National ODAR Hearing Office

[alwayslearning]

October 5, 2007

TO: ALL FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES

SUBJECT: ANNOUNCEMENT OF ALJ VACANCIES FOR SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION’S OFFICE OF DISABILITY ADJUDICATION AND REVIEW

This is to provide notice that the Office of Disability Adjudication and Review will fill seven AL-935-3 Administrative Law Judge vacancies in Falls Church, VA. These ALJs will be assigned organizationally to the newly established National Hearing Center located in Falls Church and will primarily hold hearings and issue decisions on electronic cases from the hearing center. Each Hearing Center ALJ will supervise at least one attorney adviser.

Only ALJs who currently hold the AL-3 or higher position on a permanent basis and have at least one year of experience as an attorney or ALJ with Social Security Administration will be considered.

HOW TO APPLY:

Please submit an SSA-45 (SSA employees only), OF-612 or a resume. The application must include the information specified in the OPM brochure, “Here’s What Your Resume or Application Should Contain” or “Applying for a Federal Job” (OF-510). Please also include a statement that you have maintained all qualifications required for selection as an administrative law judge and include any experience you have in electronic hearings.

Your application package must be received at the following address no later than October 11, 2007 and can be e-mailed, faxed or mailed:
Office of Human Resources, CPPS
5107 Leesburg Pike, Room 306
Falls Church, VA 22041
Attn: Pat Rocheford ([e-mail])
Fax # [phone]

Relocation expenses will be paid in accordance with Federal Travel Regulations and other applicable laws and government-wide rules and regulations.
For additional information, please contact Ms. Pat Rocheford on 703-605-8448.
All application forms are subject to the provisions of the Privacy Act and become the property of SSA.

SSA PROVIDES EQUAL OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL PERSONS WITHOUT REGARD TO RACE, COLOR, AGE, NATIONAL ORIGIN, RELIGION, GENDER, DISABILITY, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, MARITAL STATUS, PARENTAL STATUS, POLITICAL AFFILIATION AND CONDUCT NOT ADVERSELY AFFECTING EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE.

[judicature]

Staffing the national hearing office with experienced ALJ's makes good sense.

[workdrone]

alwayslearning said:

Each Hearing Center ALJ will supervise at least one attorney adviser.

Fascinating. Looks like these ALJs will be Supervisory ALJs and won't be able to join/stay with the union.

[doctorwho]

I see this as a good sign for an early in the FY class. After all, they are probably trying to see where the vacancies might end up so they can fill them.

[odarite]

Good thinking. First pick the National Hearing Center ALJs since the transfer rules do not apply to these slots, then work the transfer list, then ask for a certificate from OPM. It makes sense and might even be what is happening.

[doctorwho]

They can even ask for the cert list once it is available by simply casting a wide net on locations, and then "pairing it down." It happens all the time" "oh, we chose not to fill those slots." There are lots of ways to play the game. If they want to come even close to hiring any significant amount of ALJs this year, they need to start the process ASAP. Anybody with any personnel experience knows that.

[kingfisher]

odarite said:

Good thinking. First pick the National Hearing Center ALJs since the transfer rules do not apply to these slots, then work the transfer list, then ask for a certificate from OPM. It makes sense and might even be what is happening.

Odarite,
Why don't the transfer rules apply to these slots? I don't have a copy of the contract at home, so just wondering. Is it because these are new positions?

[workdrone]

kingfisher said:

Why don't the transfer rules apply to these slots? I don't have a copy of the contract at home, so just wondering. Is it because these are new positions?

My guess is because these seven positions are supervisory ALJ positions, they are part of the management and therefore are not subject to the CBA.

[odarite]

Workdrone may well be right about the supervisory angle, but in addition the contract has a specific procedure for new offices: "When there are no qualified Judges on the register for a new or existing hearing office and the Agency has decided to reassign Judges to that office, a posting period of fifteen (15) working days will be established." (Article 20) This posting appears to not quite comply with that provision, as there are less than 15 working days to get the applications in. So I misspoke that the rules do not apply, they are significantly different, however. And for kingfisher, the contract is online at aalj.org, look in the section aalj, inc. (This is a members only site.)

