From CNET:
In December about the status of their disability benefits applications. The average wait time for a decision was seven months, the longest it's been in 14 years, according to a recent report from USA Facts.
Jeff Nesbit, deputy communications commissioner for Social Security, said years of inadequate funding means the agency "cannot keep up with the demand for service and our annual fixed cost increases."
Disability Determination Services, which assesses disability claims, has been hit particularly hard, Nesbit wrote in a September 2022 memo, "due to historically high attrition as workloads become less reasonable with fewer staff."
That was a very informative article. Thanks for the link. I know in 2003 though, the wait for the initial determination was 180 days. Sounds like it hasn't gotten better.
ReplyDeleteThis is the crux of the problem. Not telework, not IT, not the Union, it’s drastic underfunding which means not enough bodies to to the increasing work. Hiring is great but training takes a while and the agency isn’t trying to retain employees, specifically in the DDS. They need massive raises and recruitment benefits. Doesn’t matter how fast SSA works if DDS can’t get a decision made.
ReplyDeleteI wonder how much of that time is field office tim, getting the claims to DDS and adjudicating them when a decision is made.
ReplyDeleteI think it’s going to get worse.
ReplyDeleteOur office has recently seen dramatically LONGER wait times just for initial decisions. Longer meaning it nearly double what this article shows. I think it is going to get MUCH worse and that surge when it is addressed will then pass on to the OHO's.
ReplyDelete@4:37 In a simple case, I send it to DDS the day of the claim, and adjudicate it the day it comes back to DDS. If work development is necessary, there might be up to a 30-day delay sending it to DDS while we wait for information from the claimant or lawyer. On the back end offsets, SSI development, or processing limitations requiring referral to the PC can delay things on the order of a few days to several weeks.
ReplyDeleteThe problem is that FO processing time - a metric which would be useful for targeting improvements on an individual and FO level - is not tracked. The overall processing time is, and becomes mostly a function of the DDS backlog.
They need to turn the CS position into a GS 9-11-12 ladder. Nobody good is going to sign on at a GS-7 starting salary (46k) , let alone a GS-5 (37k)!!!
ReplyDeleteHowever, 55k-65k starting salary gets you into the range that private sector employers, like insurance companies, are offering newly hired claims professionals.
@1:17: I agree. But then the agency would have to reckon with its pattern of underpaying attorneys and other GS-12-13 staff, as they sure as s*** won’t be sticking around to eat s***-sandwiches for the same wages SSA is paying highschool graduates.
DeleteWe just hired a guy with a PHD as a GS-7. It’s a joke. Like he said, he’s just collecting the check until he gets something else. He can make that Money anywhere, he’s just waiting for the right opportunity to leave. That will be another set back for our office as well have to hire someone else and start their training and hope they don’t leave.
DeleteThat's on the hiring manager. Why the heck would they select a clearly overqualified candidate?
DeleteLOL; I have a Ph.D and started as a GS-5 800# rep; I was a good hire, however, as there was mutual awareness that it was a place to start learning the agency and I would quickly end up elsewhere.
DeleteBecause they were the highest graded on the list. In fact, my office hires two of them. One already moved on after a few months. Now this one is just waiting to rollout when the time is right.
Delete
ReplyDeletePay needs to be increased at every level to get good efficient staff. Just throwing bodies at the problem just creates more problems.
@10:26. rethink your hiring methods. I am a manager and have hired 30+ people at SSA. I made the mistake of overqualified once. THe excuse they were the "highest graded" is just lazy. Hire people that are the best fit, not necessarily to most qualified. As a hiring manager, you need to consider personality, long-term fit, trainability, etc. Do better.
ReplyDeleteYeah, telling managers to just ignore the law and hire from outside the most qualified list is not a legitimate solution. Your habit of doing so will catch up to you someday.
DeleteSSA has been granted Direct Hire Authority, so we are no longer forced to pick overqualified people. In fairness, the agency has been slow rolling this info to hiring managers.
Delete