Social Security Subcommittee Hearing

     The House Social Security Subcommittee held a hearing yesterday on Social Security Fundamentals: A Fact-Based Foundation. From the written testimony, it appears that the hearing was definitely at the fundamental level, as befits a Subcommittee now under the control of Republicans who generally don't like to get down in the weeds of Social Security issues. They just know that Social Security is "doomed." They've been saying that since 1935 when the Social Security Act was passed. Alas, the voters keep expressing a strong preference that Social Security stay in business.

Every Bad Idea For Social Security That The GOP Has Ever Had, In One Document

    Republicans in the House of Representatives have put forth their plan for what that they hope to extort from the President by threatening to put the U.S. government into default on its debts. Here's what their plan would do to Social Security retirement benefits (begins at page 80):

• Implement a new minimum benefit of 15% of the average wage index;
• "Modernize" the Social Security benefit formula, which is a euphemism for reducing future benefits for those now 54 and younger;
• Increase Full Retirement Age to 70 between now and 2040;
• Eliminate the retirement earnings test for those who are under Full Retirement Age;
• Eliminate auxiliary benefits for high wage earners.
  

    The plan also includes changes in disability benefits (begins at page 74):

• Enact a benefits offset experiment that would reduce disability benefits by $1 for every $2 earned (they must not know that this experiment is underway already);
• Allow FICA reductions for employers with high rates of employee retention, which is supposed to help handicapped people stay employed (which would disadvantage manufacturers);
• Require employment in six of the last ten years, instead of five;
• Time limited disability benefits for some recipients; 
• "Update" the grid regulations;
• Make disability benefits contingent on medical improvement (I don't think they meant to say that but that's what they said);
• Prevent those drawing unemployment benefits from drawing disability benefits;
• Eliminate withholding of attorney fees for representing claimants (at least I think that's what they're saying but they only thing clear about it is that they bear a lot of ill will towards attorneys);
• Close the record "after a reasonable period of time";
• Require Social Security to conduct periodic reviews of ALJ decisions, particularly those of "outlier" judges;
• Prohibit reapplications within 12 months of a denial;
• Increase the waiting period for Medicare from 24 months to 60 months;
• Eliminate the ability to apply for both early retirement and disability benefits at the same time;
• Allow employers and employees a reduced FICA rate if the employer provides long term disability benefits.

I’m Torn; Was There Any Point In Sending This?

      An e-mail to Social Security employees:

From: ^Human Resources

Sent: Monday, April 24, 2023 8:10 AM

Subject: 2022 Best Places to Work in the Federal Government

 

A Message to All SSA Employees

Subject:  2022 Best Places to Work in the Federal Government

 

The Partnership for Public Service recently released its 2022 Best Places to Work (BPTW) in the Federal Government Rankings, which is based on results from the 2022 Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey (FEVS).  SSA now ranks 17 amongst 17 large federal agencies.  Our 2022 BPTW and FEVS results reflect your experiences from last summer – one of our most challenging periods in recent years.  Over the past year, we used that feedback to make workplace improvements to support you in providing trusted service to our customers.

While faced with our lowest staffing levels in more than 25 years, resuming in-person service amidst the ongoing pandemic, and juggling increasing workloads, you worked tirelessly to serve the public.  Because of your commitment to service, the public rated us as the 2nd most trusted agency in the federal government, second only to the National Park Service.  You are the reason for that rating – your service to the public makes a difference.

Your commitment to public service is unwavering, but changes are needed.  For over a decade, we received insufficient and inconsistent funding to administer our programs.  This led to hiring freezes and staff losses, resulting in workload and workplace challenges that directly impact your experiences.  Thankfully this fiscal year, we received a higher funding level, which allows us to start rebuilding our workforce.  Hiring is a priority; and so far, we have onboarded over 3,200 new team members across the agency.  Also, our latest data shows attrition rates are starting to slow down.

Senior leaders value the feedback you provide.  We reviewed last year’s FEVS results, as well as surveys of new hires and those leaving our agency.  Based on that input, we instituted several workplace improvements to accompany our hiring strategy.  For example, you told us transparency is important, so we increased our communications to keep you informed of our priorities and challenges.  We learned how we can better support your work-life balance and help you navigate the hybrid work environment through workplace flexibilities and wellness resources.  We are also improving access to career and professional development offerings to help you take charge of your career.

We know these changes are just a start.  Sufficient funding for future years will allow us to maintain the progress we’ve made, and we will continue to advocate for the support we need.  Additionally, your continued feedback is always welcomed.  The next FEVS – scheduled to occur later this spring – presents another opportunity for you to weigh in on future workplace improvements.

Thank you for your resilience and dedication to the public and our agency!  The public’s high level of trust in our agency is a direct reflection of the service that you provide.  As we pursue our mission, we will strive to make the agency a truly great place to work.

Seems Almost Quaint

     For most of the history of Social Security, all monthly payments of benefits came out on the third of each month. That changed in 1997 so that the Title II payments come out on three dates each month. The date you receive your payment depends upon the day of the month upon which you were born. 

