May 11, 2022

Fee Cap Going To $7,200

   This afternoon Kilolo Kijakazi, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, informed the National Organization of Social Security Claimants Representatives (NOSSCR) and the National Association of Disability Representatives (NADR) that the Social Security Administration will raise the cap on the amount that attorneys may charge under the fee agreement process for representing claimants from $6,000 to $7,200.

    In this past, such announcements were made via the Federal Register. This has not yet been published in the Federal Register nor is it scheduled for publication tomorrow.  

    If this were a true cost of living adjustment, it would be going to $8,200, not $7,200.

    When the cap was raised the last time, in 2009, it was not effective until four and a half months after the announcement. I hear that this time it won't be effective until November 30, 2022 which is more than six months off! My hope the last time was that Social Security would use the time to train its staff but it was quickly apparent after the effective date that Social Security's staff hadn't been trained since at first there were more cases handled incorrectly than cases handled correctly. Nobody seemed to have been told that attorneys were allowed to have escalator clauses in their fee agreements that allowed them to be governed by the fee cap in place at the time of implementation rather than the fee cap in place at the time the fee agreement was signed even though this has been Social Security's position since the earliest days of the fee agreement process. I know. I was practicing Social Security law then. At least, back in 2009, we were able to get in touch with the payment centers to get mistakes corrected. They're mostly incommunicado these days and unwilling to correct even the most glaring mistakes.

    By the way, if you're an attorney who represents Social Security claimants and your fee agreement hasn't had an escalator clause, you're out of luck. Trying to force a new contract on your clients for your benefit is clearly unethical in my view.

About Time! Congressional Hearing On Customer Service At Social Security

     The House Social Security Subcommittee has FINALLY scheduled a hearing on Strengthening Social Security’s Customer Service for Thursday, May 17 at 2:00 EDT. Witnesses will be announced later.

    Now, if we could just get the House Appropriations Committee to also schedule a hearing, I'd be happier. Ways and Means Committee can provide publicity but better management isn't going to make an appreciable difference in service at Social Security. That's going to take money and the Appropriations Committee holds the key to that. (Of course, I'd also be happy to see Senate Finance Committee and Senate Appropriations Committee hearings!)

May 9, 2022

Employee Viewpoint Survey


     The federal Office of Personnel Management (OPM) has issued its Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey for 2021. Over 11,000 Social Security employees responded. The survey results are reported in dozens of tables. I didn't see anything that jumped off the page. Overall, Social Security employees seem less happy than federal employees in general but not strikingly so. Take a look and tell us what you think.

May 8, 2022

Social Security Bulletin

     Social Security has posted the most recent issue of the Social Security Bulletin, the agency's  scholarly publication. It includes a study which asks "What Is the Relationship Between Socioeconomic Deprivation and Child Supplemental Security Income Participation?"

    Here are a couple of charts from that study:

Click on images to view full size



May 7, 2022

Support For Allowing NHC ALJs To Unionize

A group of Democratic senators have revisited a long-dormant effort to broaden the bargaining unit of administrative law judges at the Social Security Administration, buoyed by recent guidance from the Biden administration aimed at encouraging collective bargaining at federal agencies.

In 2007, then-Social Security Commissioner Michael Astrue created the agency’s National Hearing Center, a cadre of administrative law judges who would parachute into regions with a long backlog of disability claims, but he left the component’s employees outside of the ALJ bargaining unit at the Office of Hearing Operations, which is represented by the Association of Administrative Law Judges.

In 2011, the Federal Labor Relations Authority sided with Astrue, finding that although National Hearing Center judges had nearly identical job duties, they were management officials because they supervised decision writers. That said, the FLRA also found that the agency committed unfair labor practices by exhibiting hostility toward the union and failing to notify the group of the component’s creation.

In a letter to Acting Social Security Commissioner Kilolo Kijakazi last month, five Democratic senators, led by Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, urged the agency to consider classifying judges in the National Hearing Center as bargaining unit employees and granting them access to the Association of Administrative Law Judges. They cited the fact that in the years since the FLRA’s decision, the differences in the responsibilities of ALJs in both agency components have disappeared. ...

    Bad grammar in that first sentence! Tut, tut, tut

May 6, 2022

Conn Documentary Available On Apple TV+

From SK POP:

Apple TV+'s The Big Conn, a four-part docuseries, is set to explore the shocking real-life tale of Eric C. Conn. ...

Apple TV+ will release all four episodes together - May 6 at 3.00 am, Eastern Time (ET). In conjunction with the series, Apple will also release an exclusive companion podcast that will go into further depth into Conn's deception and his extravagant lifestyle, including new interviews and behind-the-scenes insights. ...

    My understanding is that this documentary will also focus on the real pain left behind for Conn's former clients who have ended up being harshly punished for Conn's misdeeds even though they did nothing wrong.

Most Popular Baby Names

     Social Security has released its list of most popular baby names for 2021:

Boys

Girls

1.     Liam 1.  Olivia
2.     Noah 2.  Emma
3.     Oliver 3.  Charlotte
4.     Elijah 4.  Amelia
5.     James 5.  Ava
6.     William 6.  Sophia
7.     Benjamin 7.  Isabella
8.     Lucas 8.  Mia
9.     Henry 9. Evelyn
10.  Theodore 10. Harper 

    And here's the list of the fastest rising names for girls and boys in 2021:

BoysGirls
1.     Amiri 1.  Raya
2.     Eliam 2.  Wrenley
3.     Colter 3.  Angelique
4.     Ozzy 4.  Vida
5.     Loyal5.  Emberlynn

     I'm generally in the "What's in a name?" camp when it comes to names but all I can say after looking at the fastest rising list is "Yuck!"