[aljsouth]

Well, ODAR is engaging in Union busting. This is the medicare approach where all judges were given one employee to supervise. Of course, these attorneys were moved at will by local management, but the judge officially is the supervisor.

I simply don't know enough labor law, but suspect there may be a difference between a new agency (medicare) starting up an ALJ system, and ODAR with an established ALJ cadre that is already unionized. There is no legitimate reason for the supervisory duties except to keep out the union. Line ALJ's across the country hear VTC cases and don't supervise anyone. It will be interesting.

I do agree that this hiring should be first, before the general hiring off the list.

[hooligan]

The transfer list does not control because the National Hearing Office is deemed a 'new office.' The same approach was used when Dover and Colorado Springs were opened. The Union filed a grievance arguing that once the office was announced, transfer applications should be allowed. The Union lost.

Management does not like the transfer list. No office wants to take a problem child who happens to have senoirity on the list. When a low producer gets to the top of a given location, management goes to great lengths to avoid an opening there.

[learnedhand]

Drone, what you say is true about the new judges being supervisors and not being subject to the union. I mentioned this in another thread a few days ago. My prediction is that the aalj will grieve over this. Hopefully the union will win, because if it loses, management will likely be looking for ways to reinvent the unit system and make hearing office aljs supervisors as well, with the same outcome.

[chris]

Didn't someone post recently about how they felt the unit system was a better system, all things considered?

[johnthornton]

chris said:

Didn't someone post recently about how they felt the unit system was a better system, all things considered?

This doesn't sound like the unit system. It sounds like a gimmick to remove ALJs from the bargaining unit as "supervisors". A true unit system would give ALJs supervisory authority over all parts of the decision-making system---this position description gives an ALJ nominal authority over one attorney.

[workdrone]

johnthornton said:

This doesn't sound like the unit system. It sounds like a gimmick to remove ALJs from the bargaining unit as "supervisors". A true unit system would give ALJs supervisory authority over all parts of the decision-making system---this position description gives an ALJ nominal authority over one attorney.

I agree. Supervising one AA definitely sounds very gimmicky. For example, Medicare's ALJs supervise their own team (1 AA, 1 paralegal, 1 hearing clerk). So at least you can say it's an integrated production unit. Where as 1 ALJ supervising 1 AA makes much less sense, since most AAs I know can do their work with minimal or no supervision.

Now if we're talking about a true unit system where you have an integrated production unit, I do like it better.

[Pixie]

Giving a judge one employee to supervise is simply a way to bypass the union. I think the agency would like to institute such a plan nationwide in the future.

The Baltimorons may have lost the AALJ union battle, but they intend to eventually win the war. I don't know enough about that area of the law to know if this gimmick will be successful, but it is a transparent attempt to abolish the AALJ union. The current administration will look favorably on the tactic. It may be a different situation when the Democrats take over. Just my opinion. Pix.

[learnedhand]

I agree with Pixie and mentioned this on another thread a couple of days ago. If the AALJ challenges this, and they are likely to do so, they must win or it will become a pattern in the hearing offices as well. It will be interesting to see how all the layers of management will try to stay in place while giving the aljs "supervisor" status over some of the employees. While Commissioner Astrue may not remain in place after the next election, regardless of the outcome, there is some very entrenched management that would like to see the aljs subjugated.

[learnedhand]

I should have added, unfortunately, none of them puts out a work product.

[odarite]

Commissioner Astrue was appointed to a 6 year term, thus the next election does not directly affect him. Whether he might resign early under a different administration only he knows.

[learnedhand]

I'm aware of his term length. I am already hearing rumors that he is bailing after the election, regardless of outcome. And it would certainly be consistent with his career profile of very short term leadership before moving on.