Board of Veterans Appeals (Attorney Advisor)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread has been ongoing for awhile now. I wonder if anyone has actually chosen not to join the Board because of this thread? Have people actually been encouraged by the thread? Or is it just current employees discussing workplace grievances at this point?

Good question. Personally, I take everything said here with high skepticism. Personally, I joined the Board despite the negative comments, and it was the best career decision I ever made. For obvious reasons (i.e., identification), I won't reveal too much info about myself. I will say I had substantial litigation experience before joining the Board. I hated litigation. I am NOT a people person. This position has allowed me to excel at what I do best, write. I considered being put with a bad VLJ, but I knew I write well and would have to adapt. So, I was confident with my skills. Luckily, I have a good VLJ. Even so, I have written for some stinkers of VLJs. Yet, I dealt with it and just pushed through. Each VLJ wants things a certain way, we cannot get around that.

What I will say is that getting "fully successful" v. "exceptional" on year-end evals seems to be causing controversy. Some VLJs will give your work a 3 and others will give the same work a 5. Admin needs to address that.

Unless you’ve been treated badly by a VLJ, you won’t understand how truly bad it can get at the Board. I’ve seen several BVA attorneys, who received excellent performance appraisals year after year for 10 or 20+ years, get pushed out the door after they were assigned to one of the toxic VLJs.

Things may be going great for you now, but things can deteriorate quickly if you’re reassigned to the wrong VLJ. The toxic ones don’t care how well you write. If they hate you for some reason, you better watch out.

You just described life in general. HAHA. It can be good one day and bad the next. As I said, it's all personal to each individual.

That attitude is so common at the Board. Get sexual harassed... that's life. Get screamed at...that's life. Get set up to fail... that's life and so on. That's why the toxic environment the Board at the Board has stayed the same, except for that brief period when Carol DiBattiste was in charge. Carol refused to adopt the "that's life" attitude and refused to normalize toxicity in the workplace. Most people at the Board aren't asking to be BFFs with BVA management... they just don't want to work in a toxic work environment.

Well, I have never experienced that at the Board, nor do I know anyone who has. I know from others it has occurred in the past, but to hold on to the "toxic" label is also toxic. Management is lackluster, but I don't see them as toxic. VLJs are independent. If there is a problem, the government provides avenues to report unethical acts. But just because someone may not "get along" with a VLJ because they want rewrites or you are not doing things the way they want, there is little that can be done. Whining certainly doesn't help.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread has been ongoing for awhile now. I wonder if anyone has actually chosen not to join the Board because of this thread? Have people actually been encouraged by the thread? Or is it just current employees discussing workplace grievances at this point?

Good question. Personally, I take everything said here with high skepticism. Personally, I joined the Board despite the negative comments, and it was the best career decision I ever made. For obvious reasons (i.e., identification), I won't reveal too much info about myself. I will say I had substantial litigation experience before joining the Board. I hated litigation. I am NOT a people person. This position has allowed me to excel at what I do best, write. I considered being put with a bad VLJ, but I knew I write well and would have to adapt. So, I was confident with my skills. Luckily, I have a good VLJ. Even so, I have written for some stinkers of VLJs. Yet, I dealt with it and just pushed through. Each VLJ wants things a certain way, we cannot get around that.

What I will say is that getting "fully successful" v. "exceptional" on year-end evals seems to be causing controversy. Some VLJs will give your work a 3 and others will give the same work a 5. Admin needs to address that.

Unless you’ve been treated badly by a VLJ, you won’t understand how truly bad it can get at the Board. I’ve seen several BVA attorneys, who received excellent performance appraisals year after year for 10 or 20+ years, get pushed out the door after they were assigned to one of the toxic VLJs.

Things may be going great for you now, but things can deteriorate quickly if you’re reassigned to the wrong VLJ. The toxic ones don’t care how well you write. If they hate you for some reason, you better watch out.

You just described life in general. HAHA. It can be good one day and bad the next. As I said, it's all personal to each individual.

That attitude is so common at the Board. Get sexual harassed... that's life. Get screamed at...that's life. Get set up to fail... that's life and so on. That's why the toxic environment the Board at the Board has stayed the same, except for that brief period when Carol DiBattiste was in charge. Carol refused to adopt the "that's life" attitude and refused to normalize toxicity in the workplace. Most people at the Board aren't asking to be BFFs with BVA management... they just don't want to work in a toxic work environment.

Well, I have never experienced that at the Board, nor do I know anyone who has. I know from others it has occurred in the past, but to hold on to the "toxic" label is also toxic. Management is lackluster, but I don't see them as toxic. VLJs are independent. If there is a problem, the government provides avenues to report unethical acts. But just because someone may not "get along" with a VLJ because they want rewrites or you are not doing things the way they want, there is little that can be done. Whining certainly doesn't help.

