|
|
Post by bowser on Dec 9, 2020 11:28:11 GMT -5
Maybe Biden names Yang, universal income is enacted, and we are all out of jobs!  |
|
|
|
RIFs?
Dec 9, 2020 11:47:03 GMT -5
via mobile
seaside likes this
Post by nylawyer on Dec 9, 2020 11:47:03 GMT -5
Are we all on Planet Earth? Let's say Saul is fired and he doesn't get a court to block it, at least for a while. The old career people who ran the show between Astrue and Saul take over. Remember them? I do. I can't see them doing any of the stuff in the article. Then Biden nominates someone like Elizabeth Warren to run SSA and make these administrative changes to make it harder to fire employees and make ALJs happier. What chance does that person have of getting confirmed in a GOP-led Senate (assuming arguendo)? For four years, the careerists run SSA and change nothing. Does anyone remember Biden ever promising to make those changes to DIB and SSI? He is not going to do it. If Saul resigns, fine. If not, I'll bet that on January 19, 2025, Commissioner Saul has a farewell party and dreamers on this blog will be predicting that his successor will finally make all these changes. Here's my prediction (again): Nothing changes. If Biden wants changes (and I have no reason to believe he either does or doesn't) they'll happen. Whether it's Saul, interim managers, or anyone else. |
|
|
|
Post by nylawyer on Dec 9, 2020 11:47:37 GMT -5
Maybe Biden names Yang, universal income is enacted, and we are all out of jobs! Actually, I believe under Yang's plan, Title 2 would survive. |
|
|
|
RIFs?
Dec 9, 2020 12:26:37 GMT -5
Post by jagvet on Dec 9, 2020 12:26:37 GMT -5
Rereading the article: Before Saul came in, the careerists (who would take over if Saul left), dragged their feet on several significant changes, including modernizing jobs from the ancient DOT. Biden's administration might be able to prevent some new changes to the grid if not finalized before inauguration day if they fire Saul thereafter, but that's about it.
If both senate seats in Georgia flip, then maybe, maybe the administration can get some statutory changes through Congress. Maybe not.
|
|
|
|
RIFs?
Dec 9, 2020 15:05:34 GMT -5
via mobile
ok1956 likes this
Post by tripper on Dec 9, 2020 15:05:34 GMT -5
make fun all you want, he got me this shiny-a$$ new laptop that randomly restarts during the day without warning or apology Pet peeve about the new laptops (in addition to random restarts)... did all the ports have to be on the same side (right) so there is a tangle of cords between the laptop and my notepad? |
|
|
|
RIFs?
Dec 10, 2020 23:04:51 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by roymcavoy on Dec 10, 2020 23:04:51 GMT -5
make fun all you want, he got me this shiny-a$$ new laptop that randomly restarts during the day without warning or apology Pet peeve about the new laptops (in addition to random restarts)... did all the ports have to be on the same side (right) so there is a tangle of cords between the laptop and my notepad? having recently purchased a new laptop for a family member, this is the new norm. My guess is that it is because of tethering to extended screen monitors—but just a guess |
|
|
|
Post by rov on Dec 11, 2020 9:16:21 GMT -5
I don't see a need for a RIF due to the Agency's normal attrition rate and lack of hiring. I just checked the CMD Portal and we are down to 1,382 Judges. I also believe that COVID has changed the perspectives and priorities of people to the extent that many retirement eligible judges will decide to do so.
|
|
|
|
Post by ssaogc on Dec 11, 2020 13:25:22 GMT -5
What a great article thank you for posting. Made my day. |
|
|
|
Post by nylawyer on Dec 11, 2020 13:43:00 GMT -5
From the article- "Much of the dissatisfaction stemmed from how agency leaders have managed the COVID-19 pandemic and employee safety concerns." I have to say, on my list of complaints, this would be fairly far down. I can certainly name things that could have been done better, but this is an unprecedented situation and it's tough to be overwhelmingly critical. I'm not really sure what exactly this is referring to. |
|
|
|
RIFs?
Dec 11, 2020 13:46:49 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Wynona Writer on Dec 11, 2020 13:46:49 GMT -5
Congress has until midnight to pass a CR to avoid a government shutdown. Any thoughts on what that might look like for SSA? Furlough? Essential? Should we be concerned about our scheduled Christmas leave?
|
|
|
|
Post by carrickfergus on Dec 21, 2020 10:23:04 GMT -5
This is along the lines of the "talk me back from the edge of the cliff" post earlier in this thread.
Several groups are petitioning the Biden administration to oust the COSS and other high-level members of the agency. One argument was that there doesn't have to be a "for cause" reason to remove them under the recent Seila decision. I was re-reading the scotus blog discussion of Seila, and came across this:
"The Supreme Court has recognized two limited exceptions to the president’s otherwise unlimited removal power. First, Roberts noted, in Humphrey’s Executor the justices acknowledged that Congress could create for-cause removal protections for 'a multimember body of experts, balanced along partisan lines, that performed legislative and judicial functions and was said not to exercise any executive power.' Second, in two subsequent cases, the Supreme Court upheld exceptions for so-called 'inferior' officers, who have limited duties and lack policymaking or administrative authority, such as an independent counsel."
