|
|
Post by anderson on Feb 2, 2023 11:06:46 GMT -5
Federal district courts look not only at the regulations but at the established case law. The AC on the other hand looks only at the regulations and SSA policy directives based on the curious notion that the agency can ignore case law unless there's an acquiescence ruling. So there's somewhat of a different standard from the reviewing bodies. They all make mistakes as do ALJs from time to time.
|
|
|
|
Post by ssarulz on Feb 2, 2023 18:14:18 GMT -5
Is ithe AC remanding more cases lately? Not only have I noticed an increase, but the reasons are increasingly technical/harmless. Any scuttlebutt would be appreciated. Harmless? I hate to tell you this, but majority of the ALJ decisions are terrible and mediocre at best. I understand the production requirements are high but it is unfair for the claimant to have poorly written decisions. The AC tends to find most things harmless and when they do remand, it is for legitimate reasons. Sure, that opinion that wasn’t address is unreasonable and might not be consistent with the evidence but that doesn’t mean the ALJ should ignore it. If the REP appeals that case to Court, it will be remanded ASAP! So tater than complaining about remands, might be best you guys actually read the decisions and not sign off poorly written ones. |
|
|
|
Post by recoveringalj on Feb 2, 2023 21:27:21 GMT -5
Best way to solve this beef is with a softball game…ALJs v AAJs. AAJs have to wear bow ties. ;^)
|
|
|
|
Post by superalj on Feb 2, 2023 22:06:08 GMT -5
Is ithe AC remanding more cases lately? Not only have I noticed an increase, but the reasons are increasingly technical/harmless. Any scuttlebutt would be appreciated. Harmless? I hate to tell you this, but majority of the ALJ decisions are terrible and mediocre at best. I understand the production requirements are high but it is unfair for the claimant to have poorly written decisions. The AC tends to find most things harmless and when they do remand, it is for legitimate reasons. Sure, that opinion that wasn’t address is unreasonable and might not be consistent with the evidence but that doesn’t mean the ALJ should ignore it. If the REP appeals that case to Court, it will be remanded ASAP! So tater than complaining about remands, might be best you guys actually read the decisions and not sign off poorly written ones. Speaking for myself, I don’t sign terrible drafts and edit the heck out of mediocre drafts. I worked too hard to sign my name on poorly written decisions. I can safely say the same for most of the ALJs I work with and know personally. I also read every decision from prior filings when doing file review. The vast majority of those decisions are not poorly written. If I had to put a number, I would say less than 10 percent are deficient. I strongly disagree that the majority of ALJ decisions are terrible and mediocre at best. Frankly, you sound more like a rep than an appeals analyst or AAJ. |
|
|
|
Post by rp on Feb 2, 2023 22:14:27 GMT -5
Is ithe AC remanding more cases lately? Not only have I noticed an increase, but the reasons are increasingly technical/harmless. Any scuttlebutt would be appreciated. Harmless? I hate to tell you this, but majority of the ALJ decisions are terrible and mediocre at best. I understand the production requirements are high but it is unfair for the claimant to have poorly written decisions. The AC tends to find most things harmless and when they do remand, it is for legitimate reasons. Sure, that opinion that wasn’t address is unreasonable and might not be consistent with the evidence but that doesn’t mean the ALJ should ignore it. If the REP appeals that case to Court, it will be remanded ASAP! So tater than complaining about remands, might be best you guys actually read the decisions and not sign off poorly written ones. Couldn’t disagree more. |
|
|
|
Post by rp on Feb 2, 2023 22:22:21 GMT -5
