|
|
Post by Pixie on Apr 30, 2022 23:20:23 GMT -5
Pixie did u really change dshawn’s avatar to a goldfish? Yes. I couldn't help myself. I saw that he had no avatar and I had earlier run across that cute little gold fish. The devil got into me. As he has been a good sport about it, I may not ban him if he keeps that avatar. But for violating the rule against Application Manager, he really needs a lengthy ban. Pixie |
|
|
|
Post by Pixie on Apr 30, 2022 23:35:54 GMT -5
Solid points all. Once again, DWs are the bottom of the pecking order. I was thinking more in terms of us vs outside hires. I've heard the opposite is true at OMHA. Decision writers there are rarely promoted directly to ALJs I see no one has answered your question. It is more complex than your question indicates. SSA Attorney Advisors are known quantities, both pro and con. They know the program, which is a big plus. And they are known in their offices. Their ability to follow rules, get along with others, and most importantly, their productivity are all known to management. Why take a chance on an unknown outsider when there will be fewer surprises from a known insider? Pixie |
|
|
|
Post by neufenland on May 1, 2022 8:09:52 GMT -5
Honest question - is SSA decision writing looked upon more favorably than outside litigation experience when evaluating ALJ candidates? I've heard the opposite is true at OMHA. Decision writers there are rarely promoted directly to ALJs I see no one has answered your question. It is more complex than your question indicates. SSA Attorney Advisors are known quantities, both pro and con. They know the program, which is a big plus. And they are known in their offices. Their ability to follow rules, get along with others, and most importantly, their productivity are all known to management. Why take a chance on an unknown outsider when there will be fewer surprises from a known insider? Pixie I am 100% certain that your insight into the minds of the hiring committee is correct, but even though your question was rhetorical, I'm going to answer it. Every ALJ at SSA today came through the old OPM process. Some wrote decisions and had program knowledge, but many did not. If you're one of the folks on the hiring committee who came from the outside and the "why take a chance on an outsider?" question arises, isn't the answer "because someone took a chance on me"? Cue the ABBA music. That said, Pixie, we all know you're the expert. Based on what you've been saying for years, as an outsider, I'm certainly not holding my breath. |
|
|
|
Post by Serious, J. on May 1, 2022 9:53:48 GMT -5
TPTB may be partial to known insiders. But litigation experience is important too.
SSA is the feeder organization for federal ALJs. Most other agencies hire sitting ALJs rather than brand new folks, and the largest source of those potential hires is SSA. Some of those agencies are more adversarial in nature. Even OMHA, which does hire new ALJs, has a fair number of former SSA ALJs. Some of OMHA's hearings are quite adversarial with attorneys on both sides, dueling experts, numerous issues and objections that need to be ruled upon, and multi-day hearings.
I imagine the OPM hiring process had this in mind, not just to hire for SSA but for the federal ALJ corp in general. How that may change now that SSA is in charge of the process remains to be seen.
|
|
|
|
Post by rocco1 on May 1, 2022 10:11:05 GMT -5
How do state court judges and state ALJs fair in the process? I am a former state court judge and current state alj. I was able to make the 1000 cut thanks to this Board. Some have indicated this background is helpful in the interview process.
|
|
|
|
Post by neufenland on May 1, 2022 10:54:47 GMT -5
How do state court judges and state ALJs fair in the process? I am a former state court judge and current state alj. I was able to make the 1000 cut thanks to this Board. Some have indicated this background is helpful in the interview process. No one really knows right now. Under OPM, that would likely carry you pretty far for a higher NOR/Register placement, but it's anyone's guess with the new process (as noted, though, the rumor seems to be that "insiders" are favored). |
|
|
|
Post by intothewild on May 1, 2022 11:38:35 GMT -5
TPTB may be partial to known insiders. But litigation experience is important too. SSA is the feeder organization for federal ALJs. Most other agencies hire sitting ALJs rather than brand new folks, and the largest source of those potential hires is SSA. Some of those agencies are more adversarial in nature. Even OMHA, which does hire new ALJs, has a fair number of former SSA ALJs. Some of OMHA's hearings are quite adversarial with attorneys on both sides, dueling experts, numerous issues and objections that need to be ruled upon, and multi-day hearings. I imagine the OPM hiring process had this in mind, not just to hire for SSA but for the federal ALJ corp in general. How that may change now that SSA is in charge of the process remains to be seen. You definitely don’t need to be a litigator to handle most Federal ALJ jobs. Heck the average OHMA hearing isn’t even very long. |
|
|
|
Post by hopefalj on May 1, 2022 14:06:33 GMT -5
