I know you are quite interested in Social Security matters and I believe you have a blog where you post various information concerning Social Security news. I am also aware that Commissioner Astrue has not kept his commitments made during his confirmation process that he would work with the employees' union in addressing the disability backlog, as well as other problems facing the Agency. I have pasted two e-mails below that I sent to Commissioner Astrue this month regarding the Agency's Strategic Plan and the barriers we will be facing due to the continuing resolution and shortfalls in funding and staff this fiscal year. I also noted that Deputy Commissioner de Soto and/or Chief Administrative Law Judge Cristaudo have not even met with me to discuss how we can work together to eliminated the hearing backlog and improve the overall processing of disability claims and the quality of such decisions. For the record, I have been employed by the Social Security Administration for 50 years and the Office of Disability Adjudication and Review (formerly Office of Hearings and Appeals) for 36 of those years and believe I can provide constructive input regarding the Agency's failures in eliminating the disability backlog in a more timely manner, improving employee morale and other critical issues facing the Office of Disability Adjudication and Review.
While I speak for approximately 5,000 ODAR employees, their constructive input to me has remained with me because the Agency's leadership does not wish to hear from its dedicated and outstanding employees as to how the Agency's quick fix changes are not the answer to decrease the backlog and improve quality of service. You may post this e-mail to your blog and/or question Commissioner Astrue directly as to his negativity towards AFGE which obviously affected the American people we serve.
James E. Marshall
Acting Spokesperson, AFGE General Committee and President, AFGE Council 215
From: Marshall, James
Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2008 9:37 AM
To: Astrue, Michael J.
Subject: Pre-Senator Baucus (Strategic Plan FY 2008 - FY 2013 and FY 2009 CR)
Importance: High
Sensitivity: Confidential
Commissioner Astrue:
I note that approximately two weeks have elapsed since I sent the e-mail below to you without a response from you or any other individual in the Agency. Prior to referring this matter to Senator Baucus, as well as several other Congressional leaders, I am giving you a second opportunity as the head of the Agency to demonstrate some type of working relationship with AFGE, noting we represent over 40,000 Social Security employees. I still find it extremely difficult to understand why you have such reluctance to work with us to meet the challenges this Agency faces now and will face over the next several years. As you are fully aware, I have been extremely disappointed in the attitudes of Deputy Commissioner de Soto and Chief Administrative Law Judge Cristaudo in that neither of these individuals has met with me and/or has had the common courtesy to be responsive to me regarding a multitude of issues, as well as suggestions, many of which I believe would improve the overall processing of disability claims.
I would appreciate a timely response to this e-mail or I will proceed accordingly in the representation of the outstanding Federal employees who I represent.
James E. Marshall
Acting Spokesperson, AFGE General Committee and President, AFGE Council 215
FW: Pre-Senator Baucus (Strategic Plan FY 2008 - FY 2013 and FY 2009 CR) From: Marshall, James
Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2008 11:48 AM
To: Astrue, Michael J.
Cc: Alfonzo, Carmen; Ennis, Cynthia; 'Ennis, Cynthia'; Fredericksen, Deborah; 'Fredericksen. Debbie'; Joseph, Agatha; Sipple, Cindy O.; Skayne, Susan; Tucker, Earl; 'witold1@attglobal.net'; Hicks, Cathy; Armet, JamesSubject: Strategic Plan FY 2008 - FY 2013 and FY 2009 CR
Good Morning Commissioner Astrue:
Importance: High
Sensitivity: Confidential
On behalf of the AFGE General Committee, I am submitting this e-mail in response to your e-mail broadcast dated September 24, 2008, to all SSA and DDS employees regarding Agency Strategic Plan FY 2008 - FY 2013. At the outset, AFGE notes that in your letter, you indicated that this plan had been developed in part by conferring with our unions which we presume meant AFGE was included. To our knowledge, the only contact that the General Committee had with the Agency regarding the Strategic Plan was a slideshow with notice that if we had comments they should be submitted in writing within 10 days of the slideshow. Unfortunately, we were unable to meet such mandated time frames for submission of any comments and thought that we would subsequently have the opportunity to sit down with you and your executive staff and have a full and open dialogue regarding the Agency's goals. It appears that again, our thoughts and vision for the future SSA have been buried without being heard. Shame on someone because as the representative of over 40,000 employees in this Agency, their voices should be heard through us, especially since they are the most outstanding Federal employees of any Agency.
We recognize that for FY 2009, there will be significant barriers to meet goals because of the continuing resolution and shortfalls in funding and staff. Having said that, we would have thought you would have arranged a meeting with the General Committee to discuss these shortfalls and how we can work together to eliminate the hearing backlog and to improve the overall processing of disability claims and the quality of such decisions, as well as improving all other services for our retirees. To allow the progress in our attempts to meet such challenges over the past several years to erode like the stock market, is unconscionable and you as the Commissioner should embrace the General Committee leadership for the American public we serve to ensure that such erosion does not occur. I await your response on behalf of the General Committee for a face to face meeting with you, your executive staff and our AFGE General Committee leadership.
In closing, please be advised that I, as the President of AFGE Council 215 representing ODAR employees, have yet to have any meeting with Deputy Commissioner de Soto and/or Chief Administrative Law Judge Cristaudo since they been in their positions.
Oct 24, 2008
Union Upset With Astrue
Rosasco Impressed By Astrue
The Transition Approaches
The upcoming change of administrations "will be the most difficult transition since Abraham Lincoln," he said. Even Franklin Roosevelt at least had more time to begin planning to address the effects of the Great Depression (his inauguration wasn't until March 4, 1933) and didn't have to deal with two wars overseas.
