My firm has received senior attorney decisions this month in two cases from two different hearing offices. These are the first we have seen since August 2013.
To what extent is the senior attorney program being resumed? Had it ever gone away completely? What about re-recon? Is that coming back?
Given the backlog, both programs should be resumed in a big way, if there is enough staffing.
It never went away--your commentors have discussed the new (as of last year) NSU program a few different times on here.
ReplyDeleteThe new NSU system/rules limited SAA FF OTRs to decisions relying on meets/equals and strict application of the Grids (i.e., the claimant must not have step 4 problems at the Full Range of the desired exertion, even if the actual RFC has other limitations that may defeat PRW or tsfbl skills). Also, SSA capped the total number of SAA OTRs it would allow every year, though that cap wasn't remotely approached thanks to those strict limitations.
and why were those restrictions put in place?
ReplyDeletea study found a lot of the reversals were without merit......and not substantiated by objective evidence and finding of law.......
What study?
ReplyDeleteJustin
The Senior attorney OTR adjudication program was the sacrificial lamb to appease some of the furor after the WV debacle.
ReplyDeleteThe agency directive at that time was to push fully favorables out the door as fast as possible, with minimal citations to the record or analysis justifying the pay. To say that the SAA fully favorable decisions were any worse than the ALJ fully favorables, is just not true. But it's much easier to slam an agency employee than to attack the ALJs.
So yes, the SAA program was neutered, but not eliminated. I suspect it will return, as the backlog grows.
I wouldn't expect a return to the many cases paid by senior attorneys OTR. The agency has scared ALJs from paying cases OTR (unless they are true TERI cases or the like). I wouldn't expect Senior Attorneys to pay cases OTR unless they to do any differently. Having a goal of OTR cases for Senior Attorneys to pay (as was done in the past) is not likely either.
ReplyDeleteSpoiler Alert:
ReplyDeletethe SAA OTR agree rate and quality review data haven't gotten much better since NSU was instituted. If I were an odds maker, I would put further tightening at 2/3, staying at the status quo at around 2/1, and increased SAA OTRs at about 10000000/1.
Why are the ALJ's so scared to issue an otr in an obvious award? I understand how the few outliers who were issuing several hundred cases otr a month would have stopped but how about the average award rate judge? I can't tell you how many times in an obvious award situation a judge will apologize to me saying they got my brief but they feel they had to hold a 5 min hearing rather than pay it otr. Why do they not have the courage to call it the way they see it?what about their judicial independence?
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteWhy are they afraid? Human nature. No one wants to be called before before Congress to testify about their OTRs. Very unlikely to happen, of course, but why take a chance when you can just hold that hearing and keep Region and Congress off your back? Unintended consequences of the crackdown on outlier judges.
SAA's cam still issue OTR decisions...but not if they are relying on "mental" impairments. at least that's what's going on in my office.
ReplyDeleteThat doesn't mean files with mental impairments can't get an SAA OTR, it just means that the basis of "disability" has to be physical and based on an MSS that is consistent with treating records. This should be common sense, but as noted above, there was abuse in the program and SAA OTR decisions were sometimes without merit.