The problem is that this attitude discounts the experiences of people who have been harassed at the Board. It is not just not "getting along." There were managers who were actively harassing employees, dragging them into personnel actions such as PIPs and/or removals, and even lying about the employees' work product. If this happened to you, it is hard to forget it. It's like telling a woman to forget about being beat up by her boyfriend because he never beat you up.

Of course people should try to move forward, but the people who are bitter are that way for a good reason.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread has been ongoing for awhile now. I wonder if anyone has actually chosen not to join the Board because of this thread? Have people actually been encouraged by the thread? Or is it just current employees discussing workplace grievances at this point?

Good question. Personally, I take everything said here with high skepticism. Personally, I joined the Board despite the negative comments, and it was the best career decision I ever made. For obvious reasons (i.e., identification), I won't reveal too much info about myself. I will say I had substantial litigation experience before joining the Board. I hated litigation. I am NOT a people person. This position has allowed me to excel at what I do best, write. I considered being put with a bad VLJ, but I knew I write well and would have to adapt. So, I was confident with my skills. Luckily, I have a good VLJ. Even so, I have written for some stinkers of VLJs. Yet, I dealt with it and just pushed through. Each VLJ wants things a certain way, we cannot get around that.

What I will say is that getting "fully successful" v. "exceptional" on year-end evals seems to be causing controversy. Some VLJs will give your work a 3 and others will give the same work a 5. Admin needs to address that.

Unless you’ve been treated badly by a VLJ, you won’t understand how truly bad it can get at the Board. I’ve seen several BVA attorneys, who received excellent performance appraisals year after year for 10 or 20+ years, get pushed out the door after they were assigned to one of the toxic VLJs.

Things may be going great for you now, but things can deteriorate quickly if you’re reassigned to the wrong VLJ. The toxic ones don’t care how well you write. If they hate you for some reason, you better watch out.

You just described life in general. HAHA. It can be good one day and bad the next. As I said, it's all personal to each individual.

That attitude is so common at the Board. Get sexual harassed... that's life. Get screamed at...that's life. Get set up to fail... that's life and so on. That's why the toxic environment the Board at the Board has stayed the same, except for that brief period when Carol DiBattiste was in charge. Carol refused to adopt the "that's life" attitude and refused to normalize toxicity in the workplace. Most people at the Board aren't asking to be BFFs with BVA management... they just don't want to work in a toxic work environment.

Well, I have never experienced that at the Board, nor do I know anyone who has. I know from others it has occurred in the past, but to hold on to the "toxic" label is also toxic. Management is lackluster, but I don't see them as toxic. VLJs are independent. If there is a problem, the government provides avenues to report unethical acts. But just because someone may not "get along" with a VLJ because they want rewrites or you are not doing things the way they want, there is little that can be done. Whining certainly doesn't help.

The problem is that this attitude discounts the experiences of people who have been harassed at the Board. It is not just not "getting along." There were managers who were actively harassing employees, dragging them into personnel actions such as PIPs and/or removals, and even lying about the employees' work product. If this happened to you, it is hard to forget it. It's like telling a woman to forget about being beat up by her boyfriend because he never beat you up.

Of course people should try to move forward, but the people who are bitter are that way for a good reason.

I guess I am confused. Do you have a point? You don't like the Board because of past issues? That it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread has been ongoing for awhile now. I wonder if anyone has actually chosen not to join the Board because of this thread? Have people actually been encouraged by the thread? Or is it just current employees discussing workplace grievances at this point?

Good question. Personally, I take everything said here with high skepticism. Personally, I joined the Board despite the negative comments, and it was the best career decision I ever made. For obvious reasons (i.e., identification), I won't reveal too much info about myself. I will say I had substantial litigation experience before joining the Board. I hated litigation. I am NOT a people person. This position has allowed me to excel at what I do best, write. I considered being put with a bad VLJ, but I knew I write well and would have to adapt. So, I was confident with my skills. Luckily, I have a good VLJ. Even so, I have written for some stinkers of VLJs. Yet, I dealt with it and just pushed through. Each VLJ wants things a certain way, we cannot get around that.

What I will say is that getting "fully successful" v. "exceptional" on year-end evals seems to be causing controversy. Some VLJs will give your work a 3 and others will give the same work a 5. Admin needs to address that.

Unless you’ve been treated badly by a VLJ, you won’t understand how truly bad it can get at the Board. I’ve seen several BVA attorneys, who received excellent performance appraisals year after year for 10 or 20+ years, get pushed out the door after they were assigned to one of the toxic VLJs.

