SSA Hiring And Training Issues

     From The Social Security Administration’s Major Management and Performance Challenges During Fiscal Year 2023, a report by the Office of Inspector General at Social Security:

... As of September 23, 2023, SSA had increased its staff size from 56,423 full-time permanent staff in FY 2022 to 59,591 in FY 2023. FY 2023 hiring helped SSA reverse the recent trend of declining employees in more recent years ...

SSA curtailed additional anticipated hiring in June 2023 in response to the passing of the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 (Pub. L. No. 118-5). SSA lowered each of its component’s allocation of employees because it did not want to hire employees whose salaries future budgets may not support given that the Act limits non-Defense funding in FY 2024. ...

While it hired many new employees, SSA reported it still had challenges recruiting and retaining employees because its positions are complex and require more training compared to similar positions in private industry. SSA’s Office of Operations acknowledged its self-online-training model is less engaging than in-person training and does not work well with all new hires. Also, SSA cannot offer its frontline employees some workplace flexibilities other agencies can, such as full-time remote work. Employees who separate from SSA reported they were leaving to take higher-paying jobs or because they felt overworked at SSA. ...

New Ruling On Duration

     The Social Security Administration has issued a new Ruling on Duration Requirements for Disability. At first glance I see little, if anything, new in this.

    One thing I really don't like about this is that it perpetuates the existing problem with situations where you need to combine two impairments to make up the one year duration requirement. As an example, a claimant is in chemotherapy for lung cancer and having a hard time of it for eight months. Before the chemo ends, the claimant is in an automobile accident and suffers a bad femur fracture that takes six months to heal. The claimant is out of work for more than a year due to the health problems but Social Security has examined the definition of disability with a microscope to find some tortured argument for denying such claims. Each disability must itself last at least a year. This only comes up rarely and usually when it does the decision makers involved are unaware of agency policy. Still, it's unnecessary and cruel.

Sixty Minutes On Overpayments

     Sixty Minutes did a piece yesterday on overpayments at Social Security. The written description indicates that it gave a good description of the plight of those overpaid but gave little or no attention to the underlying problems -- the overpayment rules created by Congress are brutal and complicated, the agency is critically understaffed, and the claimants can't afford to hire attorneys. And, no, legal aid isn't the answer. They're also critically underfunded.

AARP Calls For Better Service

    From a letter sent by the AARP to the leadership of the House Social Security Subcommittee:

... AARP continues to be concerned about extraordinary delays within the Social Security disability process. ...

 SSA needs to do better and should continue to prioritize the reduction of disability wait times as a key objective of the agency. In order to help SSA make improvements to the disability process, it is imperative that Congress provide the agency with the funding it needs. Social Security has a responsibility and a duty to provide timely and quality service to the public, and Congress has an obligation to ensure the agency has the resources, staffing and oversight necessary to fulfill its mission. For too long, Congress has underfunded SSA, leading to increased customer service deficiencies that have become far too common.

AARP continues to urge Congress to approve $15.5 billion for SSA administrative expenses for FY 2024. ...

    I hope AARP knows that the Social Security Subcommittee can do nothing about Social Security's appropriation. That's the responsibility of the Appropriations Committee.

Senate Hearing On O'Malley Nomination

   

     I listened to yesterday's Senate Finance Committee hearing on the nomination of Martin O'Malley to become Commissioner of Social Security. There seemed to be only limited Republican opposition. When a Republican Senator mentioned that he didn't like the firing of Andrew Saul, the Chairman of the Committee was prepared to politely mention that Republicans were hoist on their own petard. They were the ones who brought the lawsuits that led to the President's ability to fire people like Saul -- who richly deserved it!

    I liked one thing that O'Malley did. Whenever a Republican Senator complained about backlogs and delays and poor service generally, O'Malley had the numbers and could talk about the staffing cuts in the Senator's home state, which were in the 20-30% range for the field offices and DDS. That seemed to mute the complaints. Don't let them "cut it until it bleeds and then complain about the bloodstains."

 

Update: Another take on the nomination hearing.

   

O'Malley Nomination Hearing Today

    The Senate Finance Committee hearing on the nomination of Martin O'Malley to become the Commissioner of Social Security is scheduled for 10:00 Eastern today. You can watch it online.

Grassley Undecided On O'Malley Nomination

     From Radio Iowa:

The Democrat who finished third in the 2016 Iowa Caucuses is now being considered for the post of commissioner of Social Security. Former Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley will go before the U.S. Senate Finance Committee this week for his nomination hearing, and Republican Iowa Senator Chuck Grassley will be among the lawmakers asking him questions.

“I did meet with him in my office a month ago and I thought it was a very worthwhile meeting,” Grassley says. “I think his heart is in the right place, but I’m going to wait until the hearing’s over to decide whether to vote for him.”

The long-term viability of Social Security is the subject of much concern, but Grassley says they likely won’t be talking with O’Malley about that topic during the hearing on Thursday.

“I think we’re going to be more concerned about how he runs the Social Security Administration,” Grassley says, “and is he going to get people from remote work back into the offices around the country so they can serve the people better?” ...

OIG Chief Counsel Files Personal Suit Alleging Defamation, Tortious Interference, and False Light Invasion Of Privacy

     Michelle Murray, Chief Counsel of Social Security's Office of Inspector General (OIG), has filed suit on her own behalf pro se (meaning she is representing herself) in federal court in Pennsylvania against Debbie Shaw (Supervisory Attorney at the Office of the Counsel for Investigations and Enforcement -- or OCIE -- at OIG), Joscelyn Funnie (Senior Executive at OCIE), Lisa Rein (a reporter at the Washington Post), WP Company (which owns the Washington Post -- identified in the complaint as "left-centered"), Faith Williams (Director of the Effective and Accountable Government Program at the Project on Government Oversight) and the Project on Government Oversight. The complaint alleges defamation, tortious interference, and false light invasion of privacy. My name is mentioned but not as a defendant.

    There's probably a better way I don't know about but if you want to download this complaint you'll have to wait until I approve your request. I'll approve every request but I can't do it instantly.

    I'll say that as a general matter this sort of suit is difficult to win. I'd also say that if you're going to bring this sort of action your hands better be squeaky clean.

    Query: Do Debbie Shaw and Joscelyn Funnie qualify for government legal representation? I'd think so but I don't know the rules on this sort of thing.