|
|
Post by johnthornton on Feb 12, 2023 9:23:34 GMT -5
I wouldn't want to be a HOCALJ. Even with a reduced caseload, who wants the headache of managing the staff and having unmanageable ALJs? Then there's the interminable regional and national meetings. Not to mention that for any judges who are capped out, there is no extra money for the extra work of being a "manager." I don't begrudge them the reduced case load. |
|
|
|
Post by pumpkin on Feb 13, 2023 16:26:41 GMT -5
I am grateful that my HOCALJ does the job, and does it well, for no additional remuneration. I don’t know if there is or should be a magic percentage reduction in caseload for serving as HOCALJ.
I am glad our HOCALJ still holds enough hearings to give him personal experience with the VHRs, reps, and VEs who are the biggest thorns in our respective ALJ sides.
The management of government employees, particularly unionized employees, is not for the faint of heart. I would gladly do 6 extra hearings to avoid dealing with the directives from Falls Church, or the inevitable personnel emergencies. I do not want to spend my time mediating the crisis of the day - for example employees complaining about the smells created when a co-worker microwaved leftover fish and brussel sprouts in the break room (true story).
|
|
|
|
Post by nylawyer on Feb 13, 2023 17:29:11 GMT -5
I am grateful that my HOCALJ does the job, and does it well, for no additional remuneration. I don’t know if there is or should be a magic percentage reduction in caseload for serving as HOCALJ. I am glad our HOCALJ still holds enough hearings to give him personal experience with the VHRs, reps, and VEs who are the biggest thorns in our respective ALJ sides. The management of government employees, particularly unionized employees, is not for the faint of heart. I would gladly do 6 extra hearings to avoid dealing with the directives from Falls Church, or the inevitable personnel emergencies. I do not want to spend my time mediating the crisis of the day - for example employees complaining about the smells created when a co-worker microwaved leftover fish and brussel sprouts in the break room (true story). You do raise a good point. While there is probably something to be said for the benefits of consolidation, it definitely is better that the HOCALJs are still doing a substantial number of hearings (as opposed to the token numbers done by some of the higher managers). As you said, it is preferable that the HOCAlJs experience on a regular basis the same issues the line ALJs do, which might not happen if you started having one HOCALJ for multiple offices. |
|
|
|
Post by linejudge17 on Feb 13, 2023 18:37:52 GMT -5
Going back to the article above, what about the NHC judges and their reduced caseload, while they have much more support? I heard they now only have to schedule 40 hearings a month. Why does the Chief Judge’s spouse hear so few hearings? And I still don’t understand how the Chief Judge was permitted to run for a high profile position when the appearance of it really is improper. How many voters with pending claims live in that Chicago ward?
|
|
|
|
Post by nylawyer on Feb 14, 2023 8:50:17 GMT -5
Going back to the article above, what about the NHC judges and their reduced caseload, while they have much more support? I heard they now only have to schedule 40 hearings a month. Why does the Chief Judge’s spouse hear so few hearings? And I still don’t understand how the Chief Judge was permitted to run for a high profile position when the appearance of it really is improper. How many voters with pending claims live in that Chicago ward? I don't understand the NHC having a reduced caseload- prior to the pandemic, they were expected to hold a higher number of hearings, not less. Maybe there are some issues specific to the NHC? The NHCs typically would handle overflow from offices that were backed up- maybe they just aren't getting enough cases (which is still a problem, but it's an explanation). I actually thought ALJs weren't permitted to run for office, so that has me a bit confused as well. As for his spouse- obviously, it looks terrible on it's face, and frankly if she has been given what would be essentially a no show job out of nepotism then heads should roll. But, I'd hesitate to assume the worst. Maybe she took two month's vacation in the three month period being cited to? Or a significant amount of leave, for any reason, last year? |
|
|
|
Post by Topperlaw on Feb 14, 2023 9:34:02 GMT -5
My gripe isn't with HOCALJs in general, but specifically those like the previous KC Region RCALJ (thank goodness she's moved on to the Judiciary branch) who have NEVER adjudicated 500-700 in any year ever (think her best 2 years ever were 360 and 170) and then bullying line judges who were doing 450-499 cases a year, when that's practically double her best 2 years combined.
