Social Security Administration Commissioner Michael Astrue is overseeing one of the largest federal hiring efforts currently under way. He wants to bring in about 6,500 new employees by fall to reduce claims backlogs and address other needs. In an interview with Federal Times last week, he emphasized the importance of diversity in hiring and the challenges of training a workforce with so many new employees. ...
Following are excerpts of the interview:Q: Both the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and the fiscal 2009 appropriations gave SSA significant allocations for hiring. What advances are you making in hiring?Astrue: We’ve hired as of [May 26], since the first week in March, about 3,700 people. So we have almost another 3,000 to try to hire between now and the end of September. If we get Congress passing the president’s budget on a timely basis, we’ll continue hiring. We should be up over about 68,000 employees at that point. We’ve dipped as low as about 60,000 in the past. So this makes a big difference, particularly in our ability to serve the public.Q: What about administrative law judges to adjudicate decisions on the nearly three-quarters of a million in disability claims backlogged?Astrue: We are, this week, hiring 157 new administrative law judges, and the budget for next year calls for hiring another 208. We lose about 60 to 65 a year. [Currently, 1,150 are on board.] That means we’re also opening up a lot of new hearing offices; so we have 17 new hearing offices [for a total of 157] ... and two new national hearing centers [for a total of four]....Q: How have you approached working with the unions?Astrue: You try to talk directly, develop relationships. Sometimes that’s worked well; sometimes that worked well for a while, and then did not work very well … In general, if you commit yourself and this is true on both sides of the table, to talking regularly, candidly and professionally, people find common ground. There’ve been some instances where, once we’ve talked about things or where things were raised for us, they’ve expected to have opposition, and we weren’t opposed. But if you don’t talk on a regular basis, you miss some of those opportunities.
Jun 2, 2009
Lots Of Hiring? Committed To Talking With The Union?
From the Federal Times:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
Well, they are going to have to hire one additional attorney as I am leaving SSA in July. I cannot even describe how much it sucks to work as an attorney with SSA. The job is total third tier toilet.
Second only to being an ALJ. I used to love it! It was fun and rewarding. But now an ALJ is a glorified data entry clerk doing GS5 data entry most of the day, which is why I retired in January after 27 years. Do they really think they can keep people with our level of education on the job treating lawyers and judges the way they do?
And I can't believe Astrue is still talking about National Hearing Centers. Didn't he read the arbitrator's decision in AALJ v. SSA? This is what the Arbitrator said:
"Based on the Agency's actions, and the comments of the Commissioner, one must conclude thtat the Agency did not believe that it could take a straight forward approach to setting up the NHC's and at the same time ignore the Union. It knew if it did so it would be required by law to engage in I&I bargaining. Accordingly the Commissioner determined that he would take a more circuitous path to try and avoid I&I bargaining. He made a calculated decision that if the Agency opened a completely new entity (NHC), and designated the ALJs as supervisors, the Agency could perhaps avoid I&I bargaining altogether. Since the arbitrator finds that the record does not support the alleged supervisory status, he is compelled to conclude that the Agency had an obligation to engage in I& I bargaining concerning the changes in the conditions of employment for ALJs at the NHCs. ... If this expansion can be accomplished without bargaining with the Union, it severely undermines the Union's authority and denies numerous employees, who are clearly doing bargaining unit work of their representation." The Arbitrator went on to say "The Union essentially got the back of the Commissioner's hand and thereafter he refused to ever meet again to discuss the NHC's. In the course of refusing to bargain, the arbitrator finds that the Commissioner clearly exhibited anti-union animus in violation of the Statute. He made it abundantly clear that he intended to circumvent the CBA."
It seems apparent that he doesn't much care what the Arbitrator found either! The law be damned says Astrue I am Commissioner and I will do as I please! Wasn't Ceasar killed for similar action? And a few English kings beheaded?
Sometimes I wish I weren't so devoted to the rule of law! One can only hope that Congress will reign him in!
What freaking whiners, what you were doing GS-5 work for 120 or 130k a year. What if you had to do GS-5 work on GS-5 pay, then you would have something to cry about.
"Do they really think they can keep people with our level of education on the job treating lawyers and judges the way they do?"
Did you have a MOD manager threaten to write you up as AWOL for being 5 minutes late from lunch? Try working the real world of SSA, PC MOD, Field Office or Teleservice Center taking those freaking 800# calls. Then all you over paid prima donna could b*tch about being treated like dirt.
"he emphasized the importance of diversity in hiring."
SSA isn't freaking Noah's Ark, two of these and two of these. Hire the best people and stop trying to make NOW, NAACP and La Raza happy.
Hey at least you all don't have to be a state DDS examiner. I'd be happy to be paid more than the GS-7 level for the amount of work I'm expected to produce and the overwhelming nonsense I have to endure.
Sounds like there are a lot of unhappy people working for SSA. Time to retire and let in some of the unemployed who would love and appreciate a good federal job.
To A3: Based on 4 comments you feel like you can state that there are a lot of unhappy people working for SSA. Hmmm...I don't think I'd base such a statement on that kind of observation.
Kevin
Hey, Kevin, I would love to know what FO you work in, if any. You apparently are totally oblivious to the meltdown that is occurring across virually the entire rest of the agency. There are, in fact, a LOT of unhappy people working for SSA. The unhappiness stems directly from our inability to help the claimants whose welfare and well-being is in our hands by law, due to catastrophically inadequate staffing. We are not unhappy because our jobs are bad. We are unhappy because we are not allowed to do a good job because we have no resources.
If you are aware of the situation and it does not make you unhappy, you have no business working at SSA. SSA is for hardworking people who care.
This Kevin guy is the same type of brown-noser that is screwing things up for the merit-driven employees.
I'm an SSA employee and I'm with Kevin. You can be concerned about improving SSA's service while still able to enjoy your job - the two issues needn't be mutually exclusive. It's too bad that most folks who choose to post to this site as so negative. Kevin is one of the few with the guts to express an oposing, though not unique, view. It's not all roses, but it's also not as horrible as some here would like to believe.
Kevin is right. SSA certainly has problems. But if you don't like your employer, by all means find something else. If you think you would be happier in the private sector, please go!
Kevin is just doing his best with limited resources and realizes that supervisors and managers are not the enemy. A lot of these negative comments come from ignorance, not experience.
My comment #3 was not about being unhappy in my job, it was directed to the ALJ that makes more money than most at SSA and also probably gets treated better than most SSA employees crying about how awful things are at SSA for ALJs.
Now the one thing I was serious about is that 800# job. I used to do that and would rather pickup trash than do that again.
Post a Comment