THE ARBITERS OF DISABILITY: CORRELATES OF REVERSAL RATE VARIANCES IN THE DECISIONS OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION.

摘要

This dissertation identifies factors related to variations in the decisions of Administrative Law Judges (ALJs) of the Social Security Administration (SSA) reviewing state disability unit denials of disability claims.;The hypothesis is advanced that the reversal rates are the result of individual judges reactions to their working conditions. Specifically, the hypothesis states that judges satisfied with the work conditions have higher reversal rates, while judges dissatisfied with the conditions reversed fewer denials.;The hypothesis was tested by surveying a random sample of ALJs in the Southeastern Region with a questionnaire composed of items taken from Hackman and Oldham's Job Diagnostic Survey, in addition to demographic and attitudinal questions suggested by the literature.;It was found that there exist differences between judges with high and low rates of reversing denials in how they rated various aspects of their work. Statistically significant correlations were found between reversal rate and (1) years of service as a judge; (2) perceptions of the satisfaction/meaningfulness of the work; and (3) attitudes about the consideration of agency policies in decision making and the de novo review of decisions. In combination, these variables could explain 34 percent of the variation.;Although cases are assigned at random, there is wide variance in the affirmation/reversal rates of individual ALJs. This has resulted in the characterization of the disability program as arbitrary since the claimant's chances of having a denial reversed often depend as much on who the judge is as on the facts of the claim. The SSA has placed increasing pressures on the ALJs to produce a high volume of decisions while keeping the reversal rates consistent.;The conclusion was reached that some judges write more reversals since this type of decision satisfies demands for production. Other judges, who value the traditional legal emphasis on the individual case's decision, write fewer reversals and are more dissatisfied with the work because the affirmations consume more time, reduce productivity, and are more likely to be appealed and reviewed.