From a Government Executive article on what is mostly intended to be staffing cuts at federal agencies:
… The Social Security Administration is looking to grow its workforce by 2% after shedding thousands of employees over the last 15 months. The agency said it will “hire strategically across our organization,” with a particular focus on front-line staff. …
How can they increase staffing even modestly with what will amount to a cut in the appropriation when inflation is considered? Are they playing games, assuming Congress will give the agency more than what has been requested? Maybe they just assume theyll have money because they’ll get rid of largely mythical “waste, fraud and abuse.” Maybe it’s a complete fudge. Of course, there’s always the question — why did you force so many experienced productive employees out of their jobs only to hire others who won’t really be productive for months, if not years?
17 comments:
Most of those new hires will also leave or get fires long before they reach basic competence. The work is just too complicated for the people the poverty wages attract.
Wow, where are all the chicken littles who claimed the agency has been “destroyed” now? If they bring back telework there will be even fewer! In Frank we trust?
What is SSA’s current retention?
I can tell you this answering phones all day there isn’t enough money to do that all day! Says a GS 11
Anyone else seeing a surge in problems with insurance and other benefits from inaccurate reporting about disabled claimants? And is this due to staff being pulled to the phones we think?
2%..... sounds like a COLA rather than a work force improvement, and we all know how the COLA goes....
The work is complicated but the wages are hardly poverty wages. $75-88K for a grade 11 step 1 Claims Specialist isn't terrible. Great benefits. The work sucks but the pay doesn't after a couple years.
Almost nobody gets hired at GS-11 for that job. And the issue are new hires, not what people are paid, by your own words, in a couple of years. Think about who you know (if anyone) that would be willing to work for this administration under these circumstances (i.e., zero stability) for GS-7 pay, and then ask if you think those people would be capable of handling the duties of a CS. I can't think of anyone who would do that in the current environment. But that's also the point. "Oh, we can't find people, guess we'll have to train AI to do it," and service will degrade further.
Lots of errors and definitely due to the downsizing as well as moving people to phone duty.
"Put that coffee down! Coffee is for closers only" - Leland
Can we move on with the Leland jokes? He has moved on to a rewarding new role. No way to treat a man who dedicated his career to helping the public.
I don't get your point. This will not save SSA. And I don't trust frank.
The majority of the hiring will be for the 800##. GS 5-7. After initial hiring, at least half will wash out.
My office hired 4 new staff, all college degrees. All left within their first year.
Apparently there is a robust allocation for rehired annuitants. Which again argues, why push them out if you planned to bring them back?
Lol youre funny.
The agency is hiring right now. But it will not go well.
Also they’re not coming back anyway. No one comes back to SSA outside the highest echelons of management.
Follow up 3/6/9/12 months after these people are hired and see how many the agency is able to retain.
Starting people out at GS 5/7 pay (which most of these new hires will start out as) no longer pays the bills in most areas. The jobs are too cumbersome and complex for those wages.
You may get people in the door that have no other good options, but they won’t stay long. It’s a waste of time and resources.
The better option would be to increase the grade level that these jobs are being paid, and bring back some sort of hybrid schedule. That might actually get retention rates up.
Post a Comment