|
|
Post by lawyeredbylaws on Apr 21, 2022 13:47:17 GMT -5
Knowledge of the program is irrelevant? Must be nice being an ALJ and thinking all the knowledge attorneys use to constantly correct the countless errors that ALJs, especially new ones with zero background, make means nothing and shouldn't even be considered when assessing potential ALJs.
|
|
|
|
Post by benchslap on Apr 21, 2022 13:58:05 GMT -5
Came here to say this! I’ll remember this comment every time I have to explain SGA or PRW to an ALJ. For shame. Knowledge of the program is irrelevant? Must be nice being an ALJ and thinking all the knowledge attorneys use to constantly correct the countless errors that ALJs, especially new ones with zero background, make means nothing and shouldn't even be considered when assessing potential ALJs. |
|
|
|
Post by neufenland on Apr 21, 2022 14:01:16 GMT -5
Knowledge of the program is irrelevant? Must be nice being an ALJ and thinking all the knowledge attorneys use to constantly correct the countless errors that ALJs, especially new ones with zero background, make means nothing and shouldn't even be considered when assessing potential ALJs. Shots fired in the newest "insider vs. outsider" debate. I'm sure Pixie will be thrilled. I'm an outsider. I do not think your extensive experience in SSA law is irrelevant. Your experience is a huge benefit and would help you tremendously in the position. I also think that a mix of folks from varied backgrounds would be nice, as SSA is the largest user of ALJs in the feds, and as such, has the most options for career feds (and private bar folks, too) to get an ALJ position. If they just pick insiders, opportunities are lost for many of us to ever get to the ALJ level...and that kinda stinks. If rumors are true, you needn't worry so much about us outsiders. Good luck! |
|
|
|
Post by jagvet on Apr 21, 2022 14:01:49 GMT -5
Knowledge of the program is irrelevant? Must be nice being an ALJ and thinking all the knowledge attorneys use to constantly correct the countless errors that ALJs, especially new ones with zero background, make means nothing and shouldn't even be considered when assessing potential ALJs. The question is whether a judge will be overly swayed by a "we always did it that way" mentality. I have had remands mostly for my own errors, but occasionally where I was influenced by a writer's suggested change. It's still my responsibility for accepting the change, but "program knowledge" is of very little value in being a judge. Experience with court and court-like settings, dealing fairly and respectfully with people, including many who are difficult, is much more important. Some writers have that and some don't. I know of great writers who became great judges. Existing program knowledge adds little, since good judges can learn it, too. Writers help them learn. |
|
|
|
Post by jagvet on Apr 21, 2022 14:05:42 GMT -5
Neufy is right. By the way, having been a fed off and on for 43 years, I have seen many agencies where the career bureaucrats adamantly resisted change, even to the extent of sabotaging presidential initiatives. New blood is good, and experience is good, too. It really depends on the person.
|
|
|
|
Post by rp on Apr 21, 2022 15:02:57 GMT -5
Knowledge of the program is irrelevant? Must be nice being an ALJ and thinking all the knowledge attorneys use to constantly correct the countless errors that ALJs, especially new ones with zero background, make means nothing and shouldn't even be considered when assessing potential ALJs. Like I said - temperament. |
|
|
|
Post by neufenland on Apr 21, 2022 15:39:27 GMT -5
Knowledge of the program is irrelevant? Must be nice being an ALJ and thinking all the knowledge attorneys use to constantly correct the countless errors that ALJs, especially new ones with zero background, make means nothing and shouldn't even be considered when assessing potential ALJs. Like I said - temperament. To be fair, saying "knowledge of this program is really irrelevant" is throwing some shade, too (perhaps unintentionally). It is the type of statement that will necessarily invite dispute and inflame some passions (as has been seen numerous times in these threads before). |
|
|
|
Post by rightspeech on Apr 21, 2022 15:49:34 GMT -5
Not all insiders but more insiders than when OPM was involved and less veterans.
They know how motivation works. ALJ has always been the cheese the staff and hearing office management have been chasing. They have to show people that there is a path. People have to see other people they know get promoted. You take away that cheese ... sad times
|
|
|
|
Post by christina on Apr 21, 2022 16:01:24 GMT -5
Like I said - temperament. To be fair, saying "knowledge of this program is really irrelevant" is throwing some shade, too (perhaps unintentionally). It is the type of statement that will necessarily invite dispute and inflame some passions (as has been seen numerous times in these threads before). I took his statement to mean knowledge of ssa laws was irrelevant in getting hired under opm process. I know rp enough that he considers ssa knowledge to be critical to job. And also having ssa background does not unequivocally mean someone will be a great ssa alj is my take on RP’s comments |
|
|
|
Post by rp on Apr 21, 2022 16:05:52 GMT -5
Like I said - temperament. To be fair, saying "knowledge of this program is really irrelevant" is throwing some shade, too (perhaps unintentionally). It is the type of statement that will necessarily invite dispute and inflame some passions (as has been seen numerous times in these threads before). Fair point. |
|
|
|
Post by neufenland on Apr 21, 2022 16:06:29 GMT -5
To be fair, saying "knowledge of this program is really irrelevant" is throwing some shade, too (perhaps unintentionally). It is the type of statement that will necessarily invite dispute and inflame some passions (as has been seen numerous times in these threads before). I took his statement to mean knowledge of ssa laws was irrelevant in getting hired under opm process. I know rp enough that he considers ssa knowledge to be critical to job. And also having ssa background does not unequivocally mean someone will be a great ssa alj is my take on RP’s comments I agree with your last sentence. |
|
|
|
Post by johnthornton on Apr 21, 2022 17:11:55 GMT -5
I think that the ideal candidate is someone with significant litigation experience but also several years working within the agency as a decision writer or manager.