Is ithe AC remanding more cases lately? Not only have I noticed an increase, but the reasons are increasingly technical/harmless. Any scuttlebutt would be appreciated. Harmless? I hate to tell you this, but majority of the ALJ decisions are terrible and mediocre at best. I understand the production requirements are high but it is unfair for the claimant to have poorly written decisions. The AC tends to find most things harmless and when they do remand, it is for legitimate reasons. Sure, that opinion that wasn’t address is unreasonable and might not be consistent with the evidence but that doesn’t mean the ALJ should ignore it. If the REP appeals that case to Court, it will be remanded ASAP! So tater than complaining about remands, might be best you guys actually read the decisions and not sign off poorly written ones. in fact, want to talk about terrible and mediocre at best? The remand decisions generally lack any actual analysis. Typically, we ALJs feel that the AC simply feels bad for the claimants and then send back to us instead of simply granting benefits. I dare say the problem is at the AC, not at the ALJ level. |
|
|
|
Post by lawyeredbylaws on Feb 3, 2023 12:04:59 GMT -5
Is ithe AC remanding more cases lately? Not only have I noticed an increase, but the reasons are increasingly technical/harmless. Any scuttlebutt would be appreciated. Harmless? I hate to tell you this, but majority of the ALJ decisions are terrible and mediocre at best. I understand the production requirements are high but it is unfair for the claimant to have poorly written decisions. The AC tends to find most things harmless and when they do remand, it is for legitimate reasons. Sure, that opinion that wasn’t address is unreasonable and might not be consistent with the evidence but that doesn’t mean the ALJ should ignore it. If the REP appeals that case to Court, it will be remanded ASAP! So tater than complaining about remands, might be best you guys actually read the decisions and not sign off poorly written ones. All the judges I know read decisions and all the writers I know produce quality decisions. You sound like a claimant's rep who thinks they are entitled to their 25% just for showing up at the hearing. You seem to think ALJs are out to get claimants and ignore evidence to deny them. Honestly, it is kind of funny seeing a claimant's rep think ALJs are biased against claimants, when in reality it is the opposite. |
|
|
|
Post by carrickfergus on Feb 3, 2023 14:56:20 GMT -5
Lately the trend has been, at least here on the West Coast, that U.S. District Court Magistrates and Judges mostly treat appealed unfavorable ALJ disability decisions, and related Appeals Council affirmances, as clay pigeons to be shot down for what seem to be "ticky tacky" reasons (as stated above) and/or claimant-favoring ideological reasons, rather than decisions to be assessed under the substantial evidence rule and current Social Security disability regulations. One recurring theme on remands is simply that "the claimant's subjective complaints were not sufficiently considered", even where the ALJ decision notes that such complaints are not well-supported by objective medical data, and that all or most of the medical opinions in the record, and certainly the most "persuasive" ones, do not support disability: isn't that the definition of substantial evidence? I am not confident that appealed ALJ decisions are receiving enough capable and vigorous defensive representation in the Federal Court appellate process; OGC advocates in the process seem to consider it a victory to have cases remanded back to the ALJ for another look, so long as an outright reversal is avoided. There also has been a notable increase in the numbers of ALJ decisions being remanded by stipulation, without any formal decision, which should be very rare; to me this signals that SSA OGC advocates often are being cowed into submission and not "defending the case" with appropriate effort and ardor. I agree it would be refreshing to see some strategically selected appeals of District Court remands by OGC to the Circuit Courts. Have the same patterns been evident in other regions of the country? Region 4. Denial appealed up to district court, judge believed that a low IQ in and of itself could satisfy listing 12.05. To their credit, OGC tried to explain the regs to the court, but to no avail. AC remanded w/o comment. I heard the case again and issued the exact same decision as the one prior. |
|
|
|
Post by superalj on Feb 3, 2023 15:27:46 GMT -5
Pixie, are reps allowed on this board? I read enough of their complaints on the Hall blog. Of course, I’m always happy to assist reps who are applying for ALJ but I don’t want have to deal with reps whining about how unfair ALJs are.