TPTB may be partial to known insiders. But litigation experience is important too. SSA is the feeder organization for federal ALJs. Most other agencies hire sitting ALJs rather than brand new folks, and the largest source of those potential hires is SSA. Some of those agencies are more adversarial in nature. Even OMHA, which does hire new ALJs, has a fair number of former SSA ALJs. Some of OMHA's hearings are quite adversarial with attorneys on both sides, dueling experts, numerous issues and objections that need to be ruled upon, and multi-day hearings. I imagine the OPM hiring process had this in mind, not just to hire for SSA but for the federal ALJ corp in general. How that may change now that SSA is in charge of the process remains to be seen. That was the case under the former process where those agencies could effectively cherry-pick former attorneys from their agency that got picked up by SSA in mass hires. It allowed them to avoid vet preference, three strikes, certificates, and go directly after known quantities without all of the hurdles SSA has had to deal with in reaching insiders. However, some of those agencies have hired new ALJs in the last few years, and I don’t believe any of them had prior ALJ experience. They created announcements geared specifically for the types of background and experience they wanted, and I’m betting they hired the people they wanted. I’m guessing SSA will no longer be used as the farm system for other agencies now that they don’t have to worry about dealing with the register. |
|
|
|
Post by rp on May 1, 2022 16:13:30 GMT -5
TPTB may be partial to known insiders. But litigation experience is important too. SSA is the feeder organization for federal ALJs. Most other agencies hire sitting ALJs rather than brand new folks, and the largest source of those potential hires is SSA. Some of those agencies are more adversarial in nature. Even OMHA, which does hire new ALJs, has a fair number of former SSA ALJs. Some of OMHA's hearings are quite adversarial with attorneys on both sides, dueling experts, numerous issues and objections that need to be ruled upon, and multi-day hearings. I imagine the OPM hiring process had this in mind, not just to hire for SSA but for the federal ALJ corp in general. How that may change now that SSA is in charge of the process remains to be seen. You definitely don’t need to be a litigator to handle most Federal ALJ jobs. Heck the average OHMA hearing isn’t even very long. This misses the point. Litigation experience is much more than participating in hearings. With respect to SSA -docket management, making definitive decisions, and judicial temperament are all gained through litigation experience. The sheer volume of hearing 50 cases per month lends itself to those with prior litigation experience. Of course YMMV. And I am certainly not trying to fan flames. Far from it. Just saying that the discussion is deeper than this. |
|
|
|
Post by jagvet on May 1, 2022 20:18:18 GMT -5
How do state court judges and state ALJs fair in the process? I am a former state court judge and current state alj. I was able to make the 1000 cut thanks to this Board. Some have indicated this background is helpful in the interview process. Putting all cynicism aside, I do think that this is excellent experience and should help you get through. We don't really know because this is a new system, but prior state aljs were hired in the OPM process, and I would think that current SSA ALJs will see your experience is valuable. Good luck! |
|
|
|
Post by Pixie on May 2, 2022 7:19:25 GMT -5
If you are an outsider, you are likely to remain an outsider.
SSA is finally out from under the thumb of OPM; expect it to make the most of that freedom. It can now focus on known insiders. An AA, GS or HOD is unlikely to change their stripes once appointed.
The leadership at SSA didn't get there because they are stupid, so look for a certain percentage of outsiders to be hired to stave off criticism.
Shouldn't be too long until we known for sure. Pixie
|
|
Tiger
New Member
Posts: 11 
|
Post by Tiger on May 2, 2022 11:42:56 GMT -5
For what is is worth, here are the backgrounds of the ALJs in my office.
1. 100% private practice
2. Jag Corp Officer, private practice, and SSA decision writer.
3. District Attorney-prosecutor
4. Private practice and SSA decision writer.
5. SSA decision writer
6. Legal Aid attorney
7. State attorney and State ALJ
8. District Attorney-prosecutor, State appellate attorney, and Department of Labor
9. Department of Labor-attorney
10. District Attorney-prosecutor and private practice
11. Department of Labor
12. City ALJ and private practice.
13. Private practice and federal public defender
|
|
|
|
Post by rightspeech on May 2, 2022 12:38:34 GMT -5
All that tells me is most writers needed some outside experience as well to get past OPM and get a decent score, and #5 must be a good test taker/interviewer and/or veteran.
Kind of doubt its particularly relevant now. This is one of those rare instances where history may not repeat itself. Removing OPM changed basically everything except the 7 year practice requirement, which SSA chose to keep. The applicant pool this go around probably looks so much different. The number of insiders in that first 1000 this time must be substantially higher than the number of insiders that achieved a reachable score from OPM back then. The former JAG corps is significantly represented within the current ALJ corps because of veterans preference. That's essentially gone now. The old argument was veteran/non-veteran and insider/outsider, now we just have insider/outsider. 10 point veterans preference used to be a MASSIVE advantage. It used to be I respect your service, but this is BS lol. These folks were also hired by a different CALJ and DC. I understand everyone here doesn't have an intimate understanding of the onerous testing, scoring, and hiring process of before but trust me when I tell you and veterans like Pixie will affirm, removing OPM makes hiring ALJs very very different than before.