Things may be going great for you now, but things can deteriorate quickly if you’re reassigned to the wrong VLJ. The toxic ones don’t care how well you write. If they hate you for some reason, you better watch out.

You just described life in general. HAHA. It can be good one day and bad the next. As I said, it's all personal to each individual.

That attitude is so common at the Board. Get sexual harassed... that's life. Get screamed at...that's life. Get set up to fail... that's life and so on. That's why the toxic environment the Board at the Board has stayed the same, except for that brief period when Carol DiBattiste was in charge. Carol refused to adopt the "that's life" attitude and refused to normalize toxicity in the workplace. Most people at the Board aren't asking to be BFFs with BVA management... they just don't want to work in a toxic work environment.

Well, I have never experienced that at the Board, nor do I know anyone who has. I know from others it has occurred in the past, but to hold on to the "toxic" label is also toxic. Management is lackluster, but I don't see them as toxic. VLJs are independent. If there is a problem, the government provides avenues to report unethical acts. But just because someone may not "get along" with a VLJ because they want rewrites or you are not doing things the way they want, there is little that can be done. Whining certainly doesn't help.

The problem is that this attitude discounts the experiences of people who have been harassed at the Board. It is not just not "getting along." There were managers who were actively harassing employees, dragging them into personnel actions such as PIPs and/or removals, and even lying about the employees' work product. If this happened to you, it is hard to forget it. It's like telling a woman to forget about being beat up by her boyfriend because he never beat you up.

Of course people should try to move forward, but the people who are bitter are that way for a good reason.

I am confused.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread has been ongoing for awhile now. I wonder if anyone has actually chosen not to join the Board because of this thread? Have people actually been encouraged by the thread? Or is it just current employees discussing workplace grievances at this point?

Good question. Personally, I take everything said here with high skepticism. Personally, I joined the Board despite the negative comments, and it was the best career decision I ever made. For obvious reasons (i.e., identification), I won't reveal too much info about myself. I will say I had substantial litigation experience before joining the Board. I hated litigation. I am NOT a people person. This position has allowed me to excel at what I do best, write. I considered being put with a bad VLJ, but I knew I write well and would have to adapt. So, I was confident with my skills. Luckily, I have a good VLJ. Even so, I have written for some stinkers of VLJs. Yet, I dealt with it and just pushed through. Each VLJ wants things a certain way, we cannot get around that.

What I will say is that getting "fully successful" v. "exceptional" on year-end evals seems to be causing controversy. Some VLJs will give your work a 3 and others will give the same work a 5. Admin needs to address that.

Unless you’ve been treated badly by a VLJ, you won’t understand how truly bad it can get at the Board. I’ve seen several BVA attorneys, who received excellent performance appraisals year after year for 10 or 20+ years, get pushed out the door after they were assigned to one of the toxic VLJs.

Things may be going great for you now, but things can deteriorate quickly if you’re reassigned to the wrong VLJ. The toxic ones don’t care how well you write. If they hate you for some reason, you better watch out.

this is the main problem at the Board. If you dont get along with your VLJ, or they're just an awful person, they can ruin you in an instant. I've seen the same thing happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread has been ongoing for awhile now. I wonder if anyone has actually chosen not to join the Board because of this thread? Have people actually been encouraged by the thread? Or is it just current employees discussing workplace grievances at this point?

Good question. Personally, I take everything said here with high skepticism. Personally, I joined the Board despite the negative comments, and it was the best career decision I ever made. For obvious reasons (i.e., identification), I won't reveal too much info about myself. I will say I had substantial litigation experience before joining the Board. I hated litigation. I am NOT a people person. This position has allowed me to excel at what I do best, write. I considered being put with a bad VLJ, but I knew I write well and would have to adapt. So, I was confident with my skills. Luckily, I have a good VLJ. Even so, I have written for some stinkers of VLJs. Yet, I dealt with it and just pushed through. Each VLJ wants things a certain way, we cannot get around that.

What I will say is that getting "fully successful" v. "exceptional" on year-end evals seems to be causing controversy. Some VLJs will give your work a 3 and others will give the same work a 5. Admin needs to address that.

Unless you’ve been treated badly by a VLJ, you won’t understand how truly bad it can get at the Board. I’ve seen several BVA attorneys, who received excellent performance appraisals year after year for 10 or 20+ years, get pushed out the door after they were assigned to one of the toxic VLJs.

Things may be going great for you now, but things can deteriorate quickly if you’re reassigned to the wrong VLJ. The toxic ones don’t care how well you write. If they hate you for some reason, you better watch out.

