|
|
Post by ssaogc on May 23, 2024 3:33:12 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by christina on May 23, 2024 10:10:37 GMT -5
Weird. l like working here. Maybe I’m missing something although I imagine there is a lot of variation within agency depending on job
|
|
|
|
Post by ssaogc on May 23, 2024 11:42:19 GMT -5
Weird. l like working here. Maybe I’m missing something although I imagine there is a lot of variation within agency depending on job I thought it would improve with the telework. My job has changed for the better since 2020. But i do see the massive lines at field offices and i suspect the folks that process phone and inline applications have an immense workload. The article indicated that the ranking is based on those surveys they send out and i am sure the folks that have the tougher jobs in agency make sure they fill them out in a higher percentage |
|
|
|
Post by mrmojo on May 24, 2024 8:29:05 GMT -5
Weird. l like working here. Maybe I’m missing something although I imagine there is a lot of variation within agency depending on job I thought it would improve with the telework. My job has changed for the better since 2020. But i do see the massive lines at field offices and i suspect the folks that process phone and inline applications have an immense workload. The article indicated that the ranking is based on those surveys they send out and i am sure the folks that have the tougher jobs in agency make sure they fill them out in a higher percentage The subcomponent rankings bear out that where the workload is heaviest, the satisfaction is lowest. There are 459 Agency Subcomponents that are ranked as part of the survey. For SSA, Ops ranks 456, OIG ranks 430, Hearings ranks 429, OGC 399, HR 314, Policy 273, Analytics, Review and Oversight 267, Communications 264. |
|
|
|
Post by hopefalj on May 24, 2024 8:58:23 GMT -5
Weird. l like working here. Maybe I’m missing something although I imagine there is a lot of variation within agency depending on job I thought it would improve with the telework. My job has changed for the better since 2020. But i do see the massive lines at field offices and i suspect the folks that process phone and inline applications have an immense workload. The article indicated that the ranking is based on those surveys they send out and i am sure the folks that have the tougher jobs in agency make sure they fill them out in a higher percentage I think a lot of one’s feelings about their job with OHO depends on the office they’re in. If you have a laid back HOCALJ, quality staff that gets things worked up/noticed correctly, and are in an office that runs smoothly, then it’s probably great. I remember a time where that was the case for me. If you’re not in such an office, it can feel like a constant struggle just to keep your head above water, and it becomes disheartening when the only response you effectively get is a shrug when issues are raised. It feels to me that the level of micromanagement from on high is at a level not seen before. The scheduling MOU has been ignored with hearing days having over 10,000 pages at times. I’m having to regularly fix workup and file issues. There is a lot of time wasted with mandatory meetings or HACPS training that isn’t position specific and regularly has little relation to our position. I’m asked to justify postponing cases that weren’t even noticed, explain why something is a day after benchmark after being on leave for over a week, etc. I’m not planning on going anywhere, but it doesn’t mean it’s a great place to work at this point. |
|
|
|
Post by jagvet on May 24, 2024 11:16:40 GMT -5
These surveys, like FEVS survey, are meaningless. SSA probably just employs more grumpy people than most federal agencies. When I worked for another federal agency in a senior management position, I got a call from a political appointee asking me why a certain employee thought I was a bad manager. She said that it was in that employee's FEVS (or whatever they called it back then). I said that they were supposed to be anonymous, and she laughed. The next year, I let that appointee have it by name in my FEVS and complained that she was somehow given access to the "anonymous" surveys. I haven't done a single survey since then.
Big Brother is reading all the surveys, friends.
|
|
|
|
Post by bettrlatethannevr on May 24, 2024 17:14:36 GMT -5
They prefer control instead of efficiency.
|
|
|
|
Post by generalsherman on May 25, 2024 10:18:14 GMT -5
These surveys, like FEVS survey, are meaningless. SSA probably just employs more grumpy people than most federal agencies. When I worked for another federal agency in a senior management position, I got a call from a political appointee asking me why a certain employee thought I was a bad manager. She said that it was in that employee's FEVS (or whatever they called it back then). I said that they were supposed to be anonymous, and she laughed. The next year, I let that appointee have it by name in my FEVS and complained that she was somehow given access to the "anonymous" surveys. I haven't done a single survey since then. Big Brother is reading all the surveys, friends. That is what I suspected and why I do not participate |
|
|
|
Post by judgechamberlain on May 25, 2024 10:18:53 GMT -5
All the cranks who complain should be required to spend 2 or 3 years in private practice and an “eat what you kill” environment and then fill out the survey! 🤣. I am not in SSA but I have very much appreciated the great work environments in my federal employment career.
