Article on High Producer

[southernmiss]

Anyone who has worked for ODAR/OHA knows that paying a case is a lot faster and easier than denying one. I have known numerous judges over the years who received accolades for being a high producer, which they managed to do by granting most of their cases. And there is more pressure now than then, so I would expect the number of grants to increase.

[kinyago]

I know cases are assigned on a rotational basis, but is there any chance that this chief judge is getting all the favorables in the office assigned to him? I wonder what the stats of the other ALJs in the office are?

[arlene25]

I seriously doubt it, kinyago. We have an alj is our office that pays everything. And I mean everything.

[aljsouth]

I know a judge that got a child cessation in which the child had been declared disabled by this "high producer" because the child was in special education. The child kind of was in "special" ed. It turned out the child was in the advanced gifted class.

No one with any experience at ODAR, not counting so called management judges, believes this person looks at the facts of over 2000 cases a year. It is not possible. Of course SSA promotes him not once but twice.

[decadealj]

Reasonable people can differ over what's reasonable. IMHO, SSA in its quest to improve uniform decision making, has shot itself in the foot. The PUTT rulings, especially 96-2P, 96-6P, 96-8P and 96-9P can be used to find anyone disabled where a PCP (a true treating source) based on a valid MRI, X-ray, stress test or other test result, opines that his/her patient can't satisfy the physical or mental demands of SRRT for an 8/40 hour work week. We hear cases in the 3rd, 4th and 6th Circuits and the emphasis on VE and ME testimony, treating source opinion, DA&A, and a myriad of other legal issues varies significantly from Circuit to Circuit. The really sad thing is that the PUTT rulings have not done a thing to change DDS refusal to consider the vocational implications of medical findings. In Pennsylvania, we often don't have a state medical opinion in the record and routinely get AC or court remands ordering us to get one. When a non-medical DDS examiner ignore the opinions of a CE ordered by the DDS, things really get dicey! And the Commish wonders why he's got a problem?

[zero]

Wow! That article was really depressing. I also heard a rumor that there’s a guy on the other end of the spectrum that made no decisions for several years before he got fired. Also depressing.

[justfoundthisboard]

If you don't specify a name in the database it will show stats for every ALJ. I skimmed through the whole list and I only recall seeing one person who paid 100% of their cases, and I think there was only 1 ALJ with numbers in the thousands. I guess that is the ALJ who is the subject of the expose.

[hooligan]

Jan 2, 2009 22:49:46 GMT -5 justfoundthisboard said:

If you don't specify a name in the database it will show stats for every ALJ. I skimmed through the whole list and I only recall seeing one person who paid 100% of their cases, and I think there was only 1 ALJ with numbers in the thousands. I guess that is the ALJ who is the subject of the expose.

You can also choose a specific year without naming a judge and then sort the list using Dispositions. There are actually a significant number of judges over 1000/yr. It would be interesting to know how many of those are office Chiefs who may be shifting dismissals and OTR decisions exclusively to themselves.

[justfoundthisboard]

Cool. I just sorted the database by year, and the only 100%-er for 2008 is the Chief ALJ! Of course, he only decided 1 case!!

[frisco]

This database reveals some astounding facts. Probably this was obvious to everyone, but it hits home harder when you see the cold hard facts.

Here is a theory: If I went to the unemployment office today and randomly signed up the first 1000 people that got laid off last week, I could probably get 700 of them paid. Do you agree?

[nonamouse]

Jan 7, 2009 12:46:30 GMT -5 frisco said:

This database reveals some astounding facts. Probably this was obvious to everyone, but it hits home harder when you see the cold hard facts.

Here is a theory: If I went to the unemployment office today and randomly signed up the first 1000 people that got laid off last week, I could probably get 700 of them paid. Do you agree?

Uh. No. Perhaps you are forgetting that everyone seen on an appeal supposedly has a medical condition(s) that affects there ability to function. Everyone in line at the unemployment office does not get there because of a medical issue.

Clearly, many of the claimant's who appeal to an ALJ hearing don't really have a medical condition that would prevent all competitive work, but some of the higher pay rates relate to how the particular state agency does it's job. If a state has people who deny quickly because that is easiest for them, then more people will be paid at the ALJ level in that state. If a state has people who don't consider the vocational issues, then more people will be paid at the hearing level. If a state does not really develop any medical evidence and merely does a quick denial at initial and reconsideration, then more cases will get paid by ALJs in that state because they have a fully developed file.

I believe that there is room for reasonable people to differ on many of our cases, but there are also some cases that get paid due to an ALJ not spending sufficient time on the details in the evidence. Some of those with high numbers are "non-readers," some are more efficient at getting the work done, some get a large number of on-the-record cases that they can pay without a hearing because they are efficient and willing to screen files for the "easy" pay cases, some of these ALJs are HOCALJs who keep all of the OTRs screened by attorneys for themselves. Unless someone spends time with the ALJ and sees how they work or do not work with a file, I believe it would be impossible to say that they are not doing the job properly simply because they move significantly more files than most ALJs.

[decadealj]

Kudos to nonamouse. Anyone who looks closely at "THE LIST" will notice some really "statistcially significant" difference in pay and denial rates for some ALJs year to year. The big reason for the disparity was noted by nonamaouse- big differences in DDS pay rates from region to region. In my experience, there are two big reasons for disparity from region to region: the local economy and state resources dedicated to getting disabled people off of state welfare rolls. When IBM, Corning and Eastman Kodak laid off thousands of skilled workers, who couldn't sell their homes, move or find other employment, the backlog in Syracuse, Rochester and the "Finger Lake" region of New York went through the roof. Many of these folks went from situational to clinical depressiion and qualified for state or county disability and county social workers knew what it took to get a disability claim developed and paid. No such luck in the rust belts of Eastern Ohio and Western Pennsylvania, Atlanta, Georgia or the Easterrn Shore in Maryland for laid-off watermen. The big change for alot of ALJs is doing Video hearings in those regions with the biggest backlogs. I can't prove it but I am convinced regions with the biggest backlogs paid everything they could pay and left the rest (MOST WITH A DA&A component) to sit. When I read the postings of Grace, who I guess is now an ALJ, I wonder where she has worked that she has such bad regard for what are now her predecessors, and if after all thease years with SSA she understands the difference between a POM and a regulation. ALJs are the firewall between the two and my only concern with ALJs who have no outside litigation experience is that they are not so "stove-piped" as to not recognize the difference between the law and policy. The AC executes the commish's policy adjudication function- not the ALJ and that is what is behind FAALJ's paper and proposal to Obama's traansition team.