Mar 11, 2013

Employment Down 2% In Last Year

The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) has posted updated figures for the number of employees at Social Security.These figures do not show the effects of reductions in overtime at Social Security.
  • December 2012 64,538
  • September 2012 65,113
  • June 2012 65,282
  • March 2012 65,257
  • December 2011 65,911
  • September 2011 67,136
  • June 2011 67,773
  • March 2011 68,700
  • December 2010 70,270
  • June 2010 69,600
  • March 2010 66,863
  • December 2009 67,486
  • September 2009 67,632
  • December 2008 63,733
  • September 2008 63,990
  • September 2007 62,407
  • September 2006 63,647
  • September 2005 66,147
  • September 2004 65,258
  • September 2003 64,903
  • September 2002 64,648
  • September 2001 65,377
  • September 2000 64,521

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

So about the same as 10 years ago, with twice as many ALJs, several NHCs, better internet access than any time in history, boomers filing RIB online.

Yeah those numbers are about right.
No problem there, likely there is at least 5% in middle or upper management that could go and no one would ever notice. They seem to be doing fine.

Anonymous said...

What people do not understand is that nearly half of SSA's workload is SSI-related. That has exploded, and the field offices are buried in SSI work that simply cannot get done. Being able to file RIB online does not mitigate that. Besides, online RIB claims still have to be processed by actuual bodies. It does not really reduce the amount of manpower needed significantly. It simply saves on the time spent taking a phone call to set up an appointment or for the receptionist to deal with them in the office.

Anonymous said...

Whether intentional or just the practical result of various pressures, SSI became backdoor welfare after Clinton-era welfare reform coupled with some favorable Supreme Court cases and reg changes. Not because more people are disabled, mind you, but because SSI became de facto welfare (and there's a good case to be made that it had to).

Anonymous said...

SSI now costs over $ 51 billion dollars annually in payments, not counting administrative costs. Half that amount could be returned to the states in block grants if SSI were de-federalized, saving the taxpayers over $ 25 billon annually.

Anonymous said...

Thats the way it used to be before SSA took over the program. The Feds had to step in when each state made its own rules on who was disabled and what conditions. People living in one state could drive across the "border" to another state and be eligible. It was a way to drive people out of the state.

I dont see how giving it back to the states does anything to save money. You still have to pay the state in the block grant. The state in turn will need people to process the claims, office space to do so and rules and regulations. If denied where do the people go to get a Hearing? More state ALJs to do the work?

I see no savings, a way for the states to abuse as they did before and the money going to other programs.

Anonymous said...

SSA field offices are better characterized as servicing the welfare population. The numbers, job types, and pay grades appropriate for employees handling these workloads should match the needs and technology necessary to process the work. To properly determine staffing needs, will there ever be data made available that shows how many visits are made yearly for replacement SSN cards because of needs-based programs? How about the number of SSI aged applications filed yearly and the number of those receiving SSI aged benefits for those not born in the USA? Has SSI aged benefits become the International Retirement Plan for those 65 and older lucky enough to legally enter the USA, and what efforts should be made so interviewers are available in order to reduce their interview and claims processing waiting time? To what degree has the disablity program become the benefit of last resort for those whose last child is too old for welfare or for those who finally ran out of their extended unemployment benefits? These economic and political issues have a strong impact on prioritizing government staffing needs. Do meeting these needs have a higher priority compared to the government's need to monitor food safety, airport security, provide for national parks, etc.? Payment center employees are not really needed to serve those populations, and field offices would appreciate an acknowledgement of these facts to justify a better balance of staffing vs. service needs for these demographics and political factors for SSA/SSI workloads.

It is not just numbers, but also the pay grades for SSA employees that should be considered. Do we really need GS-11 CRs and the variety of GS-12 non-management staff in SSA offices? With the explosion of internet claims, ever increasing computerization of workloads (the public does successfully handle a variety of online actions without specialized training or years of experience), most of these GS-11 and 12 employees grades are more realistically set at the GS-10 level or below, and we do not need so many of them. Reduction in these numbers should also lead to the reduction in the numbers and pay grades of some management positions, and perhaps closing small offices. In the final review, SSA may need more employees (perhaps to assist in ObamaCare and/or any Immigration Amnesty workloads), but these will likely be hires for SR or clerical workloads that will include temporary hires as well. Look at staffing and payroll, permanent and tempory types of workloads, online/computerized and human interactions needed to process workloads, and be flexible enough to quickly find a balanced solution that respects the ability of the people paying the government's bills to also satisfy their own personal needs.

Anonymous said...

Do we really need GS-11's to process claims? The answer is yes! The problem is that almost anyone could get a government job and once on the job for 2 years are almost impossible to fire because of the union. Now I'm not perfect, I make my share of mistakes here and there, but some in my office don't care at all and screw things up constantly. If you want someone making $10.00 an hour processing SSI claims, you might as well let the claimants "self adjudicate" - it would be about the same quality.

As for top heavy management in the agency, that's probably very true. My office has almost as many 12's as it does 11's, 9's and 8's put together and that's not good. I suspect most goverment agencies are staffed the same paying large salaries to people who don't actually process the work.

Anonymous said...

Given the total numbers of SS employees is decreasing, has there been a decrease in management numbers and the numbers at headquarters?
Or, is this a silly question.

Anonymous said...

No Contact letter sent, SSI to FLA-B with reduction 1/3. No response, $50 penalty fee, no response, $1 payment. You see them in office the day after checks. Check Nexus Lexus, run some queries, look at a SID, take a call, do an interview, file and ABAP. Yawn.

SSI is tough.

Anonymous said...

SSI isn't hard. It's just very time consuming. The work you're describing sounds like the mess I usually clean up.

Anonymous said...

$75K a year, every Federal Holiday off (and when an ex-pres dies) most sick days of any job ever, generous vacation, cheap health insurance, TSP, reduced cell bill for fed employee, flex time, whats not to love.

I belive that can be converted to cash in 20 days, denied.
In kind support and maintenance, reduce.
Rent well below local average, reduce.

Yawn.

Anonymous said...

Nope