As the 2008 campaign nears its conclusion, the presidential transition efforts of the two major candidates have become a study in contrasts: Sen. Barack Obama has organized an elaborate well-staffed network to prepare for his possible ascension to the White House, while Sen. John McCain has all but put off such work until after the election. ...
[O]ne official with direct knowledge, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, expressed concern with McCain's approach. The Arizona Senator has instructed his team to not spend time on the transition effort, according to the source, both out of a desire to have complete focus on winning the election as well as a superstitious belief that the campaign shouldn't put the cart before the horse. ...
With 100 or so days before the next president takes office, Obama's transition effort has been organized into roughly a dozen teams of six to eight people to plot out the approach for each agency, according to a Democratic official. ...
The president and CEO of the Center for American Progress, former White House chief of staff John Podesta, is reportedly heading up Obama's transition team.
Oct 23, 2008
Mostly A Win For UNUM
A news release issued this morning by Washington law firm Phillips & Cohen LLP claiming victory in a trial against Unum regarding Social Security Claims is misleading and filled with inaccuracies. [It looks like Philiips & Cohen has taken the press release off its website.] The jury actually sided with Unum on the majority of claims. The two claims that were decided in favor of the plaintiff resulted in a total award of less than $3,000. ...As part of the trial, Unum produced 1,600 claim files that the plaintiffs then narrowed down to 101 claims that they said should not have been submitted to the Social Security Administration. This number was later reduced to 61 as it was revealed that many of these claims were actually awarded Social Security disability benefits, and in other instances there was no proof that an application was ever made to the government.
To put these numbers in perspective, Unum processed nearly 400,000 disability claims and paid more than $4 billion in disability benefits in 2007. ...
“Of the two remaining claims decided in favor of the plaintiff, we continue to believe they have no merit and we think we will ultimately prevail upon appeal,” Collins added.
Someone Notices That Astrue Is Stretching The Truth
You may never have read Congressional Quarterly, but, trust me, it is an important publication. CQ is required reading for many in Congress and higher levels of government. No one else comes close to covering Washington the way CQ does. Issues that first appear in Congressional Quarterly are often picked up by the popular media. By the way, despite the name, Congressional Quarterly is published daily and e-mail updates throughout the day are available.
Update: The article is now available at CQ's free site.
Oct 22, 2008
He Won't Be Resigning
Oct 21, 2008
Crack Is Awful Stuff
More TVs At Social Security Offices, But Fewer Employees
The National Council of Social Security Management Associations (NCSSMA), an organization of Social Security management personnel, has posted on its website a summary of meetings that its leadership had at Social Security's central offices on September 10, 2008. One of the meetings was with Linda McMahon, Social Security's Deputy Commissioner for Operations.
There is a casual reference in the summary to a hiring ceiling, also known as a head count cap ,at Social Security. I have seen Social Security's budget legislation. There has been no head count cap in that legislation. Has the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) set a head count cap for Social Security? There was legal authority for such OMB set head count caps for federal agencies during the Clinton Administration, but that authority ended in 1999. I can find a 2005 memorandum from OMB saying that it was not setting hiring ceilings at that time, probably because it had no legal authority to do so. I cannot find a record of legal authority being created for such head count caps at any later time. Can anyone explain to me what has been going on?
The summary says that most of Social Security will only be able to replace one employee for every three who leaves, even though Social Security has been receiving and will receive increases in its budget that are considerably more than the rate of inflation. One might infer that because of a head count cap that Social Security is going to lose employees, no matter how much extra money Congress gives the agency as long as George W. Bush is President, but is this cap a legal reality or, more likely, just something that Michael Astrue voluntarily chooses to observe because he is a loyal player on President Bush's team? Again, can someone explain to me where this head count cap is coming from and why Michael Astrue appears to be abiding by it?
Here is an item from the NCSSMA's summary of their meetings which seems to give at least a partial explanation of where the extra money not spent on personnel is going:
Linda indicated resources have been shifted to IT [Information Technology]. Systems is moving forward to buy a small number of large-screen TVs for reception areas for a pilot that will broadcast SSA messages while visitors are waiting, and they are also buying touch screens for visitor check in. The move is now to convert from COBOL to web-based systems and to have a common system for DDS [Disability Determination Services]. Another real issue is the need for a new National Computer Center (NCC). The existing one is rapidly proving inadequate for current needs, let alone the projected increases in demand that are anticipated. It will cost a significant amount to upgrade our infrastructure, but 5 years from now it will be too late to get started. The agency needs to start now.
Proposed Representation Regulations -- Speak Now
The deadline for comments on this proposal is November 7. Few comments have been posted so far. This is an important proposal that deserves the careful study of everyone who represents claimants. Comments may be posted online. I suggest that you not walk away without filing a comment if you review the proposal and find it confusing. Everyone whom I have talked to who has read this proposal has found it confusing. Commissioner Astrue appears to have conceded that there were drafting problems with the proposal when he spoke at the conference of the National Organization of Social Security Claimants Representatives (NOSSCR) recently. The confusing nature of the proposal is worth commenting on.
Cert Petition To Watch
Timothy White of Tulsa, OK is the attorney for the appellant.Docket: 07-1468
Title: Manning v. AstrueIssue: Whether attorney’s fees awarded under the Equal Access to Justice Act must be paid to the plaintiff directly, where it may be attached by the government for outstanding debts, or to the plaintiff’s attorney.
- Opinion below (10th Circuit)
- Petition for certiorari
- Brief in opposition