Proposed Regs On CDRs

     Social Security will publish proposed regulations on the frequency of continuing disability reviews in the Federal Register on Monday. You can read the proposal today.

     They propose to add a new category, Medical Improvement Likely (MIL), to be reviewed every two years. MIL is aimed at a group of impairments which they say fit between the categories of Medical Improvement Expected (MIE) and Medical Improvement Possible (MIP). They say they will include anxiety related disorders in this category. I don't understand that. Anxiety disorders don't respond well to treatment. Panic disorders, the most commonly disabling anxiety disorder, are quite unresponsive to treatment.

     They propose to increase the frequency of reviews for the category of Medical Improvement Not Expected (MINE) from seven years to six years.

     Overall, they expect to increase Continuing Disability Review (CDRs) by more than 1.1 million a year.

     I love how this is all couched in language about helping people get back to work. That's baloney.  Disability benefits recipients already have plenty of incentives to return to work. Some people who are cut off benefits return to work; many don't. This certainly doesn't help anyone return to work.

     This is just a proposal. The public can comment. Social Security must review the comments. Once the agency is finished reviewing the comments and making any changes they want to make, it has to go back to the Office of Management and Budget for review before publication as final regulations. This process may extend past the next inauguration day. Even if pushed out before that date, an incoming Administration may decide not to implement them.

Win For NTEU On Telework

     The Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) has given the union (NTEU) that represents attorneys and decision writers in its Office of Hearings Operations (OHO) a win on telework. Social Security unilaterally terminated its contract with the union and refused to agree to terms requiring telework. FLRA ruled that Social Security had failed to produce evidence to back up its case and ruled for the union.

Bonus For Promptness

     From Emergency Message EM-19032:

This emergency message (EM) provides instructions on how to handle inquiries from a one-time notice that was sent to correctional and mental health reporters and facilities.

On October 25, 2019, SSA mailed a one-time notice to participating correctional and mental health reporters and facilities to inform them of a change to Title XVI incentive payments. This letter is a follow-up and reminder sent to the original notice we previously sent to correctional and mental health reporters on July 2, 2018. ...

The new Title XVI incentive payment rules provide the following:

For every Title XVI recipient we suspend due to the inmate information provided, we will pay the institution:

· $400 for information received within 15 days of the confinement; or

· $200 for information received after 15 days but within 90 days after confinement. ...

Social Security Wants Info On Which Disabled People To Target For Reviews

     From a notice from the Social Security Administration that will appear in tomorrow's Federal Register:

We are announcing the fourteenth National Disability Forum. The purpose of this public forum is to obtain feedback from experts in their field on what impairments have a likelihood to improve. This forum will be moderated,and include up to five panelists presenting information on the topic. Additionally, there will be a combined question and answer session during which the panelists will address questions from those on site and received by email during the forum.

DATES:Tuesday December 3, 2019 from1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.

ADDRESSES:Meeting Location: Partnership for Public Service, 1100 New York Ave NW, Suite 200 East, Washington, DC 20005 ...

     The truth is that there are very few Social Security disability recipients who are likely to improve. Why? The one year duration requirement in the definition of disability enacted by Congress. If you're going to be disabled for at least a year, you're very unlikely to improve significantly thereafter. You could easily find a lot of disability recipients to cut off if you just reduced the duration requirement to three months.
     By the way, remember that Social Security will probably soon publish proposed regulations having to do with disability terminations. You can see that something is coming. I'm sure they want to find a way to cut a lot of people off disability benefits. I doubt they'll succeed but we'll see.

Working Conditions At Social Security In Its Early Days

Click on image to view full size

Proposed Regs On CDRs Coming

     The Office of Management and Budget has cleared for publication in the Federal Register a package of proposed regulations on the frequency and notice of continuing disability reviews. This is only a proposal. The public may comment on the proposed rules. This proposal had been pending at OMB since March 13. That's an extraordinary time for a proposal to be pending, suggesting that there may be something controversial in the proposal. This is Social Security's vague description of the proposal published in the Unified Agenda last Spring:

... The proposed regulations would add a new category to our existing medical diary categories that we use to schedule CDRs and would revise the criteria we follow to place a case in each of the categories. They would also change how often we perform a CDR for claims with the medical diary category for permanent impairments. These revised regulations would ensure that we continue to identify medical improvement at its earliest point and remain up to date with current research.

Happy Veterans Day

Social Security Treated Employee Worse Because He Was A Vet

     From Bloomberg Law:

A former attorney adviser with the Social Security Administration convinced the Federal Circuit Nov. 7 that his veteran status was a substantially motivating factor in the agency’s 2011 decision to fire him.

As a qualifying veteran hired by a government agency, Clarence McGuffin was entitled to a shorter probationary period than other non-veteran new hires before the full suite of Civil Service Reform Act rights vested. Those rights include the right to appeal adverse employment actions to the Merit Systems Protection Board....

 “We want to terminate him so that he does not acquire MSPB rights,” read one intra-agency email quoted in the opinion. Another email stated that McGuffin was a “vet” who “has to be terminated in his first year.” ...

McGuffin was let go from his attorney adviser position in SSA’s Office of Disability Adjudication and Review in part because he allegedly wasn’t producing his “fair share” of work, a monthly quantity determined by dividing the office’s caseload across all of the attorney advisers charged with authoring benefits appeals decisions. But SSA isn’t supposed to use an attorney adviser’s “fair share” production as a performance metric until their second year with the agency, Reyna said. ...

“The record is clear that SSA closed the door on Mr. McGuffin well before the end of his first year to avoid the inconvenience of defending itself should Mr. McGuffin assert his procedural safeguards afforded under the CSRA,” Reyna said. The court reversed the contrary decision from the MPSB and remanded the case for further proceedings. ...

The case is McGuffin v. SSA, Fed. Cir., No. 17-2433, 11/7/19. ...