    The Social Security Administration's statement at the time this change was made gives an insight into the level of service that was then prevalent at the agency. This is from a notice published by Social Security in the Federal Register on February 11, 1997 (emphasis added):

SSA’s current practice of paying 47 million beneficiaries within the first 3 days of each month results in a large surge of work during the first week of each month. This surge includes a large number of visitors to field offices and calls to our toll-free 800 number to report nonreceipt of a check, question the amount paid, or ask about other payment-related issues. Approximately 9 percent of all calls during check week concern nonreceipt, compared to 3 percent during the rest of the month. As an example of the surge that occurs around the current payment days, on April 3, 1995, 1,091,282 calls were placed to SSA’s 800 number. On April 14, 1995, the number of calls placed to our 800 number decreased to 229,022. It is important to beneficiaries and customers to be able to reach SSA with fewer busy signals, and we have pledged to enable callers to get through to the 800 number within 5 minutes of their original attempt. However, in fiscal year (FY) 1994, during peak periods, customers encountered busy signals on SSA’s 800 number 40–63 percent of the time and had to wait more than 5 minutes to get through about 30 percent of the time. ...

 Our goal is for our customers to have minimal waits for service when visiting a Social Security field office. Today, SSA does not always meet this goal. In FY 1994 there were 24 million visitors to our field offices. While the average wait during check week for individuals with an appointment was 8 minutes, some individuals with appointments had to wait over 2 hours. Thirty-two percent of the visitors to our offices without appointments in FY 1994 (typically people who have questions related to their payments or who want to report payment delivery problems) had to wait more than 30 minutes after arriving to be served. The average wait during check week for individuals without appointments was 16 minutes, although some individuals without appointments had to wait over 3 hours. ...

    The agency already felt it was under customer service stress way back in 1997 but the level of stress was vastly less than it is now. Adequate service has been defined downward dramatically since then.

IRS Telephone Wait Time 4 Minutes

     Last year, the average wait time when you called the Internal Revenue Service was 27 minutes. This year it's 4 minutes. How did the IRS do it? They got a big infusion of money because Congress finally realized that service at the IRS was completely unacceptable. 

    Social Security's telephone wait time is something like four times as long as for the IRS. How is that acceptable? When do things reach such an extreme state that Social Security gets an infusion of money?

OPM Memo On Telework

     From Government Executive:

The Office of Personnel Management on Tuesday announced that it will end the use of maximum telework as part of the federal government’s operating status next month, following President Biden’s planned expiration of the COVID-19 public health emergency.

The public health emergency is set to expire on May 11. In a memo to agency heads Tuesday, OPM Director Kiran Ahuja announced that as a result, the federal government’s HR agency will no longer recommend that agencies remain “open with maximum telework flexibilities” as part of a governmentwide operating status. ...

Ahuja stressed that although OPM’s recommendation for maximum telework was ending, agencies should still balance the Office of Management and Budget’s call for “substantially increased meaningful in-person work at federal agencies” with the benefits associated with continued use of workplace flexibilities, including increased productivity, employee engagement and recruitment and retention of workers.

 “OMB’s memorandum informed agencies of an expectation to increase meaningful in-person work while still using flexible operational policies,” she wrote. “Agencies should continue to strategically use telework and remote work policies in support of their workforce plans moving forward while capitalizing on the benefits of meaningful in-person work.” ...

[T]he memo did not assuage the concerns of House Oversight and Accountability Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., who compared the memo to a decades-long policy on LGBTQ+ Americans serving in the military. ...

    Cut the endless comments on the merits of telework. Don't you guys get tired?

Only 47% Of Disabled People Between Age 50 And Age 64 Draw Social Security Disability Benefits

     From a television station in New York:

A researcher estimates that over 1 million Americans with disabilities aren't getting the benefits they may need.

Zachary Morris, an assistant professor at the Stony Brook University School of Social Welfare, wanted to look at how well a couple of big Social Security programs are working for people.

Morris analyzed data on people between 50 and 64, shy of retirement age, who have work-limiting disabilities.

He found just 47% of these folks, Americans who are theoretically eligible for benefits, get Social Security Disability Insurance, Supplemental Security Income or both. ...

Rolls Royce Service For OIG; Little Service For The Public

     Social Security's Office of Inspector General (OIG) operates its own hotline for the public to use in reporting waste or fraud. Think about that. Why does OIG have its own separate hotline? Why not use Social Security's regular 800 number? The teleservice center employees are certainly capable of taking down basic information and forwarding it to OIG. I think we know the reason. The crappy service on the general 800 number would be unacceptable for OIG.

    At the moment, OIG is advertising the availability of a contract for handling its hotline. Here's one of the criteria that OIG expects a contractor to meet: "At a minimum, the contractor’s systems must handle all incoming calls, and the contractor must achieve at least an average 95% answer rate for all calls offered and a maximum average wait time of one (1) minute after call offer." The OIG contractor has to be able to "handle all incoming calls"? The agency's general 800 number certainly can't do that. A 95% answer rate? Not imaginable for the general 800 number. A maximum average wait time of one minute? Are you kidding me? It's more like 15-20 minutes for the general 800 number. 

    Why are we funding excellent call center services for OIG but those needing to file a claim or to talk with someone about their pending case get horrific service? I'm all in favor of getting fraud reports from the public but I'm also in favor of the public getting decent service from the Social Security Administration.