In-Person CEs Resuming In At Least One State

     I had posted yesterday that it was time for Social Security to either schedule in-person consultative medical examinations (CEs) or to make decisions without them -- that the agency couldn't just hold disability claims in suspense indefinitely. It turns out that I wasn't the only one thinking that. My office was told today that North Carolina Disability Determination Services (DDS) has resumed scheduling in-person CEs.

Increased Provision Of Online Services Has Not Reduced Demand For Telephone And Field Office Services

     The Social Security Advisory Board (SSAB) has issued a brief report recommending that the Social Security Administration "use evidence-based measures to evaluate access to agency services" which isn't the most exciting recommendation you'll find even in the context of government advisory board reports. There's another more complete report which adds detail. However, the brief report includes this chart which I think is far more interesting than the text in either report. (Click on the image to view full size.)

     What I get from this is that the dramatic increase in internet services provided by the Social Security Administration has had almost no effect upon the demand for services provided in person or over the telephone.

     The idea that Social Security can wean the public off personal service so that in the future the public will just deal with the agency through its online services is bunk. There's no reason to expect that's ever going to work. By all means, provide online services but don't expect that online services will ever replace field offices and telephone service.

Reduction In April OHO Receipts Probably Linked To Covid-19

      This was obtained from Social Security by the National Organization of Social Security Claimants Representatives (NOSSCR) and published in its newsletter, which is not available online to non-members. It is basic operating statistics for Social Security's Office of Hearings Operations. Click on the image to view full size.

     At my firm the number of requests for hearing went back up to something like normal in May but I don't think that will last. Many, many cases are on hold at Disability Determination Services (DDS) now waiting for that date when consultative examinations (CEs) can be scheduled once again.

     By this point, I think it's time to fish or cut bait. Either try to schedule the CEs or make decisions without them. I don't think the CE situation will change fundamentally until there's a vaccine for Covid-19 and early next year is the soonest that blessed day might arrive. DDS can't keep holding onto these cases for such an indefinite period. We need to get past the mindset that Covid-19 will magically disappear in the next few weeks. Not gonna happen.

Hypothetical?

     Here’s a hypothetical question that really isn't so hypothetical: Patient A is immunocompromised due to a history of treatment for cancer. Patient A has been told by her doctor that she should not leave the house except to go to medical treatment until the threat of being infected with Covid-19 has completely passed. That threat will not completely pass until well over half of the population has immunity to Covid-19 either because they have had the disease or because they have been immunized for the disease. This may not happen in the next year. Patient A's old job did not allow working from home. Does patient A meet the definition of disability in the Social Security Act? In answering this question, you're not allowed to assume away the premises of the question because you think the Covid-19 threat will somehow disappear on its own or that immunocompromised people don't really need to strictly avoid risk of exposure to Covid-19.

Probably Isn't Good Enough

     I happened to re-read this somewhat chilling note I made on a client a couple of months ago:

He's not in psych treatment now. Didn't like his treating doc asking if he had access to guns and didn't like the meds he was taking. [I] Told him he needs to get back in treatment. He was in special forces.

     Guns really are a problem in this country. This man probably won't harm himself or other people. Probably.

Unions File Complaints Over Social Security's Failure To Implement Emergency Paid Leave

     From Government Executive:

Officials at three federal employee unions have filed formal complaints against the Social Security Administration for refusing to fully implement a law providing emergency paid sick leave to workers related to the coronavirus pandemic.

The American Federation of Government Employees and the National Treasury Employees Union both filed internal grievances this week accusing the agency of not complying with the sick leave law and refusing its collective bargaining obligations over the implementation of the new leave category. And the Association of Administrative Law Judges has filed an unfair labor practice complaint with the Federal Labor Relations Authority.

The Emergency Paid Sick Leave Act was signed into law in mid-March as part of Congress' first bill responding to the COVID-19 outbreak. It provides employees in both the public and private sectors with up to 80 hours of paid sick leave, as well as up to 10 weeks of paid leave at two-thirds of their regular pay for workers who have child and dependent care responsibilities due to school and daycare closures related to the pandemic.

This new benefit was to take effect April 1, and the Labor Department announced it would give employers a "non-enforcement period" until April 17 to allow employers to make changes to their payroll system to offer the leave. But to date, union officials said the Social Security Administration has dragged its feet.