There should be a mandatory minimum of at least 2 years of 500 decisions before ANYONE is promoted to RCALJ. You lose ALL credibility and loyalty when you aren't even capable of the metrics yourself and are promoted anyway, and then you start being a bully.
Also there's absolutely no reason to have so much administration. No assistant RCALJs...have all regions almost identical in number of Judges..have each HOCALJ manage approximately 20 other judges (whether that means one or 2 different offices).
|
|
|
|
Post by christina on Feb 15, 2023 8:39:39 GMT -5
Going back to the article above, what about the NHC judges and their reduced caseload, while they have much more support? I heard they now only have to schedule 40 hearings a month. Why does the Chief Judge’s spouse hear so few hearings? And I still don’t understand how the Chief Judge was permitted to run for a high profile position when the appearance of it really is improper. How many voters with pending claims live in that Chicago ward? . Nhc judges are technically managers so they do have some added personnel duties such as timekeeping, performance reviews, attending manager meetings. Is that offset by having designated staff? I don’t know. |
|
|
|
Post by Pixie on Feb 15, 2023 9:01:06 GMT -5
Going back to the article above, what about the NHC judges and their reduced caseload, while they have much more support? I heard they now only have to schedule 40 hearings a month. Why does the Chief Judge’s spouse hear so few hearings? And I still don’t understand how the Chief Judge was permitted to run for a high profile position when the appearance of it really is improper. How many voters with pending claims live in that Chicago ward? . Nhc judges are technically managers so they do have some added personnel duties such as timekeeping, performance reviews, attending manager meetings. Is that offset by having designated staff? I don’t know. I would think it would. Pixie |
|
|
|
Post by superalj on Feb 15, 2023 22:53:46 GMT -5
I’d take that offset any day. NHC ALJs are still like line ALJs as they have a HOCALJ who does all the heavy admin lifting. So PACs reviews for their DWs twice a year and monthly office meetings while having their own DWs that can review their files as well as draft their decisions, NHC ALJs got it good.
I would love to have DWs who could help me with file review and who report to me instead of a GS. One of my biggest frustrations is I have no control whether my complex UF goes to a skilled DW or someone not so skilled. Even worse, my case could go to a NCAC. I’d love to supervise DWs that draft my cases to train and possibly mentor.
Lastly, I’m not bashing our DWs as that’s a difficult job more so lately since some of our most skilled DWs didn’t get a shot at being an ALJ, which is morale crushing. Not to get too off topic, at least with OPM there is a test and some level of objectivity. My concern without OPM is TPTB cherry picking GSs and managers instead of our best and brightest DWs. I had some very talented DWs not get anywhere close to an ALJ interview and have heard the same from friends in other offices.
|
|
|
|
Post by stevenq on Feb 17, 2023 10:56:38 GMT -5
My concern without OPM is TPTB cherry picking GSs and managers instead of our best and brightest DWs. I had some very talented DWs not get anywhere close to an ALJ interview and have heard the same from friends in other offices. Brother, I got myself a 79.xx on that last OPM test without vet points and without ever being a prosecutor or other litigator. I had an exceptional reputation in the Agency, all 5s numerous times, progressively higher responsibility jobs culminating in a regional management gig where I did big region wide things and the most sensitive behind the scenes things (DMO for harassment/hostile work environment investigation program, ALJ bias complaints, etc.), and occupied pretty much every gs-13 attorney job there was. I didn't even get invited to interview for the first and aborted SSA-run ALJ hire a few years back. Didn't apply to the most recent one because the Agency has become a morass and my new one is great and a 14 is enough for me for now (the pay isn't worth being stuck in West Des Moines for an indefinite period and the work conditions are abysmal compared to my job now). There's always going to be favored groups. Before Menoken blew it up, the favored class was old white guy partners in firms. Since then it's been prosecutors. Always it's been vets since it was a competitive service job until recently and points