|
|
|
|
Post by judgechamberlain on May 25, 2024 11:42:21 GMT -5
These surveys, like FEVS survey, are meaningless. SSA probably just employs more grumpy people than most federal agencies. When I worked for another federal agency in a senior management position, I got a call from a political appointee asking me why a certain employee thought I was a bad manager. She said that it was in that employee's FEVS (or whatever they called it back then). I said that they were supposed to be anonymous, and she laughed. The next year, I let that appointee have it by name in my FEVS and complained that she was somehow given access to the "anonymous" surveys. I haven't done a single survey since then. Big Brother is reading all the surveys, friends. I find this quite curious- not questioning your personal experience but I asked someone I know who had been in local management at an agency. They said the local management didn’t find out names associated with FEVS survey responses and that anonymity was maintained, at least at the local level. They have no reason to lie to me so I think their reply to my q is very credible. |
|
|
|
Post by barkley on May 25, 2024 14:43:18 GMT -5
Weird. l like working here. Maybe I’m missing something although I imagine there is a lot of variation within agency depending on job I think you may also be seeing a discrepancy among employees who have been here a while and "newer" employees. There was a time when the OHA/ODAR/OHO division had good leadership that was very protective of the hearing offices, the ALJ corps and the idea that we were doing a quasi legal process. Then, they brought in as OCALJ a person who had little experience as an ALJ but lots of operations experience and she promoted people just like her, who then in turn promoted HOCALJs with little agency experience and often no people skills. It is discouraging because it seems as if all they care about is processing times and justifying processing times, and not about ensuring correct decisions are made. I would also like to add that the lack of staffing is a real problem. Although our number of ALJs has remained steady, we have lost several clerks and writers and not had them replaced. Basically, the employees who remain have to suck up that additional work load to get everything done. The clerks in particular are told they have to do XX task in so many days - you get enough tasks like that, it becomes impossible. Then you add the over supervision by RO. They can only do that for so long. |
|
|
|
Post by Pixie on May 25, 2024 15:26:32 GMT -5
Good to see you back barkley. Pixie
|
|
|
|
Post by AAmillennial on May 26, 2024 9:45:39 GMT -5
The FO staff are overworked and understaffed. OHO staff are micromanaged and have minimal opportunities for career advancement. All are underpaid and using archaic software systems, dealing with understandably frustrated claimants and beneficiaries, and for an agency that is underfunded and subject to negative headlines in the media on a seemingly weekly basis. Attempts by management to improve morale so far are laughable. Even the measly 6 hours of admin leave resulted in Congressional displeasure ( see here). It will take years for any major changes to be made and by that time, a new administration or commissioner will be making decisions. Of course we rank last year after year. FWIW, I doubt this forum represents most of the FEVS results and negative experiences within the agency. |
|
|
|
Post by bettrlatethannevr on May 26, 2024 12:53:40 GMT -5
Weird. l like working here. Maybe I’m missing something although I imagine there is a lot of variation within agency depending on job I like working here and would certainly apply again. It’s also true that the OHO mission is being hurt substantially by myopic, embedded upper managers, and we should be truthful about this when asked. The surveys suggest we have been. COSS needs to know (and I think he does) that any significant progress will require changes in high positions. |
|
|
|
Post by badger on May 26, 2024 19:07:51 GMT -5
Weird. l like working here. Maybe I’m missing something although I imagine there is a lot of variation within agency depending on job Same. I'd be interested in a breakdown of components. I've done details outside of OHO and the grass isn't greener. For all it's faults (lack of promotion potential), OHO isn't a bad place to be. |
|
|
|
Post by Top Tier on May 27, 2024 0:53:08 GMT -5
