Earlier today, a staff member at my firm called Module (or Mod as they are usually called) 3 at Social Security's Program Service Center in Birmingham, AL to inquire about a case. Mods are where the actual work of putting claimants on benefits is done.
The staff member was told that Mod 3 was 53 days behind on its workload -- and I suspect that that is 53 days behind in even starting each workload item, not on finishing each workload item.
Commissioner Astrue has conceded that Program Service Center backlogs will grow over the course of this year, because few departing program service center employees will be replaced.
The claimant in the case about which my firm had inquired has now been waiting about three and a half months after a favorable decision for payment of back benefits. The delay occurred because Social Security took an unnecessary Supplemental Security Income (SSI) claim, which was denied due to excess income. However, this SSI claim lived on in Social Security's computers. Once she was approved, the Title II back benefits could not be paid until something was done about SSI, because of windfall offset concerns. No one did anything about implementing SSI benefits, because there was nothing to implement. Would the back benefits ever be paid without someone raising questions? I cannot say. I can say that it will be quite some time before this lady's back benefits will be paid, through no fault of hers.
I predict that Social Security's response to this post will be to tell Mod 3 and other Mods not to tell attorneys anything specific like 53 days; just keep it vague and pretend that things are not as bad as they are, because if Social Security admits that things are bad, then Social Security would have to admit that its current budget is inadequate, and that is not what the Commissioner of Social Security wants to admit.
The staff member was told that Mod 3 was 53 days behind on its workload -- and I suspect that that is 53 days behind in even starting each workload item, not on finishing each workload item.
Commissioner Astrue has conceded that Program Service Center backlogs will grow over the course of this year, because few departing program service center employees will be replaced.
The claimant in the case about which my firm had inquired has now been waiting about three and a half months after a favorable decision for payment of back benefits. The delay occurred because Social Security took an unnecessary Supplemental Security Income (SSI) claim, which was denied due to excess income. However, this SSI claim lived on in Social Security's computers. Once she was approved, the Title II back benefits could not be paid until something was done about SSI, because of windfall offset concerns. No one did anything about implementing SSI benefits, because there was nothing to implement. Would the back benefits ever be paid without someone raising questions? I cannot say. I can say that it will be quite some time before this lady's back benefits will be paid, through no fault of hers.
I predict that Social Security's response to this post will be to tell Mod 3 and other Mods not to tell attorneys anything specific like 53 days; just keep it vague and pretend that things are not as bad as they are, because if Social Security admits that things are bad, then Social Security would have to admit that its current budget is inadequate, and that is not what the Commissioner of Social Security wants to admit.
2 comments:
My uncle in TN (serviced my Mod 3)received a fully favorable T2 decision in late August 2007. He finally received his T2 backpay in February 2008. He was told by his local DO that the reason for the delay was the same as in this case - the need to process an unwarranted T16 claim that should never have been taken by SSA.
You will see more and more of these T16 claims throwing a wrench into the payment of the T2 claim. In my metropolitan California office, the T2 CR's are instructed to take T16 abbreviated claims, ABAPs, in all T2 RIB and DIB claims, regardless of the merits or feasibility of T16 entitlement. The manager and supervisors make this a 'must do' rule. The more ABAP claims that are taken, the more work units the office earns and work units equal increased staff. My manager plays this game very well and has been doing it so long, he never seems to see the futility of his employees spending time doing work that doesn't need to be done at the expense of work that needs to be done. And this attitude is pervasive across the field office staff up through the regional commissioners. If it wasn't, the practice would be stopped.
Yes, there are processes in place in which the field office notifies the payment center that windfall offset does not apply because there is no SSI entitlement. That is part of my job as an SSI TE. However, these cases come up on my to do list and no one in management asks me about them unless they are 120 days old.
The payment center staff sometimes calls to see if windfall offset applies, but when they try to figure it out on their own, it seems they are wrong about 1/2 of the time. It would be nice if we could go back to offsetting whichever program paid benefits second, but that procedure was eliminated unless the T2 gets erroneously released without windfall offset.
Post a Comment