had to be given. Who is it now? Unclear, but certainly SSA will have some sort of favored candidate traits and I can tell you from experience it doesn't appear to be beloved GSs. *Edit for add'l info. I'll also say I heard of a couple DWs picked up in the most recent hire who I knew pretty well from work and were...I'll be charitable and say less than stellar...in substantive ways (some combination of behavior/personality, grasp of the regs, and writing ability). You'll never know the legitimate and questionable factors TPTB use to select candidates. File an action of some sort and do some discovery, or maybe a FOIA could work, if you're that interested in getting a peek behind the curtain. Otherwise, all applicants simply have to do their best to feel out the vague contours of what is desired, speak to those as robustly as possible in their application materials and interviews, and pray to Jove they might grab the brass ring. There's no clear path anymore. |
|
|
|
Post by christina on Feb 17, 2023 15:04:16 GMT -5
I’d take that offset any day. NHC ALJs are still like line ALJs as they have a HOCALJ who does all the heavy admin lifting. So PACs reviews for their DWs twice a year and monthly office meetings while having their own DWs that can review their files as well as draft their decisions, NHC ALJs got it good. I would love to have DWs who could help me with file review and who report to me instead of a GS. One of my biggest frustrations is I have no control whether my complex UF goes to a skilled DW or someone not so skilled. Even worse, my case could go to a NCAC. I’d love to supervise DWs that draft my cases to train and possibly mentor. Lastly, I’m not bashing our DWs as that’s a difficult job more so lately since some of our most skilled DWs didn’t get a shot at being an ALJ, which is morale crushing. Not to get too off topic, at least with OPM there is a test and some level of objectivity. My concern without OPM is TPTB cherry picking GSs and managers instead of our best and brightest DWs. I had some very talented DWs not get anywhere close to an ALJ interview and have heard the same from friends in other offices. Tbh never heard a NHC judge complain about their gig. |
|
|
|
Post by barkley on Feb 17, 2023 22:51:34 GMT -5
There should be a mandatory minimum of at least 2 years of 500 decisions before ANYONE is promoted to RCALJ. You lose ALL credibility and loyalty when you aren't even capable of the metrics yourself and are promoted anyway, and then you start being a bully. THIS. I do not think ANYONE should be a RCALJ with less than 10 years experience being an ALJ. I think under Bice the goal was to get people who did not know anything about the Agency but would easily fall in line with the whole Operations attitude about hearings - numbers > people, widgets > legal analysis. Further, they should not select HOCALJs with less than 5 years experience as an ALJ, unless they had prior Agency experience. |
|
|
|
Post by operationalj on Feb 18, 2023 10:26:05 GMT -5
There should be a mandatory minimum of at least 2 years of 500 decisions before ANYONE is promoted to RCALJ. You lose ALL credibility and loyalty when you aren't even capable of the metrics yourself and are promoted anyway, and then you start being a bully. THIS. I do not think ANYONE should be a RCALJ with less than 10 years experience being an ALJ. I think under Bice the goal was to get people who did not know anything about the Agency but would easily fall in line with the whole Operations attitude about hearings - numbers > people, widgets > legal analysis. Further, they should not select HOCALJs with less than 5 years experience as an ALJ, unless they had prior Agency experience. Agree. I can think of 3 really good HOCALJs with career progression that looked like firm, prosecutor, and/or Claimant's rep, then Agency DW and supervisor experience, then ALJ for less than or about 5 years, then HOCALJ. As HOCALJs, they continued to manage and produce a significant number of decisions; all had exceptional soft skills and Agency knowledge. There is one exception that had other extensive fed govt experience then ALJ for about 10 years then HOCALJ. I'm sure there are others but had to say something as I have a lot of respect for these ALJs; they have done an amazing job considering the challenges of production requirements and management constraints. FWIW  |
|
|
|
Post by Rabbit Bat Reindeer on Feb 21, 2023 15:49:58 GMT -5
I know my HOCALJ is doing less than half of my workload and I am absolutely fine with it.
