Federal News Network has posted an interview with the president of the union that represents Social Security's Administrative Law Judges (ALJs). It's obvious they're feeling beleaguered. I think they, like others, are in the mode of trying to stall the Trump Administration to prevent irreparable damage until after the election, hoping there will be a new Administration next year which will have a dramatically different outlook. They must also hope that if there is a change in the occupant of the White House next January that Andrew Saul does not try to stay on as Commissioner.
Saul has a six-year term as Commissioner. Why wouldn't he fulfill it? Better not count on him stepping down.
ReplyDeleteI think the key to breaking the union is this: Give them everything they want, but they must surrender the title of Judge and become Hearing Officers. If they want to keep the title then they need to give up the right to bargain. I'm betting they would cling to the title even if they know it is a poisoned pill. Now I know it is more complicated than I have stated, but not out of the realm of the possible. Thoughts?
ReplyDeleteIf they are changed to "Hearing Officers" they wouldn't be embarrassed when people ask what kind of "Judge" they are.
ReplyDelete10:29, 11:08: Such pettiness coming from what I'm sure are the two esteemed Supreme Court Justices reading this blog.
ReplyDeleteI actually agree with 10:29 now that think about it. Don’t call yourself immune from politics and completely independent if you are also in a collective bargaining unit at the same time. Seems quite paradoxical. Hahaha. Hearing officer seems way better.
ReplyDeleteI respect most ALJs and the job they do. I understand their political bias before becoming an ALJ plays a part. But most decent ALJs who stick around longer than 5 years or so generally seem to vote based on their own views not the SSA.
ReplyDeleteIn the last 5 years or so, I did see a trend where ALJs seemed to be trained to deny more coming out. When I started out in 2006, it was the opposite. Many ALJs started granting too much and then felt like they were being duped so they would settle into denying more. And after 5 years or so, they settled into their natural grant rate.
Eliminating this independence would decrease the grant rate significantly under this administration.
Vast majority of ALJ's I've appeared in front of have been decent people trying to do their job. I'm saying that as one of those horrible money grubbing attorneys I'm sure you hold in low esteem also. I say screw U system destroyers. I hope Trump goes down and Saul with him.
ReplyDeleteI'm not understanding why this administration is so bent on changing this system. This system has been around and developed as needed. The proposed changes sound more like things dictators do to finish taking over everything and destroy the independence of the Administrative Law Judges.
ReplyDeleteAbout 75% of ALJs are honest people trying to apply the regulations. About 25% think their job is to play gotcha on the claimant’s to deny. In the last years of this program we will see a lot of the 75 quit or get chastised because they won’t tow the line. When I see an exodus of honest ALJs we will know it’s truly the end. i
ReplyDeleteSaul is in over his head, as SSA Commissioner.
ReplyDeleteHe's well into his 70's and should retire before he does further damage to the agency..
He should quit whether Trump is reelected or not. If not, either Trump or the next President should force him out.
Maybe more ALJ's should ask themselves whether their conduct has anything to do with what's going on rather than just blame others/point fingers. And, if they're truthful they might find that blaming others is not exactly correct.
ReplyDeleteYou demonstrate remarkable ignorance. As an ALJ with over 30 years' service, SSA has never treated ALJs decently except under Commissioner Barnhart.
ReplyDeleteThis is not a Trump issue. It's all SSA. Get over your Trump Derangement Syndrome.
12:58 would you still do the job if they changed the title from Judge to Claim Adjudicator or Hearings Officer? Same job, same pay, just a title change?
ReplyDelete@4:26
ReplyDeleteAs a sitting ALJ, if everything else remained the same, they could give me whatever job title they wanted. I don't care one bit about the title of judge. Other than making the decision, I'm not any more important or special than anyone else in the process from DDS on up. I'm certainly not the most important person in the hearing room, though I may self-rank myself second.