enact a permanent change in this arena. Because of that, the major tell will likely be the omnibus appropriations deal that Senate GOP is pushing/passes. When we see what they agree to, we will have an idea what changes Senate GOP wants for SSA, etc.
Edit to Add...
Found the passed House Appropriations Bill (HR 7617)—it has not been passed by senate and while the House Senate and WH are working on it, it will certainly have changes....
The release states these two tidbits...
“Blocks OPM Merger with GSA – Includes new language rejecting the Administration’s proposed merger of OPM with GSA.”
and
“$13 billion for the Social Security Administration’s (SSA) operating expenses,
with an increase of $100 million above the FY 2020 enacted level to hire
additional staff at field offices, teleservice and processing centers and improve
public services.”
The language of the actual bills includes the following:
“ Provided further, That $50,000,000 shall remain available through September 30, 2022, for activities to address the disability hearings backlog within the Office of Hearings Operations: Provided further, That unobligated balances of funds provided under this paragraph at the end of fiscal year 2021 not needed for fiscal year 2021 shall remain available until expended to invest in the Social Security Administration information technology and telecommunications hardware and software infrastructure, including related equipment and non-payroll administrative expenses associated solely with this information technology and telecommunications infrastructure...”
It seems that the $50M can be used for whatever purpose to erode backlog but any unused funds thereafter would go to “nonpayroll” info tech and telecom hardware and software. I think language was largely copied from the 2019 Omnibus Appropriations, which allowed $n to be used to hire ALJs, but unused amounts to go to tech upgrades. This seems to give the Commissioner more leeway on what is needed to erode the backlog—which likely begs the question as to who the commissioner would be.
Again, hasn’t passed senate so changes will occur. It partly answers my question and explains the shiny new laptop on my desk.
|
|
|
|
Post by roymcavoy on Dec 28, 2020 11:48:18 GMT -5
The language of the actual bills includes the following: “ Provided further, That $50,000,000 shall remain available through September 30, 2022, for activities to address the disability hearings backlog within the Office of Hearings Operations: Provided further, That unobligated balances of funds provided under this paragraph at the end of fiscal year 2021 not needed for fiscal year 2021 shall remain available until expended to invest in the Social Security Administration information technology and telecommunications hardware and software infrastructure, including related equipment and non-payroll administrative expenses associated solely with this information technology and telecommunications infrastructure...” This language did manage to find its way into the (apparently) signed bill from pages 1073-1079 of the document (1081-1087 of the pdf) |
|
