Another newspaper piece, this one from Buffalo, blaming Social Security field office closures on the foolish, heartless Social Security Administration. The rational conclusion after reading this and other similar pieces is that Social Security must have terrible leadership. No mention is made in this piece of Social Security's limited appropriations. It's all about bad decisions made at Social Security.
I really wonder whether this run of articles around the country on this subject is happening spontaneously or whether some group is promoting this.
8 comments:
Charles: "No mention is made in this piece of Social Security's limited appropriations."
Article: "Agency officials have said that they have received $1 billion less than requested by President Obama in the last three years to operate, which has led to closings, consolidations and reduced office hours."
Moreover, it's an opinion piece and is labeled as such at the top.
Obama and SSA requested sufficient $ to avoid service cuts. The Repubs controlling appropriations in the U.S. House of Reps did not deliver. Therefore the Repubs own the flack for service cuts. They knew when they refused to approve the needed funds what would happen. It will be fun watching the spin doctors try to deflect the blame from where it belongs.
Your readers should be aware that SSA execs are traveling around the country on junkets, staying at fine hotels and bothering folks in the field offices for no good purpose...
SSA has the necessary funding to provide needed services, but chooses not to spend it wisely enough. Moreover, the latest push is towards online activities and more centralized work units -- such as the National Case Assistance Center opening in Baltimore that will house around 300 employees, most of whom will be new hires.
Anon 4:51:
When you look at SSAs large numbers of lost staff over the past few years, and the historically high service demands due to demographic factors, you can't get around the fact that SSA needs to hire and train up a lot of new people. That takes increased funding which congress still refuses to adequately provide, despite repeated asks and warnings of resulting service cuts. If it weren't so sad, it would be funny to see congresspersons complain about reduced services and SSA offices in their district closing, when their own failure to adequately fund SSA is what caused it.
cuts cause problems, but the article is right...SSA management makes terrible decisions.
With good management, the cuts would be difficult. With SSA management, the cuts are almost impossible to handle and it seems like the solution is to just add more layers of management.
With more than 30 years of work at SSA under my belt (both in the BU and in senior management), it's my opinion that SSA is facing a serious crisis in leadership. Some of the most senior positions are occupied by the weakest and most ineffective leaders the agency has ever had to endure. Given the challenges ahead this may prove to be disastrous.
It's true that lack of funding is a problem, but it's certainly not the biggest problem facing the agency...not by a long shot.
SSA has PLENTY of money. The agency has been hiring a plethora of lawyers in Baltimore and Falls Church - lawyers who are assigned exclusively to give extra scrutiny to favorable decisions before and after they are paid. Meanwhile, upper management is squeezing/closing FOs because doing so gets the public's attention and raises an outcry for more funding, which is exactly what the fat cats at the top don't need.
Post a Comment