|
|
|
|
Post by hopefalj on Feb 21, 2023 20:05:52 GMT -5
There should be a mandatory minimum of at least 2 years of 500 decisions before ANYONE is promoted to RCALJ. You lose ALL credibility and loyalty when you aren't even capable of the metrics yourself and are promoted anyway, and then you start being a bully. THIS. I do not think ANYONE should be a RCALJ with less than 10 years experience being an ALJ. I think under Bice the goal was to get people who did not know anything about the Agency but would easily fall in line with the whole Operations attitude about hearings - numbers > people, widgets > legal analysis. Further, they should not select HOCALJs with less than 5 years experience as an ALJ, unless they had prior Agency experience. I don’t know. I tend to think that most people with 5 years experience in the agency know better than to get involved in management unless they’re a sadist or a masochist (not that there’s anything wrong with that!). Baltimore has made a concerted effort to go for a certain type in leadership positions… yes women and men. They’ve been successful in locating them and putting them in positions from the top down. I don’t expect that to change now that they have far more freedom in whom they can hire. I’m not saying everyone who has been and will be picked up will fit that mold, but more than enough will to keep the PTB from encountering a whole lot of resistance to their sometimes nonsensical policies. |
|
|
|
Post by trp888 on Feb 23, 2023 14:02:24 GMT -5
My concern without OPM is TPTB cherry picking GSs and managers instead of our best and brightest DWs. I had some very talented DWs not get anywhere close to an ALJ interview and have heard the same from friends in other offices. Brother, I got myself a 79.xx on that last OPM test without vet points and without ever being a prosecutor or other litigator. I had an exceptional reputation in the Agency, all 5s numerous times, progressively higher responsibility jobs culminating in a regional management gig where I did big region wide things and the most sensitive behind the scenes things (DMO for harassment/hostile work environment investigation program, ALJ bias complaints, etc.), and occupied pretty much every gs-13 attorney job there was. I didn't even get invited to interview for the first and aborted SSA-run ALJ hire a few years back. Didn't apply to the most recent one because the Agency has become a morass and my new one is great and a 14 is enough for me for now (the pay isn't worth being stuck in West Des Moines for an indefinite period and the work conditions are abysmal compared to my job now). There's always going to be favored groups. Before Menoken blew it up, the favored class was old white guy partners in firms. Since then it's been prosecutors. Always it's been vets since it was a competitive service job until recently and points had to be given. Who is it now? Unclear, but certainly SSA will have some sort of favored candidate traits and I can tell you from experience it doesn't appear to be beloved GSs. *Edit for add'l info. I'll also say I heard of a couple DWs picked up in the most recent hire who I knew pretty well from work and were...I'll be charitable and say less than stellar...in substantive ways (some combination of behavior/personality, grasp of the regs, and writing ability). You'll never know the legitimate and questionable factors TPTB use to select candidates. File an action of some sort and do some discovery, or maybe a FOIA could work, if you're that interested in getting a peek behind the curtain. Otherwise, all applicants simply have to do their best to feel out the vague contours of what is desired, speak to those as robustly as possible in their application materials and interviews, and pray to Jove they might grab the brass ring. There's no clear path anymore. What is this new wonderful agency you went to?? Please share  |
|
|
|
Post by stevenq on Feb 23, 2023 17:59:09 GMT -5
what is this new wonderful agency you went to?? Please share There's lots of good ones it seems from my recent hobnobbing with other OGC attorneys from other agencies at various work related trainings, etc. Steer clear of the VA and any agency with a law and order type mission and you're likely to find a 40 hour workweek with reasonable workload. Boss and coworkers always a wildcard, though. Plus, you pick the right agency and get to the right practice area and there's a chance the subject matter knowledge you learn will make you a real contender for a mid-level associate job at a firm or in house counsel getting comp so good that that will become your new brass ring (and a realistically attainable one this time!). Just think about what government agencies deal with big corps in a way that those big corps or the firms that serve them would find your knowledge and skills useful. Sure, you'll work 60 hours and hard hours, but you'll only have to hack it a short while before banking enough that you can leave the stage completely before you're 50 (assuming you aren't too far past 40 already). |
|
|
|
Post by superalj on Feb 23, 2023 22:32:00 GMT -5
