Question, Questions, Questions !

[gadourylaw]

I made the first cut. Do I have to achieve a "satisfactory" score on the WD to go on to the SI or is that automatic ? Also, I researched some of the older threads and saw that the pension plan for ALJ's is not good. I just assumed that it would be great, like state and federal court judges. Does anyone have any specific information re: this issue ?

Congratulations to all, those who made it and those who put forth a good effort but didn't advance this time around.

Thank you in advance,
Mike G.

[lurker]

Once you've qualified to sit for the exam, you qualify for both parts - written and interview. Then those 2 parts are scored and your total score will be made up of your score on the application, the written test and the interview. Don't ask how the 3 parts are allocated - that's a bit of a black box question. The archives here contain lots of speculation on that issue.
As a federal ALJ, you are entitled to the same pension as any federal gov't employee. New hires are considered part of FERS (Federal Employee Retirement System) which contemplates a 3-part retirement plan: Social Security, your contributions to the Thrift Savings Plan, and a small pension. The expectation is that you will take advantage of the Thrift Savings Plan. The problem for many ALJs without prior federal service is that they get this job toward the end of their legal career, when they're not contemplating having to work another 25-30 years just to get a reasonable pension. Nevertheless, that's what they end up having to do. There is a move afoot in the AALJ and FALJ to convince Congress to make some changes to the ALJ pension plan to address this fact (others know more about this - as a long-time fed, I haven't really done the research on the proposal). But the bottom line is that the pension is the same that any fed gets - and that while this may not be the defined benefit type pension available to many state and municipal employees, it's certainly a healthier pension than many people have who are working in the private sector.

Hope this helps

[gadourylaw]

Dear Lurker,

Thank you very much for all of your help. I thought it was going to be a % of salary after so many years (e.g. 80% after 20 years service).

Sincerely,
Mike Gadoury

[emphyrio]

Under the system in effect for new hires, the pension is generally 1% for each year of service, e.g., 20% after 20 years. The percentage gets adjusted somewhat depending on how old you are when you retire.

[gadourylaw]

Dear Emphyrio,

Thank you for your helpful response.

I thought I read in an old posting that the matching program was very generous, like dollar for dollar match by the government, is this true ?

Sincerely,
Mike G.

[emphyrio]

They match up to 5% of salary, although it's not exactly dollar for dollar, in fact they match more than dollar for dollar at the low end. For details, see:

www.tsp.gov/forms/tspbk08.pdf

Of course, just now the TSP is not looking like such a good deal.

[Interested]

Emphyrio's right, although I'd note that a participant in TSP can allocate their TSP savings (and the matching agency contribution) into one of several funds, each of which carries a different degree of risk. For example, one fund tracks a basket of domestic stocks, another a basket of foreign stocks, yet another is in US government-backed securities, etc. Details about the allocations and how/when to allocate are at the website in Emphyrio's posting.

[Pixie]

Oct 3, 2008 7:38:10 GMT -5 gadourylaw said:

Dear Emphyrio,

Thank you for your helpful response.

I thought I read in an old posting that the matching program was very generous, like dollar for dollar match by the government, is this true ?

Sincerely,
Mike G.

You may be confusing two different programs. Emphrio is explaining the retirement program which gives 1.1% credit for each year of service. You have asked about matching funds, which is part of the Thrift Savings Program.

If a judge is appointed at age 55, and retires at age 70, she would have 15 years of service. That would give her 16.5% times the average of her high three years of earnings. Assuming a high average of $155,00, her annual federal retirement would be $25,575. Best to have an alternate plan.

The federal retirement model is predicated on a third each of pension, personal savings, and SSA retirement. I think it is obvious that SSA retirement won't be available for many more years. Also, most lawyers have neglected their savings plans because of various factors, such as the high costs associated with educating their children. So, with the inadequate federal retirement program, many ALJs are forced into working well beyond the age at which they would like to retire.

If one is 55 or over, without a substantial amount of personal savings, one may want to rethink accepting an appointment as a Federal ALJ. Pix.

