|
|
Post by eagerbeaver on Jul 18, 2024 11:07:00 GMT -5
Has anyone heard anything about changes to telework policies in the Hearing Offices or OAO? I know the field offices, OGC, and HQ have been back in the office 2-3 days a week for a while now.
|
|
|
|
Post by patiently on Jul 18, 2024 14:43:30 GMT -5
This would seem determined by the applicable CBA. For ALJs, it seems entirely dependent on the number of in person hearings that are scheduled. At least where I am, there are not enough to fill a whole day once a week. Until that changes (and I don't see why it would with most representatives now preferring remote hearings), one day a week in the office seems to be how it will stay for the near future.
|
|
|
|
Post by prescient on Jul 19, 2024 7:01:40 GMT -5
Read the tea leaves
It’s quite obvious if there’s a change in administration, we are all getting dragged back into the office. I also would not be surprised if they axed phone/Teams hearings
|
|
|
|
Post by hopefalj on Jul 19, 2024 10:49:46 GMT -5
Read the tea leaves It’s quite obvious if there’s a change in administration, we are all getting dragged back into the office. I also would not be surprised if they axed phone/Teams hearings It’s not that obvious to me. I have a far bigger concern with not ever being allowed back in the office than being forced to go back into the office in a regime change. |
|
|
|
Post by jagvet on Jul 19, 2024 10:56:28 GMT -5
We had this same discussion eight years ago. Please don't let your political biases affect your judgement.
1. The current administration is now forcing non-judge staff into the office more days a week.
2. The current administration fired the last commissioner. Expect a new administration to fire the current commissioner. Other than that and maybe repealing the 5-year prw change, I don't see big changes.
|
|
|
|
Post by arkstfan on Jul 20, 2024 8:26:58 GMT -5
Yeah having a commissioner working maxi flex from home while trying to eliminate telework was fun.
AFGE ended up with an onerous contract and AALJ was fortunate to run out the clock to get a better deal.
People should not forget that a significant USDA section was relocated halfway across the country to force people to quit and it wasn’t dressed in any silly platitudes about realigning mission priorities, there was an honest admission it was to get rid of people.
|
|
|
|
Post by neufenland on Jul 20, 2024 12:24:46 GMT -5
Yeah having a commissioner working maxi flex from home while trying to eliminate telework was fun. AFGE ended up with an onerous contract and AALJ was fortunate to run out the clock to get a better deal. People should not forget that a significant USDA section was relocated halfway across the country to force people to quit and it wasn’t dressed in any silly platitudes about realigning mission priorities, there was an honest admission it was to get rid of people. It was the BLM at Interior. And they moved them to Grand Junction, CO, which is not exactly easy to get to (no direct flights to DC, for instance). I think they brought everyone back to DC, so that’s fun, too…I mean, those that didn’t bail. |
|
|
|
Post by nylawyer on Jul 20, 2024 14:32:37 GMT -5
Read the tea leaves It’s quite obvious if there’s a change in administration, we are all getting dragged back into the office. I also would not be surprised if they axed phone/Teams hearings Under the current CBA, ALJs aren't being brought back into the office. And I can't see anyone eliminating phone hearings- there's just no constituency for it (other than local governments who desperately need office space to get filled). Might the next CBA be less generous? I suppose, but that's not imminent. If you want to be paranoid, the thing to watch for would be offices getting consolidated. |
|
td37
Full Member
Posts: 43 
|
Post by td37 on Jul 20, 2024 14:33:20 GMT -5
The COSS in recent townhalls has been saying no more changes to telework policies are currently planned. Take that for whatever its worth. But thinking there won't be changes with a different administration is naive, they're heavily promoting unambiguous plans for large scale changes to every federal agency. Very unlikely SSA would be immune from that agenda.
|
|
|
|
Post by bettrlatethannevr on Jul 20, 2024 20:49:38 GMT -5
It’s not partisanship or speculation to note the historical fact that one of the candidates actually did direct the substantial roll back of telework when he was President. There are arguments for or against telework that could be deemed political, but it’s pretty obvious that the election results will dictate the future of telework.
|
|
|
|
Post by prescient on Jul 22, 2024 3:34:43 GMT -5
Things aren’t the same as 8 years ago.
There’s been a never ending drumbeat over the past few years that federal employees have gotten fat and lazy working from home while private returned to office. It would take a miracle for there not to be any changes in telework with an administrative change
|
|
|
|
Post by Musician lawyer guy on Jul 23, 2024 12:16:27 GMT -5
Guys, I am in active SSDI practice - do quite a few hearings monthly ...last month I did a phone hearing with an ALJ from let's just say the middle of the country. After the hearing, he asked me to stay on the phone to speak with me for a few. We happened to be currently living in the same state. He mentioned that since COVID, the SSA has allowed ALJ's to live "anywhere they want" and be available for phone/video hearings -- and for in person hearings he will fly out for half a week to his assigned OHO to conduct said hearings ....