These surveys, like FEVS survey, are meaningless. SSA probably just employs more grumpy people than most federal agencies. When I worked for another federal agency in a senior management position, I got a call from a political appointee asking me why a certain employee thought I was a bad manager. She said that it was in that employee's FEVS (or whatever they called it back then). I said that they were supposed to be anonymous, and she laughed. The next year, I let that appointee have it by name in my FEVS and complained that she was somehow given access to the "anonymous" surveys. I haven't done a single survey since then. Big Brother is reading all the surveys, friends. I don't know that "SSA probably just employs more grumpy people than most federal agencies" but I know it employs more employees than most agencies. Maybe there should be some metric to account for the percentage of "disgruntled employees" per capita. I propose that the Department of Veteran Affairs clearly has the most disgruntled employees for some reason... However, last year I received the same FEVS email reminders up until the time I gave in and completed it. Once I did, I no longer received the reminder emails. It is strange that I haven't completed the FEVS this year and I keep getting a reminder email stating that I haven't completed it yet. How do they know that "I" haven't completed it if it is anonymous? Given the procedural history, I am now of the belief they know with specificity whom submitted which answers and when. Also, when an employee completes a FEVS questionnaire, the questions are so specific that they can most likely determine who the employee is by the responses. I too no longer complete the survey because it is not anonymous. |
|
|
|
Post by judgechamberlain on May 27, 2024 9:13:16 GMT -5
Does SSA use a different FEVS than other agencies? The Q’s don’t seem to specific to me. Just wondering.
I agree that they probably can tell who answered and how they answered as I think everyone gets a personalized URL and that would be why they stop sending reminders after you respond. I have nothing bad to say, so I am good with responding. My Fed experience is far better than my time in private work, so, all good!
|
|
|
|
Post by seaprongs on May 28, 2024 10:05:09 GMT -5
I generally like it at SSA, but I think OHO's workload is very, very different from other parts of the agency. As frustrating as the lack of promotional opportunities are, I have a high threshold for leaving because I like everything from the mission of the agency to the work life balance. Telework is a big reason to stay imo. But I can definitely understand why some of our coworkers in the field office or in other parts of the agency may feel differently.
|
|
|
|
Post by hillsarealive on May 28, 2024 10:13:58 GMT -5
I thought it would improve with the telework. My job has changed for the better since 2020. But i do see the massive lines at field offices and i suspect the folks that process phone and inline applications have an immense workload. The article indicated that the ranking is based on those surveys they send out and i am sure the folks that have the tougher jobs in agency make sure they fill them out in a higher percentage The subcomponent rankings bear out that where the workload is heaviest, the satisfaction is lowest. There are 459 Agency Subcomponents that are ranked as part of the survey. For SSA, Ops ranks 456, OIG ranks 430, Hearings ranks 429, OGC 399, HR 314, Policy 273, Analytics, Review and Oversight 267, Communications 264. Wow, per the subcomponent rankings, OGC has been falling like a rock over the past 6-7 years. We went from a top 20% component to a bottom 20% component in that time. I always complete the FEVS survey. It is therapeutic. I try to be honest in my responses. If I could make one change to FEVS, though, I would add a section for comments. Let people pinpoint the exact issues on their minds. It also wouldn't hurt if the survey did a better job of defining the different levels of management, although I suppose they are boxed in to an extent since the questions have to work for all agencies and components. |
|
|
|
Post by prescient on May 30, 2024 21:52:28 GMT -5
The subcomponent rankings bear out that where the workload is heaviest, the satisfaction is lowest. There are 459 Agency Subcomponents that are ranked as part of the survey. For SSA, Ops ranks 456, OIG ranks 430, Hearings ranks 429, OGC 399, HR 314, Policy 273, Analytics, Review and Oversight 267, Communications 264. Wow, per the subcomponent rankings, OGC has been falling like a rock over the past 6-7 years. We went from a top 20% component to a bottom 20% component in that time. I always complete the FEVS survey. It is therapeutic. I try to be honest in my responses. If I could make one change to FEVS, though, I would add a section for comments. Let people pinpoint the exact issues on their minds. It also wouldn't hurt if the survey did a better job of defining the different levels of management, although I suppose they are boxed in to an extent since the questions have to work for all agencies and components. With OGC being one of the components dragged back into the office 3 days /week, their ranking is going to plummet even more next year |
|
