From a press release issued by the National Executive Board of the Association of Administrative Law Judges (AALJ), a labor union that represents many of Social Security's Administrative Law Judges (ALJs):
Currently the nation´s Social Security disability insurance program is struggling under a severe case backlog. In some parts of the country, claimants can wait more than two years for a hearing. According to the Government Accountability Office the backlog results primarily from increased applications, staffing shortages and management weaknesses.
The Social Security Administration (SSA) has tried a number of fixes to speed the process including video hearings. In recent years, these hearings have been conducted in special chambers located in government buildings where federal administrative law judges control the camera and where claimants can discuss the most intimate details of their lives and disability, without worrying others will hear. ...
Now, SSA´s management has begun testing a new and until now unpublicized form of video hearing where judges are not in control of the camera, where hearings originate from the offices of private disability lawyers and where no federal employee is present to monitor the hearing and oversee operation of the camera or protect the privacy of claimants.
Judges would like to see steps taken to reduce the backlog and more quickly settle claims, however the use of video hearings originating from claimants´ lawyers laptops is not the solution. Claimants who have paid into the Social Security system throughout their working lives have a right to a fair hearing before a judge in a dignified setting. The new "laptop law" video forum has no provision for the judge to position or move the camera during the hearing. It deprives the judge of control of the hearing process and creates too many opportunities to game the system. It is not hard to imagine a claimant testifying from his lawyer´s office reading testimony from a teleprompter or being coached by another lawyer in the background.
It would be fairly easy to tell if someone was reading testimony off of a teleprompter. Likewise the ALJ would likely be able to tell if a claimant was being coached by someone off-camera. These are two of the many reasons why attorneys would not bother to pull stunts like this while holding video hearings in their offices. Plus, if the judge is controlling the questioning, it would be way too much work to create a "script" for the claimant's testimony AND work out a system to make sure the claimant reads the correct answers to the judge's questions, all the while making sure to do all of this in such a way as to keep the ALJ from catching on. Oh, yeah, and there are rules of ethics/professional responsibility that require attorneys NOT do pull stunts like this.
ReplyDeleteI suppose I am fortunate to work in an area where the most of the ALJs have a moderate amount of respect for attorneys--and by "respect", I mean they do not see us as the "bad guys," or sneaky, conniving bottom-feeders who are trying to get our gov't to award benefits to as many underserving people as possible because we only care about generating fees. It is disappointing to see that the AALJ seems to still think the worst of us.