All you can do is hope to be invited to an interview and try to interview well. Even having the opportunity for an application package to be reviewed makes one more fortunate than many. We won't really know anything until post selection polls.
|
|
|
|
Post by neufenland on May 2, 2022 14:49:03 GMT -5
All that tells me is most writers needed some outside experience as well to get past OPM and get a decent score, and #5 must be a good test taker/interviewer and/or veteran. Kind of doubt its particularly relevant now. This is one of those rare instances where history may not repeat itself. Removing OPM changed basically everything except the 7 year practice requirement, which SSA chose to keep. The applicant pool this go around probably looks so much different. The number of insiders in that first 1000 this time must be substantially higher than the number of insiders that achieved a reachable score from OPM back then. The former JAG corps is significantly represented within the current ALJ corps because of veterans preference. That's essentially gone now. The old argument was veteran/non-veteran and insider/outsider, now we just have insider/outsider. 10 point veterans preference used to be a MASSIVE advantage. It used to be I respect your service, but this is BS lol. These folks were also hired by a different CALJ and DC. I understand everyone here doesn't have an intimate understanding of the onerous testing, scoring, and hiring process of before but trust me when I tell you and veterans like Pixie will affirm, removing OPM makes hiring ALJs very very different than before. All you can do is hope to be invited to an interview and try to interview well. Even having the opportunity for an application package to be reviewed makes one more fortunate than many. We won't really know anything until post selection polls. I went into a public 'ouse to get a pint o' beer, The publican 'e up an' sez, "We serve no red-coats here." The girls be'ind the bar they laughed an' giggled fit to die, I outs into the street again an' to myself sez I: O it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, go away"; But it's "Thank you, Mister Atkins," when the band begins to play The band begins to play, my boys, the band begins to play, O it's "Thank you, Mister Atkins," when the band begins to play. |
|
|
|
Post by Topperlaw on May 2, 2022 15:21:44 GMT -5
I'd like to know how the Agency weighs the 6 competencies. One of the 6 was completely focused on Social Security Disability law. If those 6 were worth 10 points each (for example) and an outsider AUTOMATICALLY gets a 0/10 on the one competency because they have NO Social Security experience, they start out with a possible score of 50/60. It's going to be VERY HARD for non-Social Security outsiders to get a better score than an Insider when the Insider automatically starts out with a score of 10/10 before the other 5 Competencies are even graded.
I find it very hard to believe that the Agency charged with deciding Social Security disability cases would purposefully make an entire competency be about Social Security Law and then INTENTIONALLY WEIGHT THAT COMPETENCY LESS THAN THE OTHER 5. Instead, my guess is that they PURPOSEFULLY made one of the 6 Competencies to be entirely about Social Security law so that they could place a huge thumb on the scale in favor of insiders.
|
|
|
|
Post by hillsarealive on May 2, 2022 15:47:05 GMT -5
I'd like to know how the Agency weighs the 6 competencies. One of the 6 was completely focused on Social Security Disability law. If those 6 were worth 10 points each (for example) and an outsider AUTOMATICALLY gets a 0/10 on the one competency because they have NO Social Security experience, they start out with a possible score of 50/60. It's going to be VERY HARD for non-Social Security outsiders to get a better score than an Insider when the Insider automatically starts out with a score of 10/10 before the other 5 Competencies are even graded. I find it very hard to believe that the Agency charged with deciding Social Security disability cases would purposefully make an entire competency be about Social Security Law and then INTENTIONALLY WEIGHT THAT COMPETENCY LESS THAN THE OTHER 5. Instead, my guess is that they PURPOSEFULLY made one of the 6 Competencies to be entirely about Social Security law so that they could place a huge thumb on the scale in favor of insiders. But it makes sense to give some weight to subject matter knowledge here, right? An expert on Social Security disability laws and policies should get some points in SSA's process. It would be remarkable to me if this knowledge counted for nothing here. Not trying to defend the application process thus far, but the competencies don't seem like a problem (except to the extent they could have used tighter definitions, in my humble opinion). |
|
|
|
Post by neufenland on May 2, 2022 15:48:24 GMT -5
