New Caseload Analysis Report

      The Social Security Administration has released its Caseload Analysis Report for its hearing functions. It shows a declining number of ALJs and an increasing backlog despite throwing a ton of overtime at the problem.

National Hearing Centers To Close — Also A New Chatbot At SSA

      From Federal News Network:

Decades before the current boom in videoconference platforms, the Social Security Administration launched a similar concept to address workload backlogs.

In 2007, SSA opened National Hearing Centers to have administrative law judges hear more appeals from individuals whose initial retirement or disability claim was rejected. Individuals would show up at their local hearing office to have their appeals heard, but the case would be heard on video by an administrative law judge located in one of these National Hearing Centers.

But with the vast majority of these appeals hearings now taking place fully virtually through modern-day videoconference platforms, the agency is now planning to shutter these National Hearing Centers next week, on May 18. …

SSA is also launching a Policy Assistant Tool (PAT), an AI-powered chatbot designed to give employees access to information more quickly when assisting the public. …

ALJ Hires

      From a job posting for Administrative Law Judges at Social Security:

The incumbent is subordinate to and accountable to the direction and supervision of the Commissioner of Social Security.  …

You must currently hold, or have previously held, a permanent Attorney position at the GS-13 or above for a minimum of 52 weeks. …

Let’s Circle Back To This

      I want to circle back to something that was in the Washington Post article about Social Security’s decision to scrap their plan to reduce or eliminate the consideration of age in making disability determinations. There was this interesting sentence:

… Among the Trump administration’s concerns with using the new [occupational] data is that younger disabled people with cognitive and mental impairments would probably qualify for fewer jobs, potentially leading more of them to be awarded benefits, the former Social Security executive said. …

     OK, so it sounds like they collected data showing that more people with cognitive and mental impairments should be awarded disability benefits but they’re not going to act on that data or even release it to the public. Does that sound like the right thing to do? If the data is subpoenaed for an ALJ hearing shouldn’t it be produced?

     I recall a non-disability case where I asked the ALJ to obtain some information about the case from a field office. The field office sent back a memo literally asking “Don’t you understand that the attorney is only trying to get his client approved?” Would that be the agency’s response to a request for the occupational data that they spent hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars obtaining?

     You might think that an attorney raising a fuss over this might be endangering their older clients since the plan to reduce or eliminate consideration of age might come back. That sounds too speculative to me to take into consideration but if an attorney has clients with conflicting interests, you don’t solve the conflict by deciding which clients to not represent zealously. You solve it by withdrawing from cases. That’s non-negotiable.

ALJs Available Dropping Rapidly

 

From Social Security. Click on image to view full size

Hearing Backlog Starts To Inch Up As Available ALJs Dip Below 1,000

 

Click on image to view full size

Trump Administration Says ALJs May Be Fired At Will

      From the New York Times:

The Trump administration told Congress on Thursday that it believed President Trump had the constitutional power to summarily fire administrative law judges at will, despite a statute that protects such officials from being removed without a cause like misconduct. …

To insulate the officials from political interference, Congress enacted a statute that says disciplinary action, including firings, may be taken against such judges “only for good cause established and determined by the Merit Systems Protection Board on the record after opportunity for hearing before the board.”

Ms. Harris’s letter to Congress also brought to wider attention that the Justice Department had said it would no longer defend the constitutionality of the law protecting administrative law judges in a little-noticed Feb. 11 filing in an appeals court case. …

     The Social Security Administration employs the vast majority of federal ALJs. 

Dwindling Number Of ALJs

     Notice that unless more Administrative Law Judges (ALJs) are hired we will be below 1,000 ALJs in a few months. At one point, there were almost 2,000 ALJs at Social Security.

From Social Security. Click on image to view full size.

OHO Caseload Analysis Report

 

Click on image to view full size

ALJ Hiring

      Social Security has posted an announcement that it is accepting applications for Administrative Law Judge positions. The announcement is only open until Wednesday.

ALJ Hiring?

      Posters on an online message board mostly frequented by wannabe Administrative Law Judges seem convinced that Social Security will soon be hiring more ALJs. We’ll see.

This Is Going To Be A Trip For Those Of You Who Have Never Watched John Oliver Before

ALJs Push Annual Leave Change

     From Government Executive:

Officials with a union that represents administrative law judges at the Social Security Administration are preparing for a push to pass legislation to expand the amount of annual leave they can carry over each year. ...

The Association of Administrative Law Judges said it has been hard at work in recent months to build bipartisan support in Congress for a legislative proposal to increase that cap to 90 days. Officials said the change would be fairer to ALJs who undergo more scrutiny than most other General Schedule employees and could offer a novel way to retain a highly specialized and aging workforce. ...

[The union president] said her organization’s proposal could help the agency in two ways. First, the agency has already seen the headcount of its ALJ corps shrink from 1,645 in 2018 to only 1,170 last year. Data from an internal survey of AALJ members found that in fiscal 2023, SSA administrative law judges forfeited an average of 27 hours of leave per year due to the annual leave cap, compared to just 0.75 hours of forfeited leave on average across the General Schedule from fiscal 2019 to 2023.

