Scum-sucking bottom feeders - SSA employees nailed

[Traveling_Home]

http://govexec.com/dailyfed/0107/010407m1.htm?rss=getoday

Social Security employees face $3.8 million in work-related fines
By Jenny Mandel
[e-mail]

Four Social Security Administration employees have been informed of
proposed fines of as much as $3.5 million for actions taken in the
course of their duties reviewing disability claims, according to a
grievance filed by a federal employee union.


Officials with the National Treasury Employees Union, which is
representing three of the four employees in legal proceedings, said
Thursday that the three attorneys and a supervisor have been told
they face suggested penalties of $5,000 per violation for cases in
which they allegedly used expert testimony improperly to help justify
benefits decisions. The employees cited the testimony at the
direction of an administrative law judge, union officials said.

This amounts to potential fines of between $100,000 and $215,000 each
for the attorneys; the supervisor, who was involved with more than
700 cases, has been informed of a proposed fine of more than $3.5
million. SSA's inspector general office, which union officials said
has been investigating the matter for more than four years, proposed
the penalties.


According to NTEU President Colleen Kelley, the alleged "material
misstatements" stem from the employees' repeated use of testimony by
a single expert who answered a series of general questions in a
single case to assist in determining benefits eligibility. Those
statements were then applied to later cases at the judge's direction,
Kelley said. That practice was taught in official training sessions
and commonly used within the Office of Disability Adjudication and
Review where the attorneys worked, she said.


Describing the fines as absurd, Kelley said the federal employees'
actions should be legally protected in at least two ways: first,
through the immunity that shields federal employees from personal
liability for actions taken in the course of official duties; and
second, through a quasi-judicial immunity that covers judges and
those working with them. The immunity is designed to protect the
independence of the judicial process.


"To challenge a judge's evidentiary technique has far-ranging
ramifications for not only this agency but for other agencies where
you have employees doing similar things," said Robert Shriver, NTEU's
assistant counsel.


Kelley said the inspector general's office has reviewed the
approximately 700 cases in question, and stressed that the disability
determination was not found to have been improper in any of them.


Jonathan Lasher, a deputy chief counsel for the IG's office, said he
could not confirm or deny the existence of any case against an
individual because of Privacy Act restrictions. But he took issue
with a statement by Kelley that SSA has never before used Section
1129 of the Social Security Act, which covers factual misstatements
that affect benefits decisions, against agency employees. Lasher said
employees have been fined before under that section, and emphasized
that it applies to "wrongful acts."


"If we received information suggesting that a particular SSA policy
or practice was inefficient, was unfair, wasted money, any number of
things, that would generally be looked at by the Office of
Audit," he said. "Those generally would not include an allegation of
wrongful or even criminal activity. more in the
program improvement realm."


The IG's Office of Inspection handled this case.


The IG has to date formally assessed a penalty of $215,000 against
one attorney, who has retained private legal help but is also working
with the union. In the other three cases, the employees have
submitted financial statements to the IG office and are awaiting
finalization of the penalties.


The employees will be able to request hearings before an
administrative law judge, and either side can appeal that decision to
a departmental appeals board, the Social Security Commissioner and
ultimately the U.S. Court of Appeals, NTEU officials said.


The union has also written to SSA Commissioner Jo Anne Barnhart
requesting that she throw out the penalties immediately.

[hashibabba]

1. They should go to jail. Can you imagine how many people

probably were rejected because of this? I wonder how many of them ended up on the streets? Anything to save money. Who cares about the individual who goes without.
Thanks for posting.

[DU9598]

2. Actually the SSA workers are to be commended!!!!

You have it backwards ... and this story is scary and should be published on liberal blogs. This is a case where the BUSH APPOINTED cronnies are trying to threaten and fine support staff for an administrative law judge who frequently GRANTED BENEFITS to applicants. This is an attempt to fine the support staff (and the judge but this instance brought him to an untimely death from stress and heart disease) because they were actually GRANTING BENEFITS in a way the administration did not like or approve of. This action by the BUSH FEDS will have a chilling affect on administrative law judges who will be hesitant to award legitimate claims for fear of BIG BROTHER looking over the shoulder willing to seek millions in fines.

The Democratic delegation in Iowa will be looking into this ... to tell you how off the wall this is, the Bush appointed US Attorneys won't even consider prosecution.

HOPE THIS CLEARS UP THIS ISSUE AND BLOGGERS WITH MORE EXPERIENCE THAN ME RUN WITH THIS STORY.

[hashibabba]

3. Thank you for the clarification. I automatically assumed they

were trying to mess up benefits for people who needed them!

Read, read, read and reread, then respond!

[Traveling_Home]

4. I must disagree

"Four Social Security Administration employees have been informed of proposed fines of as much as $3.5 million for actions taken in the course of their duties reviewing disability claims, according to a grievance filed by a federal employee union.


Officials with the National Treasury Employees Union, which is representing three of the four employees in legal proceedings, said Thursday that the three attorneys and a supervisor have been told they face suggested penalties of $5,000 per violation for cases in which they allegedly used expert testimony improperly to help justify benefits decisions. The employees cited the testimony at the direction of an administrative law judge, union officials said.


This amounts to potential fines of between $100,000 and $215,000 each for the attorneys; the supervisor, who was involved with more than 700 cases, has been informed of a proposed fine of more than $3.5 million. SSA's inspector general office, which union officials said has been investigating the matter for more than four years, proposed the penalties.

According to NTEU President Colleen Kelley, the alleged "material misstatements" stem from the employees' repeated use of testimony by a single expert who answered a series of general questions in a single case to assist in determining benefits eligibility. Those statements were then applied to later cases at the judge's direction, Kelley said. That practice was taught in official training sessions and commonly used within the Office of Disability Adjudication and Review where the attorneys worked, she said."

====================================================================

So rather then grant due process to individual applicants, the bureaucrats "allegedly used expert testimony improperly to help justify benefits decisions"..."the alleged "material misstatements" stem from the employees' repeated use of testimony by a single expert who answered a series of general questions in a single case to assist in determining benefits eligibility"

Now how can any of that be correct? They used one experts testimony extrapolated to non-relevant cases to make decisions that effect my life.

The determination was on denying due process rights not on whether a person did or didn't get $$$. I'd be happy with a guarantess of due process and let the chips fall as they may. As many GAO reports havew shown, SSA is a rogue agency not accountable to anyone.

IS there any reason to debate whether folks with disabilities think SSA does a fair job and is to be trusted OR do we think it is worse then IRS. At least IRS doesn't audit us every year.

We (disability community) FEAR SSA. Something's wrong with the system when that is true.

Old Tom

[cutlassmama]

5. No wonder they are "backlogged" then. Who the heck would

want to work there with all these possible "fines" hanging over their heads. I hardly think they are paid enough to begin with...then to have the possibility of FINES...um no, no way in hell I'd work for the SSA.