I'd like to know how the Agency weighs the 6 competencies. One of the 6 was completely focused on Social Security Disability law. If those 6 were worth 10 points each (for example) and an outsider AUTOMATICALLY gets a 0/10 on the one competency because they have NO Social Security experience, they start out with a possible score of 50/60. It's going to be VERY HARD for non-Social Security outsiders to get a better score than an Insider when the Insider automatically starts out with a score of 10/10 before the other 5 Competencies are even graded. I find it very hard to believe that the Agency charged with deciding Social Security disability cases would purposefully make an entire competency be about Social Security Law and then INTENTIONALLY WEIGHT THAT COMPETENCY LESS THAN THE OTHER 5. Instead, my guess is that they PURPOSEFULLY made one of the 6 Competencies to be entirely about Social Security law so that they could place a huge thumb on the scale in favor of insiders. To be fair, you were meant to explain your experience with "administrative or regulatory law." The "competency" explained that ALJs apply SSA regs, but that was prefatory. It did not specifically ask the applicant to explain their experience with SSA law. |
|
|
|
Post by pumpkin on May 2, 2022 16:59:42 GMT -5
I'd like to know how the Agency weighs the 6 competencies. One of the 6 was completely focused on Social Security Disability law. If those 6 were worth 10 points each (for example) and an outsider AUTOMATICALLY gets a 0/10 on the one competency because they have NO Social Security experience, they start out with a possible score of 50/60. It's going to be VERY HARD for non-Social Security outsiders to get a better score than an Insider when the Insider automatically starts out with a score of 10/10 before the other 5 Competencies are even graded. I find it very hard to believe that the Agency charged with deciding Social Security disability cases would purposefully make an entire competency be about Social Security Law and then INTENTIONALLY WEIGHT THAT COMPETENCY LESS THAN THE OTHER 5. Instead, my guess is that they PURPOSEFULLY made one of the 6 Competencies to be entirely about Social Security law so that they could place a huge thumb on the scale in favor of insiders. Was the competency “you must have worked for Social Security”? Was it familiarity with Social Security disability law? Administrative Law, more broadly? If the competency isn’t specific to already being employed by SSA, then I wouldn’t be quite so confident that insiders automatically score 10/10 and “outsiders” a 0/10. Familiarity with substantive Social Security disability law can be gleaned from an outsider’s work as a federal law clerk, an AUSA prosecuting disability fraud, an AUSA representing the Agency at the USDC level on appeals from the AC, and, of course, a claimant'srepresentaitive. Wouldn’t a claimant’s rep who devotes 100% of his/her practice to SSA disability law also rate a possible 10/10 in that competency as well? Don’t count your competency chickens before they are hatched. |
|
|
|
Post by mango54 on May 3, 2022 21:45:12 GMT -5
I'd like to know how the Agency weighs the 6 competencies. One of the 6 was completely focused on Social Security Disability law. If those 6 were worth 10 points each (for example) and an outsider AUTOMATICALLY gets a 0/10 on the one competency because they have NO Social Security experience, they start out with a possible score of 50/60. It's going to be VERY HARD for non-Social Security outsiders to get a better score than an Insider when the Insider automatically starts out with a score of 10/10 before the other 5 Competencies are even graded. I find it very hard to believe that the Agency charged with deciding Social Security disability cases would purposefully make an entire competency be about Social Security Law and then INTENTIONALLY WEIGHT THAT COMPETENCY LESS THAN THE OTHER 5. Instead, my guess is that they PURPOSEFULLY made one of the 6 Competencies to be entirely about Social Security law so that they could place a huge thumb on the scale in favor of insiders. Was the competency “you must have worked for Social Security”? Was it familiarity with Social Security disability law? Administrative Law, more broadly? If the competency isn’t specific to already being employed by SSA, then I wouldn’t be quite so confident that insiders automatically score 10/10 and “outsiders” a 0/10. Familiarity with substantive Social Security disability law can be gleaned from an outsider’s work as a federal law clerk, an AUSA prosecuting disability fraud, an AUSA representing the Agency at the USDC level on appeals from the AC, and, of course, a claimant'srepresentaitive. Wouldn’t a claimant’s rep who devotes 100% of his/her practice to SSA disability law also rate a possible 10/10 in that competency as well? Don’t count your competency chickens before they are hatched. Somewhere deep in all of those instructions it indicated that "experience" would equate from "similar" areas to Social Security....that is the way it has always been since I have been on this crazy ride.....the question may state or discuss Social Security in particular but that "experience" may be substituted with similar experiences (admin law). As an aside....I would like to do a little bragging.....when I started this venture into insanity several, several years ago, I also started a PhD program and low and behold....I should be finishing this Summer with my dissertation....so, this black robe may elude me but I'll be getting another one soon and it comes with a spiffy hat and cape...... as one of my main union client heads once told me......"You gots to claim victory when you can....."  |
|
|
|
Post by tripper on May 4, 2022 6:50:41 GMT -5
Congrats mango54! That’s quite an accomplishment! Enjoy your victory. |
|