|
|
Happy_GS
Full Member
I can do this all day
Posts: 34
|
Post by Happy_GS on Apr 21, 2022 17:43:31 GMT -5
I think that the ideal candidate is someone with significant litigation experience but also several years working within the agency as a decision writer or manager. As a current insider with prior litigation experience, I wholeheartedly agree. |
|
|
|
Post by tripper on Apr 21, 2022 17:54:48 GMT -5
I think that the ideal candidate is someone with significant litigation experience but also several years working within the agency as a decision writer or manager. As a current insider with prior litigation experience, I wholeheartedly agree. As a current ALJ with litigation experience then 6 years as AA and SAA I also agree. I also think that we overlook the absolute shock of somebody coming from extensive outside non-governmental experience and becoming an ALJ at SSA. The culture shock is real. Especially if you been corporate counsel or someplace else that you aren’t escaping the horror of billable hours. It’s a big change. |
|
|
|
Post by benchslap on Apr 21, 2022 18:00:10 GMT -5
Also experience talking to people. Talking to real human beings of every walk of life. If you’re coming from corporate work, taking testimony from claimants might be shocking to say the least. As a current insider with prior litigation experience, I wholeheartedly agree. As a current ALJ with litigation experience then 6 years as AA and SAA I also agree. I also think that we overlook the absolute shock of somebody coming from extensive outside non-governmental experience and becoming an ALJ at SSA. The culture shock is real. Especially if you been corporate counsel or someplace else that you aren’t escaping the horror of billable hours. It’s a big change. |
|
|
|
Post by WallyGator on Apr 21, 2022 18:04:44 GMT -5
I don’t think representative experience should be overlooked. I was a representative prior to becoming a writer (now an ALJ) and I know a few others who followed that path. Writer or any other SSA experience helps with knowing the systems and acronyms. Knowing the law/regulations/etc is a bit of a double edged sword as it’s easier to spot and get bogged down by the mistakes/errors of others. Sometimes a little ignorance is bliss. I think what was most helpful to me with respect to holding hearings (a big part of the job) was my experience as a representative. You get in front of multiple ALJs and learn what to do and what not to do. I’m not sure a lot of litigation experience prepares you for that type of hearing and listening to it as a writer is very different from being a participant.
|
|
|
|
Post by jagvet on Apr 21, 2022 18:17:57 GMT -5
Also experience talking to people. Talking to real human beings of every walk of life. If you’re coming from corporate work, taking testimony from claimants might be shocking to say the least. As a current ALJ with litigation experience then 6 years as AA and SAA I also agree. I also think that we overlook the absolute shock of somebody coming from extensive outside non-governmental experience and becoming an ALJ at SSA. The culture shock is real. Especially if you been corporate counsel or someplace else that you aren’t escaping the horror of billable hours. It’s a big change. I can agree that experience with ordinary people is very important. However, don't assume that corporate attorneys are antisocial. SSA gives new judges four weeks of intense training--more than enough to get the acronyms and culture. I also didn't find that ODAR/OHO people were culturally different from other people. There was no culture shock whatsoever. OHO employees have the same pluses and minuses as everyone else--in other words, they are essentially kind-hearted, hard-working and dedicated. They have the same cartoons and memorabilia on their walls as any other government employee. |
|
|
|
Post by theadjudicator on Apr 21, 2022 18:24:00 GMT -5
The insider vs outsider argument is as old as the Agency itself. There is absolutely no reason that someone from the inside or the outside cannot be an effective ALJ. Just look at the 13 judicial competencies. The more well rounded you are in areas related to the job , the better ALJ you will be.
In my opinion it is short sighted to tbink one is better than the other. I have been at SSA for approximately 15 years and have seen the good, the bad, and the ugly from my time in multiple hearing offices.
It is really no different than any other position at OHO (there are good, average, and poor employees in every position across the Agency). It comes down to the individual's drive and determination to be the best or at least try to be the best at the job duties assigned to that person.
I wish anyone who is eligible to apply the best of luck regardless of the legal experience you bring to the table
|
|
|
|
Post by nylawyer on Apr 21, 2022 18:41:17 GMT -5
In case it isn't clear (because a quick review of the thread would make it appear I am to blame for starting this fight back up again), I was merely stating what I believe the prevailing wisdom is of what WILL happen in terms of hiring.
I am offering no opinion on what SHOULD happen.
(And backing away slowly, hands outstretched)
|
|
|
|
Post by benchslap on Apr 21, 2022 18:55:49 GMT -5
As someone in private practice who has appeared before ALJs throughout the country for a good period of time, SSA’s training leaves much to be desired on how to properly interact with claimants. All of us private attorneys can instantly spot a new ALJ who hasn’t had experience dealing with people. There are many ALJs out there who are rude and even adversarial to claimants. In a setting that is supposed to be very much non-adversarial. I’m not talking about approval/denial rates, I’m talking about treating claimants with respect regardless of whether a FFD will be issued. Also experience talking to people. Talking to real human beings of every walk of life. If you’re coming from corporate work, taking testimony from claimants might be shocking to say the least. I can agree that experience with ordinary people is very important. However, don't assume that corporate attorneys are antisocial. SSA gives new judges four weeks of intense training--more than enough to get the acronyms and culture. I also didn't find that ODAR/OHO people were culturally different from other people. There was no culture shock whatsoever. OHO employees have the same pluses and minuses as everyone else--in other words, they are essentially kind-hearted, hard-working and dedicated. They have the same cartoons and memorabilia on their walls as any other government employee. |
|
