Let's say that someone other than Carolyn Colvin had been made the Acting Commissioner of Social Security and let's say it's a career employee in his or her prime working years. Let's also say that the Trump Administration decides a priori that Social Security will do just fine with a 20% reduction in staffing. That Acting Commissioner would face a dilemma. The person could forcefully resist internally in which case that person would probably be fired and their federal career would be at an end. That person could quit in protest in which case their federal career would also be at an end. That's tough on a person with a mortgage and kids in or near college.
At her age, Colvin can easily resign in protest. She has no reason to worry about her federal career. She can court firing or quit without concern. If she leaves, she can be very noisy about it. This gives her a certain power that others, younger than her, don't have.
By the way, if you're someone in line to succeed Colvin, what would you do as Acting Commissioner if the Trump Administration orders up something that you know will have disastrous effects? Would you have the courage to resign in protest? Would you be willing to preside over a disastrous situation? Is there some way of squirming out of the dilemma? These may not be abstract questions for a handful of people at Social Security.
3 comments:
Charles, I think you saw Mr. Smith Goes to Washington one too many times during the Thanksgiving break. There are not too many idealistic leaders in todays society. The current crop would kiss the ring and do what they are told.
The agency has been a disaster for years and no one is protesting. Perhaps, just perhaps, you should give new leadership a chance before you decide they are going to make things worse. The agency needs more than just more staff and more money. It needs updated IT systems. It needs reorganization to make it more efficient. For example, why do we have people in local offices doing a dozen different things, none of them well. Why aren't forms sent to a regional or national intake center like the VA does. I've never had the VA lose anything, yet SSA loses things all the time. Its long past time for someone to look at these outdated systems and come up with more efficient ways of processing things. It ain't rocket science. Yet, anytime someone comes along that may make major changes they are met with "sky is falling" type resistance. Perhaps you need to step out of your box and consider that someone new with new ideas might be a good thing. And, while I know the agency has a lot of hardworking good employees, I also know there is a lot of useless dead weight sitting behind some of those desks. For example, it should not take a year and a writ of mandamus filing to get a paper request for hearing processed, but it did. And, to the best of my knowledge, no one was held accountable. That is another thing, someone needs to bring some accountability into this agency. I know of a hearing office manager who submitted a perjured affidavit to a federal court. The fact that is was perjury was proven by the agency's own statistics. Yet, she still has her job. Perhaps a good house cleaning would be a good thing. Certainly, this agency needs drastic change. Yet, anytime someone proposes such, folks like you want to holler and complain that they are the devil. How about wait and see what a new person might propose before we resort to hysterical rantings that the world is coming to an end?
You must be the same individual that expects Santa to come down the chimney every December and nobody comes. It was a beautiful soliloquy but nothing more.
Post a Comment