Although I vent about the AC, I’m genuinely interested in hearing their perspective and like it or not, they are members of the SSA family. Lol
|
|
|
|
Post by Pixie on Feb 3, 2023 19:45:12 GMT -5
Pixie, are reps allowed on this board? I read enough of their complaints on the Hall blog. Of course, I’m always happy to assist reps who are applying for ALJ but I don’t want have to deal with reps whining about how unfair ALJs are. Although I vent about the AC, I’m genuinely interested in hearing their perspective and like it or not, they are members of the SSA family. Lol Yes, as long as they stay within the parameters of the board. Pixie |
|
|
|
Post by ssarulz on Feb 3, 2023 23:58:38 GMT -5
Pixie, are reps allowed on this board? I read enough of their complaints on the Hall blog. Of course, I’m always happy to assist reps who are applying for ALJ but I don’t want have to deal with reps whining about how unfair ALJs are. Although I vent about the AC, I’m genuinely interested in hearing their perspective and like it or not, they are members of the SSA family. Lol You just heard it. I worked at the AC for year before jumping ship and going to another field. Calling me a REP is hilarious. |
|
|
|
Post by superalj on Feb 4, 2023 14:14:04 GMT -5
Pixie, are reps allowed on this board? I read enough of their complaints on the Hall blog. Of course, I’m always happy to assist reps who are applying for ALJ but I don’t want have to deal with reps whining about how unfair ALJs are. Although I vent about the AC, I’m genuinely interested in hearing their perspective and like it or not, they are members of the SSA family. Lol You just heard it. I worked at the AC for year before jumping ship and going to another field. Calling me a REP is hilarious. My bad sorry for calling you a rep. No disrespect to the reps on the board as I would estimate only 10 percent of the reps are whiny like 10 percent of our decisions are poorly drafted. Lol One last comment about reps. While I cheer for all our applicants on this board, I would like to see more former reps in the ALJ corps. Many of the most knowledgeable ALJs I know are former reps and they bring a great perspective to the job. |
|
|
|
Post by abthejd on Feb 4, 2023 16:18:00 GMT -5
I find them often annoying and sometimes amusing. The latest one was that there was noise on the DRAP, so AC figured that the hearing monitor must not have muted. AC remanded for a do-over. I listened myself--it was the claimant who was sitting in a car, not the hearing monitor. There was some ambient traffic noise, but everything was clear. Oh well. Easy notch in the remand belt for the AC judges! If I had gotten that one, I would have been cancelling a lot of hearings over the past couple of years. I frequently hear noise in the background of claimants who are in a car or out in the street or at work. But now you are telling me that it might get remanded for that? I was assigned a remand as a DW. The AC order said there was a defect in the hearing recording and no hearing was available. I gave it a listen, and right at the start it sounded like the hearing recorder started the recording early on accident and there was music for a few seconds. The hearing cut, and it jumped to the normal start of a hearing with no other issues. Remands like these chip away at the credibility of AC remands IMO. |
|
|
|
Post by abthejd on Feb 4, 2023 16:42:04 GMT -5
Is ithe AC remanding more cases lately? Not only have I noticed an increase, but the reasons are increasingly technical/harmless. Any scuttlebutt would be appreciated. Harmless? I hate to tell you this, but majority of the ALJ decisions are terrible and mediocre at best. I understand the production requirements are high but it is unfair for the claimant to have poorly written decisions. The AC tends to find most things harmless and when they do remand, it is for legitimate reasons. Sure, that opinion that wasn’t address is unreasonable and might not be consistent with the evidence but that doesn’t mean the ALJ should ignore it. If the REP appeals that case to Court, it will be remanded ASAP! So tater than complaining about remands, might be best you guys actually read the decisions and not sign off poorly written ones. So let me get this straight, you are saying MOST ALJ 15+ page decisions are terrible, while not being able to put together a single paragraph without multiple errors? Got it. Remanded, with kind regards. |
|
|
|
Post by nylawyer on Feb 5, 2023 23:21:02 GMT -5
If I had gotten that one, I would have been cancelling a lot of hearings over the past couple of years. I frequently hear noise in the background of claimants who are in a car or out in the street or at work. But now you are telling me that it might get remanded for that? I was assigned a remand as a DW. The AC order said there was a defect in the hearing recording and no hearing was available. I gave it a listen, and right at the start it sounded like the hearing recorder started the recording early on accident and there was music for a few seconds. The hearing cut, and it jumped to the normal start of a hearing with no other issues. Remands like these chip away at the credibility of AC remands IMO. Words fail. |
|
|
|
Post by superalj on Feb 8, 2023 17:33:25 GMT -5
Federal district courts look not only at the regulations but at the established case law. The AC on the other hand looks only at the regulations and SSA policy directives based on the curious notion that the agency can ignore case law unless there's an acquiescence ruling. So there's somewhat of a different standard from the reviewing bodies. They all make mistakes as do ALJs from time to time. I just read a synopsis of 9th case law on subjective complaints and was floored. “Clear and convincing reasons”?! What happens to substantial evidence? And more importantly, to those that adjudicate and draft decisions in the 9th circuit, I salute you! |
|
|
|
Post by barkley on Feb 17, 2023 23:14:23 GMT -5
I have had more frivolous AC remands this year than I have ever had. I had one where there were two pops on the recording and it got sent back. I got one wherein the initial and recon DDS assessments were identical, but only one was mentioned in the decision. I got one where the AC did not like the way I expressed the severe impairment, in a pay case. I got one where the same MSS had been exhibited three times since some legal assistants don't screen for dups, but only one exhibit number was referred to. And on and on.