I'm not sure which two subsequent cases the author means, but if her interpretation of those is correct, my take is that if everyone wants to call ALJs 'inferior officers' then it stands to reason that we lack the status to which schedule F purports to apply.
|
|
|
|
RIFs?
Dec 21, 2020 15:53:16 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by arkstfan on Dec 21, 2020 15:53:16 GMT -5
The ALJ corps is so small it’s hard to imagine anyone in Congress caring much unless constituents start raising hell that someone in Baltimore heard their case while their cousin was before a live ALJ who drove to a nearby town from Minneapolis.
Historically, early out offers precede RIF and neither is easily approved. I believe my office is currently at 8 unless I’ve missed a retirement (three since we went to alternate work station). Of the 8 there are 5 who can say screw it and walk out at any time. Most wouldn’t because they’d like to qualify for Medicare or build their TSP more or add more to their FES benefits or hit full retirement age for Social Security but they can walk and get by if the mood strikes which one judge did.
Attrition is a powerful force
|
|
|
|
RIFs?
Jan 8, 2021 10:56:22 GMT -5
Post by fowlfinder on Jan 8, 2021 10:56:22 GMT -5
Not sure where to put this, but since whether Saul would stay on was discussed here I will place this here. "The Trump administration on Thursday instructed all political appointees to submit their resignation letters by Jan. 20, ensuring they exit federal agencies upon President-elect Biden’s swearing in." www.govexec.com/management/2021/01/white-house-belatedly-issues-request-resignation-letters-all-appointees/171263/Not sure if this applies to the SSA Commissioner, (I think it probably does, but what do I know). There is the added question of whether it applies to the Deputy Commissioner, who the Unions have also expressed no confidence in. (Probably not). |
|
cle
New Member
Posts: 13
|
Post by cle on Jan 8, 2021 11:43:26 GMT -5
Not sure where to put this, but since whether Saul would stay on was discussed here I will place this here. "The Trump administration on Thursday instructed all political appointees to submit their resignation letters by Jan. 20, ensuring they exit federal agencies upon President-elect Biden’s swearing in." www.govexec.com/management/2021/01/white-house-belatedly-issues-request-resignation-letters-all-appointees/171263/Not sure if this applies to the SSA Commissioner, (I think it probably does, but what do I know). There is the added question of whether it applies to the Deputy Commissioner, who the Unions have also expressed no confidence in. (Probably not). I think the article says appointees with terms, like US Attorneys, don't necessarily resign. Since Saul still has some years left on his term, he might stick around like Astrue did into Obama's presidency. Of course, if Supreme Court extends Seila Law to make him removable at will, who knows what happens? |
|
|
|
Post by jagvet on Jan 9, 2021 22:42:11 GMT -5
I'm hoping everyone forgets my earlier prediction, but here are my 2 cents. Saul and Black will not resign. I do think Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau applies to SSA, and Biden could fire Saul and Black. Here's why I don't think it will happen.
Biden has a big agenda and control of both houses of Congress. Do the unions at SSA want to get rid of Saul or do they need him as a foil for propaganda purposes? If they push, it may happen, but then they have to get a new commissioner confirmed, and that could take time. I just don't see enough interest outside of our small universe to make this an issue for the new administration.
SSA is funded through 9/30/21. I think the real changes, if any, will come in FY22 budget discussions, but not now.
|
|
|
|
Post by jagvet on Jan 15, 2021 1:30:06 GMT -5
I am changing my predictions. Black will be out by February 28. Saul will hang on until a replacement is confirmed. |
|
|
|
Post by statman on Jan 15, 2021 15:34:03 GMT -5
Change at the very top is insufficient. Real productive change will only happen when there is change at the chief judge and regional chief judge levels.
|
|
|
|
RIFs?
Jan 16, 2021 20:13:42 GMT -5
Pixie likes this
Post by Legal Beagle on Jan 16, 2021 20:13:42 GMT -5
Change at the very top is insufficient. Real productive change will only happen when there is change at the chief judge and regional chief judge levels. The Regional Chiefs just have to enforce whatever the very top tells them to do. Until the top understands the hearing process as well as the eligibility requirements, we will always be the dirty stepchildren of the agency. |
|
|
|
Post by jagvet on Jan 16, 2021 21:53:23 GMT -5
Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose
|
|
|
|
RIFs?
Jan 17, 2021 21:46:47 GMT -5
Post by wacokid on Jan 17, 2021 21:46:47 GMT -5
Change at the very top is insufficient. Real productive change will only happen when there is change at the chief judge and regional chief judge levels. I am not an SSA ALJ, so I can't speak from experience in that realm. But I have known your chief judge for nearly 30 years, and it would surprise me if he weren't in lockstep with the incoming administration. FWIW. |
|
