O'Malley's Tenure As Commissioner

     From a piece in Government Executive about Martin O'Malley's too brief tenure as Commissioner of Social Security:

Social Security Commissioner Martin O’Malley on Wednesday described his nearly a year in charge of the embattled agency responsible for administering Americans’ retirement and disability benefits as one of the “greatest honors” of his career in government and politics. ..

O’Malley told Government Executive on Wednesday that he was “enormously proud” of the agency’s beleaguered workforce, which was able to find significant customer service improvements despite operating at a 50-year staffing low and serving the most beneficiaries in history. ...

[T]he public’s preference for telephonic and video disability hearings–with 90% of new requests being through those avenues–has made it easier to optimize administrative law judges’ workloads regardless of geographic location. ...

Jim Borland, the agency’s assistant deputy commissioner for analytics, review and oversight, said he will be retiring after a 40-year career in the federal government next month, and that this final year was “the most fun” he’s had at work in those four decades. ...

New Regs On Setting the Manner of Appearance of Parties and Witnesses at Hearings

     The Social Security Administration has posted final rules on Setting the Manner of Appearance of Parties and Witnesses at Hearings. These formalize the procedures already in place allowing claimants the option of either an in person, video or telephone hearing. 

    The pandemic changed the Social Security Administration in many ways. This may be the most enduring change.

CCD Comments On Proposed Regs

  

   The Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities (CCD), a large umbrella organization of non-profits who aid the disabled, has filed comments on Social Security's proposed changes in its regulations on manner of appearance at hearings. Their most important comment is to oppose changing the default manner of holding hearings from in-person to telephone. Now, if you don't specify, you get an in-person hearing. The proposed regulation would flip that.

Numbers Please

      The common wisdom is that claimants receive the same decision whether their hearing is in person, over the telephone and by video but do we really know? We think we know that the rate at which claimants were approved did not decline, at least to a significant extent, when the pandemic began and the switch was made to telephone hearings but do we know this for sure? I don't recall ever seeing any numbers from the Social Security Administration. A 2% difference probably wouldn't be enough to be noticeable without numbers from a database but a 2% change is not insignificant for a claimant. For that matter, numbers from the beginning of the pandemic are not the same as numbers from the current environment in which claimants can choose the method, although maybe "choose" should be in quotes since many law firms and other representing claimants -- and not just national firms -- always advise phone or video, mainly because it's more convenient for them. I doubt that the differences between phone, video and in person are great but we ought to get the numbers. 

    I have to say, though, that there will be confounding elements to the numbers, if we ever see them. In person is now the default mode. That's where a claimant ends up if he or she doesn't make a choice but unresponsive claimants certainly get denied at a higher rate than claimants who choose a method for their hearing. Also, the selection of video is one generally made by better educated claimants. Their chances of success may be different than for less well educated claimants who can only do telephone hearings. Yes, many, perhaps most, Social Security disability claimants lack the technical skills to download an app, register with the app and then access the app when the time comes for their hearing. There's also the problem that those who live in small towns and rural areas are more likely to select telephone or video since they have to travel farther for an person hearing than those who live in urban areas. Rural and urban claimants don't necessarily get approved at the same rate. Rural claimants, on average, have lower educational levels and less access to health care than their urban cousins.

Making It Official

     The Social Security Administration has posted a Notice of Proposed Rule-Making (NPRM) in the Federal Register to make official the availability of telephone and video hearings in Social Security cases.

Phone And Video Hearings Not Going Away

     Not that there was any doubt, but Social Security has decided to make telephone and video hearings a permanent option.

    This is extremely convenient for "national" firms representing disability claimants.

Trying To Cram Telephone/Video Hearings Down The Throats Of Claimants?

     Yesterday I received word through the National Organization of Social Security Claimants Representatives (NOSSCR) that the number of hearings Social Security has scheduled for July and August is down more than 30%. We are told that they will try to schedule more hearings if we'll agree to hearings being held without receiving the notice period required by the agency's regulations and agree that the hearings be held either by telephone or video. 

    I've got three questions:

• Why has the agency scheduled so many fewer hearings this summer? It's not like they're run out of cases to schedule.
• If the problem were merely scheduling, why is it necessary to put pressure on claimants to accept telephone and video hearings? If you're doing in person hearings, you're doing in person hearings.
  
• Will there be a continuing effort to cram telephone and video hearings down the throats of destitute claimants by scheduling those hearings far more quickly?