what is this new wonderful agency you went to?? Please share There's lots of good ones it seems from my recent hobnobbing with other OGC attorneys from other agencies at various work related trainings, etc. Steer clear of the VA and any agency with a law and order type mission and you're likely to find a 40 hour workweek with reasonable workload. Boss and coworkers always a wildcard, though. Plus, you pick the right agency and get to the right practice area and there's a chance the subject matter knowledge you learn will make you a real contender for a mid-level associate job at a firm or in house counsel getting comp so good that that will become your new brass ring (and a realistically attainable one this time!). Just think about what government agencies deal with big corps in a way that those big corps or the firms that serve them would find your knowledge and skills useful. Sure, you'll work 60 hours and hard hours, but you'll only have to hack it a short while before banking enough that you can leave the stage completely before you're 50 (assuming you aren't too far past 40 already). Objection! Non responsive to the question. Lol In other threads, you called the majority of ALJ decisions terrible and mediocre at best so I’m curious where you landed as well. Obviously, you can take the 5th to protect your anonymity, but touting your regional experience and darn good OPM score-you’ve made some bold claims. Lastly don’t disrespect the vet points, they were well earned. |
|
|
|
Post by stevenq on Feb 24, 2023 17:47:38 GMT -5
Objection! Non responsive to the question. Lol In other threads, you called the majority of ALJ decisions terrible and mediocre at best so I’m curious where you landed as well. Obviously, you can take the 5th to protect your anonymity, but touting your regional experience and darn good OPM score-you’ve made some bold claims. Lastly don’t disrespect the vet points, they were well earned. Can't say my agency, it would be a dead giveaway. I've already shared more than enough details that people here from my old neck of the woods should know it's me or be strongly suspecting it is. If destroying my anonymity is that big a deal to you--if you need to know my name and look up my LinkedIn and talk to folks who knew me to believe me, go right ahead--ask around and after awhile I promise you'll figure it out. But you can do that leg work. And send me a PM with my name and if you're right I'll send you my ALJ score email, still have it . Yes, I said ALJ decisions are bad compared to many other federal adjudication documents. And I stand by that. And it still isn't because ALJs or DWs are bad writers or bad at anything. It's an assembly line, what can you do? How can you compete (or think that you do!) on quality when you have to crank out a few hundred substantive decisions each year (and hold the hearing, review the file, etc.) and your writers have to draft even more when the adjudicators and drafters for the other decisions I'm talking about might spend the better part of a week or more crafting a single decision (and they get way more time to do all the other aspects of the adjudication than you do)? Don't take it personally, sheesh. And I wasn't disrespecting vets or vet points, I was simply pointing out that I was a baby angel's eyelash away from 80 on that last OPM test--an amazing score--and I did it with cruddy experience (in their eyes) not worth many points and without vet points. I totally dominated the exam as what I brought with me (experience and vet points) gave me nearly no points. But who cares? It didn't get me ALJ since the OPM process went poof, and it's really dorky and gauche to boast about test scores anyway. I was meaning to show that by various measures I was an ideal ALJ candidate and didn't even get over the first hurdle when SSA finally took the wheel. But back to my last point: there are a lot of less well known, smaller than SSA or DOJ or DoD agencies where the OGC attorneys spend a great deal of time on some niche but potentially lucrative subject matter. Look for where big corps and rich corps might be litigating with the government or at least in a federal forum--there are so many federal fora you, like me before I got on here, probably haven't heard of where these matters are handled. Once you learn these areas of law from the government side, if you want to jump ship you're likely an extremely viable contender to work for a firm or a company to handle those same types of litigation, compliance, etc. matters for the companies. Here's another free tip since I'm feeling generous: a good foot in the door to ANY agency is employment law. Every agency does it, most lawyers don't want to do it. And many places don't make you be a full time employment lawyer (especially I'm regional offices outside the headquarters/DC offices), so you can slide in on employment, then sink your teeth into the substantive practice(s) OGC has. Employment itself isn't really lucrative, you aren't doing it for a private sector employment law job. It's just a useful practice to have because it makes you really mobile within federal government. If you can't actually do employment practice (looking at you writers), get into mgmt and do as many employment law adjacent things that give you knowledge of EEO, MSPB, etc. relevant subject matter as you can and maybe that can work for you. |
|
|
|
Post by ssaogc on Sept 11, 2023 17:46:34 GMT -5
Great thread lots of good information.
I know the HOCALJs I have had have some telework.
Are they required to come into the office a certain number of day (besides in person hearings).?
I have seen a couple of announcements but they were all in remote areas except for the one in Denver.
|
|