|
|
|
|
Post by ssaogc on Jul 23, 2024 13:06:40 GMT -5
We had this same discussion eight years ago. Please don't let your political biases affect your judgement. 1. The current administration is now forcing non-judge staff into the office more days a week. 2. The current administration fired the last commissioner. Expect a new administration to fire the current commissioner. Other than that and maybe repealing the 5-year prw change, I don't see big changes. Things got pretty bad in 2017. The AALJ and other unions were on the ropes. Telework was on the outs almost entirely. Schedule F was about to be implemented… |
|
|
|
Post by johnthornton on Jul 23, 2024 13:49:11 GMT -5
Guys, I am in active SSDI practice - do quite a few hearings monthly ...last month I did a phone hearing with an ALJ from let's just say the middle of the country. After the hearing, he asked me to stay on the phone to speak with me for a few. We happened to be currently living in the same state. He mentioned that since COVID, the SSA has allowed ALJ's to live "anywhere they want" and be available for phone/video hearings -- and for in person hearings he will fly out for half a week to his assigned OHO to conduct said hearings .... This is theoretically possible, yes. The problem is that management must allow you to designate your in person days for this to work. In my office, you have no say in which days you request are in person. The number of in person days also greatly varies by office. Nationally, 16-17% of the cases are in person. In my office, the number is closer to 40%. |
|
|
|
Post by Gaidin on Jul 23, 2024 19:50:51 GMT -5
Guys, I am in active SSDI practice - do quite a few hearings monthly ...last month I did a phone hearing with an ALJ from let's just say the middle of the country. After the hearing, he asked me to stay on the phone to speak with me for a few. We happened to be currently living in the same state. He mentioned that since COVID, the SSA has allowed ALJ's to live "anywhere they want" and be available for phone/video hearings -- and for in person hearings he will fly out for half a week to his assigned OHO to conduct said hearings .... This is theoretically possible, yes. The problem is that management must allow you to designate your in person days for this to work. In my office, you have no say in which days you request are in person. The number of in person days also greatly varies by office. Nationally, 16-17% of the cases are in person. In my office, the number is closer to 40%. All of this. I know there are offices where they almost never go in for in person hearings but that isn't everyone's reality. Just like I know there are offices where they can't fill 40 hearing slots and there are others where they fill 60. The realities of a national program are that East BFE is not the same as West BFE. The current contract will only protect us until we get a new contract and the agency's attitude about telework will be dictated by the administration in charge so lets enjoy what we have but nobody should count on this being the norm going forward if there is an administration opposed to telework. Or you know federal employees. |
|
|
|
Post by Maria C. on Jul 24, 2024 10:18:51 GMT -5
My two cents (current SSA, prior service with two other Federal Agencies), a contract’s (CBA/Union) worth is largely dependent on the Agency’s willingness to abide by its terms.
In other words, the “powers that be” can tell mgmt that they will not abide by it’s terms (including telework) and if the employees don’t like it, let them grieve it and file an unfair labor practice with the FLRA.
Keep in mind that for years, the FLRA was disfunctional (didn’t have enough board members, appointee issues etc. and this really made it an agency without any teeth).
Even if one successfully arbitrates a grievance or gets a ULP finding by the FLRA, the Agency STILL has to agree to abide by the contract. Enforcement of a ULP may involve federal court BUT keep in mind this whole process: grievance/ULP, pending investigation, pending arbitration or hearing, pending enforcement can take YEARS - it is not uncommon for these dispute to last 4-6 years and in the interim, the Agency does its thing and gives direct orders and well, if you don’t follow a “direct order” (even if the direct order violates telework) good luck at the MSPB (another long process).
I don’t mean to paint such a grim picture but at any time, any Administration can tell an Agency that it won’t adhere to certain terms in a CBA and then good luck, telework is simple changed, albeit unilaterally and in bad faith (pending grievance, ULP etc).
The other part of this whole telework equation is simply recognising that “certain administrations” (powers that be) would like to halt spending (paying benefits, hearing claims, etc) and if that means frustrating the entire process and making life difficult for claimants….welll
Again my two cents, NOT based on any SSA experience
|
|
|
|
Post by bettrlatethannevr on Jul 24, 2024 11:25:06 GMT -5
My two cents (current SSA, prior service with two other Federal Agencies), a contract’s (CBA/Union) worth is largely dependent on the Agency’s willingness to abide by its terms. In other words, the “powers that be” can tell mgmt that they will not abide by it’s terms (including telework) and if the employees don’t like it, let them grieve it and file an unfair labor practice with the FLRA. Keep in mind that for years, the FLRA was disfunctional (didn’t have enough board members, appointee issues etc. and this really made it an agency without any teeth). Even if one successfully arbitrates a grievance or gets a ULP finding by the FLRA, the Agency STILL has to agree to abide by the contract. Enforcement of a ULP may involve federal court BUT keep in mind this whole process: grievance/ULP, pending investigation, pending arbitration or hearing, pending enforcement can take YEARS - it is not uncommon for these dispute to last 4-6 years and in the interim, the Agency does its thing and gives direct orders and well, if you don’t follow a “direct order” (even if the direct order violates telework) good luck at the MSPB (another long process). I don’t mean to paint such a grim picture but at any time, any Administration can tell an Agency that it won’t adhere to certain terms in a CBA and then good luck, telework is simple changed, albeit unilaterally and in bad faith (pending grievance, ULP etc). The other part of this whole telework equation is simply recognising that “certain administrations” (powers that be) would like to halt spending (paying benefits, hearing claims, etc) and if that means frustrating the entire process and making life difficult for claimants….welll Again my two cents, NOT based on any SSA experience Totally agree. There may be no effective incentive for a new administration to honor even the current contract provisions. |
|
|
|
Post by millennial on Aug 7, 2024 9:18:03 GMT -5
would relocation expenses be paid if brought back into the office? i'm asking for both ALJs and regular DWs that live within the 2 hours.
|
|
|
|
Post by eagerbeaver on Aug 7, 2024 11:14:08 GMT -5
No, there would be no “relocation” assistance. My understanding is that the two-hour requirement exists (for DWs) because that is felt to be the maximum acceptable commuting distance. would relocation expenses be paid if brought back into the office? i'm asking for both ALJs and regular DWs that live within the 2 hours. |
|
|
|
Post by costanza on Aug 7, 2024 17:27:51 GMT -5
would relocation expenses be paid if brought back into the office? i'm asking for both ALJs and regular DWs that live within the 2 hours. You can't be serious. LOL  |
|
