From a press release:
The national average wait time for a Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) benefits hearing is 538 days, according to Allsup, which has released its latest state-by-state ranking of the hearing backlog. Allsup is the nation’s premier disability representation company.
At year-end, 801,428 people were waiting for a hearing to determine whether they would be awarded their benefits. Overall, the national average wait time has decreased 67 days from an all-time high of 605 days in 2017. The decrease in hearing processing times is due partly to funding received by the Social Security Administration (SSA) in 2018, aimed at tackling the disability hearing backlog.By the way, I'm old enough to remember when it took three months to get a hearing. Those who talk as if anything under a year is a dangerous rush to judgment are nuts. We need a dramatic speedup. It's not reasonable to expect people to wait so long.
The highest wait times still top 600 and 700 days in many cities, including 724 days in Long Beach, California; 706 days in New York City; 690 days in Greensboro, North Carolina; 689 days in Phoenix (North); and 684 days in Fresno, California. ...
8 comments:
"Allsup is the nation’s premier disability representation company."
LOL. If only they'd put as much effort into developing and staying on top of their cases as they do in patting themselves on the back.
Most people involved in the process that would rather have a hearing three months after a hearing request versus 18-22 months. Claimants obviously get heard more quickly. OHO ALJs and writers have a year or more fewer records to go through.
Of course, we'd probably see another unintended consequences post due to a year or more of back benefits that would also be negated. I'd imagine even fewer cases would hit the $6k cap, and there would never be an SSI case that would, unless a prior determination on a previous application were reopened.
The US sucks..I am dying and in pain and noone will help me
I've done a few hearings in under a year when an area was caught up.
Really not great when you have a pending surgery that in theory can have someone able to work before a year has elapsed since onset. Also not good in dealing with seizure disorders since treatment tends to be hunt and peck, altering medications in hopes of finding control. Not unusual for that process to take 6-10 months with a person at or near listing level of seizure activity until the right treatment is found and then a year later the person is driving because they've been seizure free for a year. Also can be an issue in cancer. The disabled for a year provision creates issues because with a number of cancers a person is disabled for a number of months, in large part because of the treatment, but not for a year.
I can't complain about the wait time with the Jackson, MS OHO. They aren't taking a year to schedule hearings for claimants out here in the hinterlands.
I have faith that as the wait time gets shorter and shorter the reps will complain about that too and say it is unfair to the Claimant and doesn't allow time for development blah blah blah.
If a hearing could be scheduled in 3 months, attorneys wouldn't get much in retro pay for the cases they win. While good for the claimants, seems like many attorneys would have to do other types of work.
Always have said the system would work best if it took exactly 1 year from the initial app to get a hearing. Theoretically, a person must be off work at least 1 year.
Will never understand how the U.S. Federal Government could put a man on the moon in 1969 and not adjudicate disability claims in a timely manner. Anything over 1 year is a travesty and national embarrassment.
PS. I know many former Allsup attorneys. They are only the biggest because they represent a large number of long term disability claimants. They force these clients to file for SSD to offset costs.
I've said it before and I'll say it again- Change the business process! The agency has roughly 2500 OHO level attorneys. We need to bring back widespread attorney-level favorable adjudication. current screening unit is too small to make an impact. I have heard the ALJs don't like senior attorney adjudication, but the agency does not even have a new hiring process in place and even then will hire only a handful of ALJs.
If there is concern about too many favorable adjudications, make it a two step process- promote attorneys to GS-13 to screen cases as senior attorneys and promote some of the current GS-13 senior attorneys to briefly review GS-13 justifications to pay. If the agency designated/promoted 1000 SAAs to screen cases, the wait times would go way down.
Post a Comment