[gadourylaw]

Dear Pixie,

Thank you for your help/information regarding this matter. I fall into the category of people you described i.e. no money put away for retirement, teenagers attending college etc. I don't know why but I just assumed that the retirment would be generous like the state court judges here in Rhode Island (80
% of salary after 20 years of service, I believe). I am 46 years old and have spent the last 12 years developing a pretty thriving private practice (80% Social Security representation). I am just trying to begin to grasp/analyze the pros and cons of an ALJ position, if offered a position at some point.

Again,
Thank you
Mike G.

[barkley]

Pixie

Forgive me if this is a stupid question, but when you say the percentage is based on the years of service, is that based on years of service as an ALJ or would other government/military service be considered in this context?

Thanks
B

[workdrone]

Oct 4, 2008 20:00:21 GMT -5 barkley said:

Pixie

Forgive me if this is a stupid question, but when you say the percentage is based on the years of service, is that based on years of service as an ALJ or would other government/military service be considered in this context?

Assuming you are currently a federal civilian employee in the FERS system, your years will just carry over. If you are a state or county employee, no such luck. As for military service, FERS allow you to pay a premium and add those years to your retirement credit.

[Pixie]

As Drone says, pay a premium and "buy back" your military time. However, it is a very small "premium" and can be paid by payroll deduction over a period of time. It won't even be missed from the paycheck, it is so small. Important though to keep records of the "buy back" as it has been "lost" in the past. Pix.

[latinlawyer]

What if you are a "retired" civilian federal employee, who took early retirement under CSRS (not FERS), and is currently receiving such retirement? What happens when you start working as an ALJ?

Will you go back in under CSRS and your current pension stop? Or, will you start again under FERS and keep receiving your already earned pension?

Thanks for any information.

[ruonthelist]

Here is a link to the OPM brochure on FERS retirement:

www.opm.gov/forms/pdfimage/RI90-1.pdf

There is at present no retirement plan specifically for ALJs. Instead, there is a retirement plan for civil servants, which includes ALJs. For civil servants hired since the late 80s, that plan is FERS.

FERS is designed with a much more modest defined benefit component than the old CSRS. A FERS retirement is expected to be comprised of three sources of income:

1. Social Security. (pp 3-4 of the brochure) This works like it does with a private sector job, so I won’t discuss it in detail.

2. The Basic Benefit (pp 5-11 of the brochure) This is the defined benefit part of FERS. The formula is based on the average of your three highest years of pay (high 3). Ordinarily you get 1 percent per year of service (including qualifying military service if you buy in) times your high 3. If you have reached age 62 AND have 20 years of qualifying service (you must meet both requirements) the multiplier is 1.1 percent. To illustrate: A new ALJ with no prior qualifying service hired at age 45 would qualify for the following multiples of high 3 at the ages indicated:
62 17%
64 19%
65 22%
70 27.5%

3. Thrift Savings Plan. (pp 12-16 of the brochure) This is like a private sector 401(k) plan. It is explained in the linked brochure and at tsp.gov. The main things I want to emphasize are the variety of funds available and the government match.

There are five funds, three stock and two bond. You can allocate your contributions in any percentage you like, in as many of the different funds as you like. Or you can choose one of the blended “Lifecycle” funds that makes the allocation decision for you.

The maximum TSP contribution is based on IRS rules, and this year it is $15,500, plus up to $5000 more if you are over 50, or will turn 50 this year. The most that the government will match is 5% of your pay. When you fill out the TSP-1 form at training you can list either a dollar amount or a percentage. If you contribute 5% you will be sure of getting all of the government matching funds to which you are entitled. You can, of course, contribute more (up to the IRS limit) or less (down to zero, in which case the government will still contribute 1 percent of your pay). Whatever amount you contribute to TSP will reduce your taxable income.


Judicial retirement systems, both state and federal, start from the premise that judges generally start their employment late in life. FERS does not. FERS was designed with career civil servants in mind, and works reasonably well for them. It can generate a decent retirement income if the employee (a) contributes regularly to TSP and (b) has a lengthy career in federal service. If you join the civil service in your 20s, invest 5 percent or (hopefully) more in TSP and stay for 30-40 you will get 30-44 percent of your high-3, and thanks to decades of compounding, your TSP balance will be substantial. If, like a typical ALJ from the private sector, you start in your 40s or 50s, not so much.