Some observations:
1. There was a time when the AC applied the substantial evidence rule. I remember seeing the AC upholding a decision, stating that while the ALJ made XXX mistake, it would not change the outcome. What happened to that?
2. If the AC remands really are valid, I think OCALJ should be asking why we are not getting better. Since I have been an ALJ, they have improved ALJ training, they created the mentorship program for new ALJs, they do quarterly OCEPTs, they mandated use of Insight, they expanded quality reviews. You would think with all that training, there would be fewer and fewer remands.
3. If it is true the AC must remand 15% to justify their existence, then that is just wrong. The focus changes from is each individual decision legally sufficient to which 15% of cases are the worst. That would be like telling an ALJ, with each docket you must pay two people and only two people - it does not matter if they all meet SSA's requirements or none of them do, we want to see just the two worst people on a given docket paid. The AAJs should be looking at each case separately, without worrying about quotas to return.
|
|
|
|
Post by stevenq on Feb 17, 2023 23:43:24 GMT -5
The poster who said ALJ decisions are mostly bad or mediocre is correct. And it's not a knock against you ALJs or the DWs.
A disability claim is often a really complex matter with a ton of evidence. Lots of issues and nuance. And yet SSA allots less than a day to draft a decision ship to stern for most all types of cases. Less than 4 hours for favorables, right??? And you ALJs get barely the same amount of time for file review, holding the hearing, and dealing with whatever else might need dealing with.
That's absurd.
A lot of you come from other areas of practice. How long did you spend on your filings and what did they look like? How long did it take your judges to draft and issue decisions/opinions and how many clerks did they have helping and for how many hours? It's not your fault; for the sweatshop conditions they force on you--yes, most decisions are pretty darn good considering those conditions.
But objectively--for a federal legal adjudication? Come on! They're bad and not even close to as carefully crafted and reasoned as they could or should be. Again, think back to the quality of any work product that you or the adjudicator for your matters would create in relation to your criminal or civil matters. You're fooling yourself (but not me) if you try to assert the average OHO disability decision is anywhere close to as thorough, well reasoned, etc. as the average, e.g., MSPB decision, district court opinion, etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by christina on Feb 18, 2023 3:35:28 GMT -5
Federal district courts look not only at the regulations but at the established case law. The AC on the other hand looks only at the regulations and SSA policy directives based on the curious notion that the agency can ignore case law unless there's an acquiescence ruling. So there's somewhat of a different standard from the reviewing bodies. They all make mistakes as do ALJs from time to time. I just read a synopsis of 9th case law on subjective complaints and was floored. “Clear and convincing reasons”?! What happens to substantial evidence? And more importantly, to those that adjudicate and draft decisions in the 9th circuit, I salute you! Indeed! |
|
|
|
Post by rp on Feb 18, 2023 10:11:37 GMT -5
Harmless? I hate to tell you this, but majority of the ALJ decisions are terrible and mediocre at best. I understand the production requirements are high but it is unfair for the claimant to have poorly written decisions. The AC tends to find most things harmless and when they do remand, it is for legitimate reasons. Sure, that opinion that wasn’t address is unreasonable and might not be consistent with the evidence but that doesn’t mean the ALJ should ignore it. If the REP appeals that case to Court, it will be remanded ASAP! So tater than complaining about remands, might be best you guys actually read the decisions and not sign off poorly written ones. So let me get this straight, you are saying MOST ALJ 15+ page decisions are terrible, while not being able to put together a single paragraph without multiple errors? Got it. Remanded, with kind regards. 😂 |
|