At a time when the agency projects the number of initial disability determinations to increase by more than 300,000 this fiscal year—and with them, appeals of those determinations—a boost to the leave cap could allow judges to take more cases. ...

    This sounds like a hard sell to me.

Monthly OHO Report

 

Click on image to view full size

Monthly OHO Report

 

Click on image to view full size

Backlog Of ALJ Decisions

     Over the last few months there's been a dramatic increase in the wait time to receive a decision from an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) here in North Carolina. It affects multiple hearing offices. 

    I can't tell. Is this a national problem? Regional?

    What's behind this problem? I know that some decision writers were detailed to work with Disability Determination on the huge backlogs of initial and reconsideration determinations but this new backlog to receive an ALJ decision seems far beyond anything that could be explained by that.

    Why are they scheduling ALJ hearings if they can't get out decisions?

A Golden Oldie

      It’s a slow time in Social Security world so let me reprise a post from almost ten years ago. The themes coming from shills have changed but the problem hasn’t gone away. I’ve become quicker to delete comments that look phony to me. I do note comments now that appear to me to come from employee unions but it’s hard to tell since there are obvious reasons why many Social Security employees agree with union talking points.

Bombarding This Blog — From November 8, 2013

If you read the comments posted on this blog you might come to the impression that everyone knows that:

• Social Security employees do most of their "work" from at home but they don't really work because they're all lazy. The agency has way too many employees.
• Social Security's Administrative Law Judges are particularly lazy. They approve Social Security disability claims because they're lazy. A lot of the judges are crooks in cahoots with crooked disability claimants and their crooked attorneys.
• Most Social Security disability claimants are just crooks trying to scam the program.
• It's way too easy to get on Social Security disability benefits, especially for "mental illness." Anyone can get on Social Security disability benefits for "mental illness" just by pretending to be crazy.
• SSI child's benefits are the biggest scam. It's nothing but lazy, drug addicted mothers coaching their kids to act crazy. They get child after child on SSI child's benefits and then steal the money to support their drug habits.
• Attorneys who represent Social Security claimants are lazy. They're paid huge sums of money by Social Security but they do nothing for their clients. If anything, they're just crooks who assist their crooked clients in perpetrating fraud.
• There is no money in the Social Security trust funds. The money was all stolen by Democrats. The U.S. government bonds that are supposed to be in the trust funds are meaningless pieces of paper.
• Social Security is going bankrupt.You'll never get back the money you paid in. It's all a scam.

     Some of this comes from individuals legitimately expressing their opinions. However, it's long been apparent to me that most of this is coming from people who have been paid to post online comments about Social Security. Often, these people pretend to be Social Security employees, Social Security claimants or Social Security attorneys. Often, their comments just don't ring true because they're pretending to be someone they're not.

     Does it seem outlandish, even paranoid to think that someone would be paid to post slanted comments online? Take a look at this article from the Baltimore Sun. Officials at the University of Maryland had a problem. They wanted to shift the University's athletic programs from the Atlantic Coast Conference to the Big Ten. They knew that many of the University's alumni would be furious with this move. Here's what they did:

Brian Ullmann, the university's assistant vice president for marketing and communications ... wrote that the school planned to "engage professional assistance in helping to drop positive messages into the blogs, comments and message board sites. I will arrange for this service today." ...

Lee Zeidman, the corporate communications consultant who helped Maryland draft letters and talking points, said Wednesday that it is "standard operating procedure" in the business world to weigh in directly on message boards. "There are special PR agencies who work in the digital space who bombard blogs and newspaper sites where no one puts their name," Zeidman said.

     Who would pay online shills to post on Social Security issues? Pete Peterson and the Koch brothers are the prime candidates. They're tossing around tens of millions of dollars in their fight against Social Security. They certainly wouldn't be going after just this blog. It's quite unlikely they know anything about it. They would mostly be going after message boards at news media sites. However, I don't know that there's any other web site quite like this one where there's an ongoing discussion on Social Security issues. If you're doing an online campaign to malign Social Security both as a social program and as an agency, you're going to come here.
    I wonder how someone who works as an online shill would feel about their job. Would it make them proud? Would they tell their children about what they do for a living?

ALJ Trends

     Social Security's Office of Inspector General has issued a report on Administrative Law Judge Trends.

    Below are three charts from the report. As always, click on the image to view full size.

ALJ Levinson Removed From Job

    Social Security wanted to fire Administrative Law Judge Michael Levinson of Macon, GA for some very unjudicial conduct. The Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) has jurisdiction over this kind of matter. An MSPB ALJ decided to suspend Levinson from his job as an ALJ for 2 years and to downgrade him in rank. Both Levinson and Social Security appealed to the full MSPB which changed Levinson's penalty to what Social Security wanted, firing.

    It's a tiny minority of ALJs who behave as Levinson did but we have to get them out of their jobs. I'm shocked that the MSPB ALJ thought that anything less than firing was appropriate. The behavior here was way beyond the pale.

    By the way, Levinson approved claims at a somewhat higher rate than most ALJs. Would things have proceeded differently if Levinson had a low allowance rate?

OHO Caseload Analysis Report

 

Click on image to view full size