The agency has faulted the Interior Business Center, which does payroll for Social Security and several other agencies, for being unable to implement the coding changes needed until July. ...

For its part, the Interior Business Center disputes Social Security Administration officials' laying of blame. ...

The Sky Isn't Falling -- At Least For The Social Security Trust Funds

     There has been a fair amount of speculation about the effects of the Covid-19 pandemic on the Social Security trust funds. This mostly comes from people who have always predicted doom for the trust funds even in better times and it's been little more than speculation.

     The first fairly solid projection I've seen is from the Penn Wharton Business School's Budget Model. I don't know how solid their Social Security trust funds projections have been in the past but they're not some think tank cranking out projections designed to either scare or reassure people. The Penn Wharton model had the combined trust funds running dry in 2036, which was one year later than Social Security's actuaries had it. Now, the Penn Wharton Budget Model projects a trust fund exhaustion date between 2032 and 2034. That's not as good but doesn't sound to me like the sky is falling.

     In any case, I'm not worrying about Social Security "running out of money." Even if the trust funds run dry, the agency would still be able to pay 76% of benefits just from FICA payments coming in. However, that scenario is no more than a right wing fantasy. Even members of Congress who are hostile to Social Security would not allow that to happen. There are far too many voters receiving Social Security. There will be tax increases or general fund transfers. The worst that might happen would be some very minor cuts and I'll be surprised if there are any cuts. Ultimately, the Social Security trust funds are an abstraction. What really supports Social Security is the support of the American people. Right wingers make the mistake of thinking that just because they don't like Social Security that it can't really be all that popular. That's wrong. Public support for Social Security is overwhelming and unwavering.

     We've got far more immediate crises to worry about. Relax about the Social Security trust funds.

Wisconsin Not Allowing Social Security Disability Recipients To Receive Pandemic Unemployment Insurance

     From the Sun Prairie Star:

People stopped traveling when the coronavirus pandemic hit, costing Jessica Barrera her job at Groome Transportation, an airport shuttle service with an office in Eau Claire.

So the 40-year-old single mother joined nearly 70,000 other laid-off Wisconsinites during that third week of March: She filed her first weekly unemployment claim. 

She filed another claim the next week. And the next. And the next. She continued until the Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development denied her claims in a letter that explained in bold, capital letters:

“THE CLAIMANT CANNOT RECEIVE SOCIAL SECURITY DISABILITY PAYMENTS AND UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE BENEFITS CONCURRENTLY.”

“I cried for days,” Barrera said. “I thought (unemployment assistance) was going to be my saving grace to help me get by until my job opened.” 

Barrera has polycythemia vera, a rare disease that causes her body to produce too many red blood cells. The condition can lead to strokes, blood clots, miscarriages and other complications.

She takes a blood thinner and has 16 ounces of blood removed from her body monthly to control her symptoms. She also says she grapples with depression and anxiety following a pair of family tragedies.

All that qualifies Barrera for Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI), a federally funded program for people who have worked and paid Social Security taxes but can no longer perform “substantially gainful activity.”

SSDI guidelines allow and encourage part-time work so long as she does not earn more than $1,260 per month. “You have to stay poor to keep your health care to stay alive,” Barrera said.

About 175,000 working-age Wisconsinites rely on SSDI to supplement their income. But the Republican-controlled Legislature in 2013 passed a law barring that group from simultaneously receiving unemployment insurance after losing work.

George Wentworth, an unemployment insurance specialist with the National Employment Law Project, a nonprofit that supports protections for low-wage workers and the unemployed, said he knows of only one other state — North Carolina — that also explicitly bans tapping both programs. ...

Barrera is appealing with the pro bono help of Victor Forberger, supervising attorney for the University of Wisconsin’s Unemployment Compensation Appeals Clinic, who said he is representing about 20 people with similar cases. Forberger accuses Wisconsin of discriminating against people with disabilities, saying the denials run counter to Congress’ aim. ...

    I live in North Carolina. I have been told that the governor has ordered that Social Security disability recipients will qualify for Pandemic Unemployment Insurance. However, I'm not so sure that there aren't other states with the same issue as Wisconsin.