[hooligan]

Oct 4, 2008 8:52:08 GMT -5 Pixie said:

If one is 55 or over, without a substantial amount of personal savings, one may want to rethink accepting an appointment as a Federal ALJ. Pix.

Pix, with all due respect, I match that profile and this job is without question the best job I have ever had. At age 55 in private practice, I had responsibility to pay rent, library, telephone, advertising, staff and myself. I had responsibilities from marketing to training to collections. If I went on vacation, the billing engine came to a halt. My medical insurance was prohibitively expensive. It seemed I worked around the clock.

Now, I get a nice paycheck, I am accruing retirement benefits, I have a great medical plan, I worry only about doing a good job on my cases, I leave the job at the office after 40 hours and I have very little stress. I do not hire, fire, support, administer, market or worry about policy.

I do not like the retirement plan, but it is a whole lot better than what I had. I will probably work as long as I have my health. However, that is not a reason to warn people to avoid the job. It is great. [Yes, there are a number of idiots in management but that is a small price to pay and we are mostly immune.]

[Pixie]

Hooligan: The question was about retirement; that is where my comments were directed. The merits of the job didn't factor into my response. That is a subject for a different discussion. Pix.

[deltajudge]

8-)Hooligan, I think Pixie is mostly right. I decided back in 1976, based on the advice of many of my lawyer friends to forego a career in law and accept the appointment as an ALJ. Although I had some doubts along the way, I now know I made the right decision. However I was only 38. I was a Worker's Comp Judge at the time, and could have written my ticket with any firm in the state, but my lawyer friends pointed out the same things you mentioned about overhead, retirement, etc., and they were right.

[hooligan]

Deltajudge: You raise a good point. My only real regret about the job is that I did not find out about it until late in my career. The retirement options are much better for someone who started at age 38 instead of age 55. However, even at age 55, the retirement options are superior to what I had in private practice.

[counselor95]

[quote
The federal retirement model is predicated on a third each of pension, personal savings, and SSA retirement. I think it is obvious that SSA retirement won't be available for many more years.
Pix.
[/quote]

Pixie, I know this discussion is on another topic, but I can't let this statement, about SSA retirement not being available for long, go unchallenged. Social security retirement is not in terrible shape; Congress has shown a willingness to adequately fund it in the past; there is no reason to forecast "gloom and doom" now. If the American public stands behind it, Congress will fix the funding. As you indicated, social security retirement was never expected to fund retirement 100%; of course, we each have to plan and save, as well.

When it gets down to it, those of us working for the Federal government could apply the same reasoning to worry about our paychecks-- since we all know how quickly those checks would stop if Congress didn't pass the funding bills.

Now, Medicare is another matter . . . but I won't get started on that!
C95

[alj2009]

Hi all,

This is my first post, humor me if I mess it up, please!! I am looking for some clarifications of this seemingly Kafka-esque process!

I was lucky enough to get scheduled for the WD and the SI. After that, I'm clueless. I have been reading everything on this and the other board. Even still......

It looks to me like if you score high enough, you will get onto something called the Register. Then, at some point your name may or may not go on a Cert. Then, you may or may not get offered an actual job. Then, you may or maybe not be allowed to "one free turn-down." Then, you are put at the very bottom of the list, or you stay where you were. Till, who knows when.

Or, you score not so highly, but are put on the Register anyway. Then, you may not ever get on the Cert, so you take the test again next year, or you wait until your name comes up someday. Then you are put on the Cert and then you wait. Or, you get offered a job and have to be there in 2 weeks.

Even if any of this is right, I still can't get a clear picture of what that means to me now. If I do well after the SI, should I expect something to happen soon? Or in a year?
How do you all even understand this?
And finally, does my failure to figure this system out mean I shouldn't even be applying for this job? (That part was rhetorical, btw).

Thanks all for any enlightenment.
Sign me,
"Confused"