You just described life in general. HAHA. It can be good one day and bad the next. As I said, it's all personal to each individual.

That attitude is so common at the Board. Get sexual harassed... that's life. Get screamed at...that's life. Get set up to fail... that's life and so on. That's why the toxic environment the Board at the Board has stayed the same, except for that brief period when Carol DiBattiste was in charge. Carol refused to adopt the "that's life" attitude and refused to normalize toxicity in the workplace. Most people at the Board aren't asking to be BFFs with BVA management... they just don't want to work in a toxic work environment.

Well, I have never experienced that at the Board, nor do I know anyone who has. I know from others it has occurred in the past, but to hold on to the "toxic" label is also toxic. Management is lackluster, but I don't see them as toxic. VLJs are independent. If there is a problem, the government provides avenues to report unethical acts. But just because someone may not "get along" with a VLJ because they want rewrites or you are not doing things the way they want, there is little that can be done. Whining certainly doesn't help.

Well. I'm not the previous poster, but I have seen it many times. Some very very good conscientious people who care about their work got pushed out and it is very disappointing and sad when it happens.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread has been ongoing for awhile now. I wonder if anyone has actually chosen not to join the Board because of this thread? Have people actually been encouraged by the thread? Or is it just current employees discussing workplace grievances at this point?

Good question. Personally, I take everything said here with high skepticism. Personally, I joined the Board despite the negative comments, and it was the best career decision I ever made. For obvious reasons (i.e., identification), I won't reveal too much info about myself. I will say I had substantial litigation experience before joining the Board. I hated litigation. I am NOT a people person. This position has allowed me to excel at what I do best, write. I considered being put with a bad VLJ, but I knew I write well and would have to adapt. So, I was confident with my skills. Luckily, I have a good VLJ. Even so, I have written for some stinkers of VLJs. Yet, I dealt with it and just pushed through. Each VLJ wants things a certain way, we cannot get around that.

What I will say is that getting "fully successful" v. "exceptional" on year-end evals seems to be causing controversy. Some VLJs will give your work a 3 and others will give the same work a 5. Admin needs to address that.

Unless you’ve been treated badly by a VLJ, you won’t understand how truly bad it can get at the Board. I’ve seen several BVA attorneys, who received excellent performance appraisals year after year for 10 or 20+ years, get pushed out the door after they were assigned to one of the toxic VLJs.

Things may be going great for you now, but things can deteriorate quickly if you’re reassigned to the wrong VLJ. The toxic ones don’t care how well you write. If they hate you for some reason, you better watch out.

You just described life in general. HAHA. It can be good one day and bad the next. As I said, it's all personal to each individual.

That attitude is so common at the Board. Get sexual harassed... that's life. Get screamed at...that's life. Get set up to fail... that's life and so on. That's why the toxic environment the Board at the Board has stayed the same, except for that brief period when Carol DiBattiste was in charge. Carol refused to adopt the "that's life" attitude and refused to normalize toxicity in the workplace. Most people at the Board aren't asking to be BFFs with BVA management... they just don't want to work in a toxic work environment.

Well, I have never experienced that at the Board, nor do I know anyone who has. I know from others it has occurred in the past, but to hold on to the "toxic" label is also toxic. Management is lackluster, but I don't see them as toxic. VLJs are independent. If there is a problem, the government provides avenues to report unethical acts. But just because someone may not "get along" with a VLJ because they want rewrites or you are not doing things the way they want, there is little that can be done. Whining certainly doesn't help.

The problem is that this attitude discounts the experiences of people who have been harassed at the Board. It is not just not "getting along." There were managers who were actively harassing employees, dragging them into personnel actions such as PIPs and/or removals, and even lying about the employees' work product. If this happened to you, it is hard to forget it. It's like telling a woman to forget about being beat up by her boyfriend because he never beat you up.

Of course people should try to move forward, but the people who are bitter are that way for a good reason.

I guess I am confused. Do you have a point? You don't like the Board because of past issues? That it?

He or she is explaining some of bad things that happen there. It is a relatively large place, and given the solitary nature of the job, its impossible to know everything that happens. What you experience or what he or she experiences or what anyone experiences is only a small sliver of what goes on there, good or bad. Management knows a lot more of course, but they don't really care. They're content to sweep problems under the rug.

[Anonymous]

These are not solely Board issues. They are general American workplace issues. If you have only ever worked at the Board, that's all you have to go by. But having worked in other state agencies, these events occur there also. Do not believe the Board is the only place problems occur. So, for all the complaints - which are justifiable understandable - you have to adjust, otherwise you should just quit and never work again, or just run your own law business.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:These are not solely Board issues.

