Judges sue Social Security over case 'quotas'

STEPHEN OHLEMACHER , The Associated Press
POSTED: Friday, April 19, 2013, 8:28 AM

WASHINGTON - Judges struggling to handle a surge of disability cases sometimes award benefits they might otherwise deny in order to clear cases faster so they can meet quotas imposed by the Social Security Administration, according to a lawsuit filed by the union representing the agency's administrative law judges.

The Social Security Administration says judges should decide 500 to 700 disability cases a year. The agency calls the standard a productivity goal, but the lawsuit claims it is an illegal quota that requires judges to decide an average of more than two cases a workday.

The lawsuit says the requirement violates judges' independence, denies due process rights to applicants and further strains the finances of a disability program that is projected to run out of money in 2016.

*edit* that site has copyright at the bottom of their pages. (© Copyright 2013 Interstate General Media, LLC )
http://www.philly.com/philly/wires/a...asequotas.html

I don't know wither to be , and/or both.

That would be a ridiculous schedule.

Doing 2 to 3 hearings per workday ? Sounds reasonable, based on the length of mine.

Writing up those 2 to 3 findings per day ? Can easily fit that in if they are approvals, but if a denial requires a lengthy explanation, that could mean trouble/overtime.

Many days, it seems like an ALJ should be able to manage 2 to 3 hearings plus their write ups in an 8 hour day. The problem is.....

Reading the entire record to evaluate if the right decision was made the first time or not. When would it be possible for them to do the thorough review of the record that we would all like to think that we are entitled to ? It does't seem like any time is being alotted for that.

Are the ALJs really writing and researching the decisions themselves? Or is it their staff?

At the time of my ALJ hearing, my medical file was pretty thick. I was that the judge knew my case better than I did based on the questions I was asked.
It was obvious the judge had read/reviewed my file the night before. I noticed he had placed reminder tabs throughout my file & was flipping through them when asking me questions. I suspected he wanted to see if my answers corresponded w/what the medical providers provided in their notes.

My ALJ hearing was approximately 3 hours long. There was one case before mine & one after.

At the time, NJ backlog was 3 years average.

I wonder if they are using the law firm, Dowe, Cheatum, and Howe?