... I wasn’t asked to come here because everything was going great, right? We’re in a customer service crisis; that cannot be denied. ...
There is a theme running through this stuff [I've done]: It’s small.
[W]e executed on a bunch of little short-term, quick wins. Our new general counsel has probably said yes in 60 days more than any [Office of General Counsel] leader has said in 10 years. ...
I have been unpleasantly surprised by how dire the staffing situation is. ...
[W]e’ll be rolling out an action plan for the remainder of the year that will better organize over 150 actions under 21 initiatives, all of which are intended to take a bite out of these processing times [at Disability Determination Services]. ...
Clearly we need a more modern assessment of the widely available occupations out there [used in disability determination]. And we are taking a fresh look at this project [to create a new occupational data system], and at what we forecasted we might have to spend. ... Many members of Congress expressed their concern about the amount of money that we have put into this and the amount of time that it has taken. There’s still a systems component, and that also has a price tag. I would say it’s a big policy issue. There will be some winners, some losers. ...
5 comments:
Nothing will change unless O’Malley gets proper funding from Congress. O’Malley needs to do more interviews and spread the word on how the agency is in dire need.
What's the story about the new GC?
Unlike the previous OGC who was (in)famous for rejecting any and all reform, new OGC is showing more flexibility in legal analysis.
The change to the T. II default rate from 100% to 10% is just one example. Former OGC said could not do it.
Nonsense.
O'Malley has been a disaster. Talk about wasting money: he's spending countless dollars to open new facilities and force workers back into the office when those workers are more productive at home. Morale is at the lowest it has ever been.
@10:02 PM. I don’t think you understand that the Commissioner didn’t really have a choice about our return to office.
1. The President directed increased in office presence.
2. Even if you disagree with the sentiment that in person work increases collaboration and effectiveness (and I’m not sold on that myself), we still had to come back for the simple reason that, if we had not, no matter what else the agency does, many in Congress would rebut any and all arguments that SSA needs more resources by saying some version of “Bull…you have not even told your staff to get back to work.” If you think SSA is under-resourced (and I do) and if you want to see that change (and I do) and if you understand that Congress has to act to make that change, then return to the office is a necessary step towards that goal.
Post a Comment