...

So, for all the complaints - which are justifiable understandable - you have to adjust, otherwise you should just quit and never work again, or just run your own law business.

Really? That is a revelation to me, because I never, ever had any other jobs anywhere else. Thank you for this amazing insight.

No one is saying these are just Board issues. The topic of this thread, however, is the Board of Veterans' Appeals, not "workplace problems in America" or " bad places I have worked." And no one is saying that they don't adjust to problems, they are describing problems that have occurred.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:These are not solely Board issues. They are general American workplace issues. If you have only ever worked at the Board, that's all you have to go by. But having worked in other state agencies, these events occur there also. Do not believe the Board is the only place problems occur. So, for all the complaints - which are justifiable understandable - you have to adjust, otherwise you should just quit and never work again, or just run your own law business.

yes there are other bad places out there. But, I've been in the workforce professionally for 27 years and the Board is by far the most dysfunctional poorly managed place I've been.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These are not solely Board issues. They are general American workplace issues. If you have only ever worked at the Board, that's all you have to go by. But having worked in other state agencies, these events occur there also. Do not believe the Board is the only place problems occur. So, for all the complaints - which are justifiable understandable - you have to adjust, otherwise you should just quit and never work again, or just run your own law business.

yes there are other bad places out there. But, I've been in the workforce professionally for 27 years and the Board is by far the most dysfunctional poorly managed place I've been.

I had the same role in three other state agencies, and they were A LOT worse than the Board.

If you want to know how bad a government agency can be, work at the local or county level. The Board is leaps and bounds above them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These are not solely Board issues. They are general American workplace issues. If you have only ever worked at the Board, that's all you have to go by. But having worked in other state agencies, these events occur there also. Do not believe the Board is the only place problems occur. So, for all the complaints - which are justifiable understandable - you have to adjust, otherwise you should just quit and never work again, or just run your own law business.

yes there are other bad places out there. But, I've been in the workforce professionally for 27 years and the Board is by far the most dysfunctional poorly managed place I've been.

I had the same role in three other state agencies, and they were A LOT worse than the Board.

If you want to know how bad a government agency can be, work at the local or county level. The Board is leaps and bounds above them.

The Board is leaps and bounds above them FOR YOU. You seem not to understand that other people have a different experience than you. Try to understand people other than yourself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These are not solely Board issues. They are general American workplace issues. If you have only ever worked at the Board, that's all you have to go by. But having worked in other state agencies, these events occur there also. Do not believe the Board is the only place problems occur. So, for all the complaints - which are justifiable understandable - you have to adjust, otherwise you should just quit and never work again, or just run your own law business.

yes there are other bad places out there. But, I've been in the workforce professionally for 27 years and the Board is by far the most dysfunctional poorly managed place I've been.

I had the same role in three other state agencies, and they were A LOT worse than the Board.

If you want to know how bad a government agency can be, work at the local or county level. The Board is leaps and bounds above them.

Very sad. Did they have crushing quotas which were enforced by firings without recourse?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These are not solely Board issues. They are general American workplace issues. If you have only ever worked at the Board, that's all you have to go by. But having worked in other state agencies, these events occur there also. Do not believe the Board is the only place problems occur. So, for all the complaints - which are justifiable understandable - you have to adjust, otherwise you should just quit and never work again, or just run your own law business.

yes there are other bad places out there. But, I've been in the workforce professionally for 27 years and the Board is by far the most dysfunctional poorly managed place I've been.

I had the same role in three other state agencies, and they were A LOT worse than the Board.

If you want to know how bad a government agency can be, work at the local or county level. The Board is leaps and bounds above them.

The Board is leaps and bounds above them FOR YOU. You seem not to understand that other people have a different experience than you. Try to understand people other than yourself.

And you don't seem to understand you don't have it as bad as you think. Try to understand other people yourself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These are not solely Board issues. They are general American workplace issues. If you have only ever worked at the Board, that's all you have to go by. But having worked in other state agencies, these events occur there also. Do not believe the Board is the only place problems occur. So, for all the complaints - which are justifiable understandable - you have to adjust, otherwise you should just quit and never work again, or just run your own law business.

yes there are other bad places out there. But, I've been in the workforce professionally for 27 years and the Board is by far the most dysfunctional poorly managed place I've been.

I had the same role in three other state agencies, and they were A LOT worse than the Board.

If you want to know how bad a government agency can be, work at the local or county level. The Board is leaps and bounds above them.

Very sad. Did they have crushing quotas which were enforced by firings without recourse?

You mean like a law firm, where if you don't meet billable hours your are fired? Yep. Why do people think working at the Board should be a cakewalk?