Board of Veterans Appeals (Attorney Advisor)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From my team meetings with my judge, the number being thrown around is up to 15% cut at BVA. They aren’t touching the judges. So between attorneys and personal staff, I would think up to 15% cut of that number.

Don’t forget, we have more than just attorney’s judges and administrative staff. We have human resources, IT, etc. I really wish we would all stop speculating until we actually have concrete statements.

I don't think we'll ever get concrete statements. RIFs will only be confirmed once people start getting notified that they're being RIF'd.

[Anonymous]

Anybody hearing when the RIF notices will start going out, and when they take effect (when you're out of a job)?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Anybody hearing when the RIF notices will start going out, and when they take effect (when you're out of a job)?

No clue, but they’ll probably put you on admin leave first for 30-60 days. Then you’re officially out of a job. They’ll owe you severance too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:From my team meetings with my judge, the number being thrown around is up to 15% cut at BVA. They aren’t touching the judges. So between attorneys and personal staff, I would think up to 15% cut of that number.

That's a shame. There's some real dead weight with the judges. Folks that can't even bother to do something about the red squiggly lines in drafts they receive, and others who more problematically, remand virtually everything to avoid appeals.

[Anonymous]

I'd start the analysis on VSIP vs DRP now so you're prepared. When this went down at USCIS, under 40 had only 2 days to make a decision.

[Anonymous]

My VLJ said RIFs would be in June or July.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From my team meetings with my judge, the number being thrown around is up to 15% cut at BVA. They aren’t touching the judges. So between attorneys and personal staff, I would think up to 15% cut of that number.

That's a shame. There's some real dead weight with the judges. Folks that can't even bother to do something about the red squiggly lines in drafts they receive, and others who more problematically, remand virtually everything to avoid appeals.

But the judges do the work of holding hearings, which is very involved and time consuming. They also clean up the cases and get them out the door so they can be counted toward the organization's goal. So, even a judge who leaves a few errors in a decision is very valuable to the overall function of BVA compared to a decision writing attorney.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So that would mean probationary staff and newer non-veteran hires, say those with less than 5(?) years of experience, would likely be subject to RIF? If there’s approx 1000 attorneys then about 150 positions would be eliminated. According to DOGE website, 161 employees have 1 year tenure; 88 have 1-2 years tenure; 168 employees have 3-4 years tenure, 454 have 5-9 years tenure (significantly largest group); 163 have 10-14 years tenure; and 172 have 15-19 years tenure. It goes down significantly after that.
https://doge.gov/workforce?orgId=791615dd-6293-4e19-bf50-e63282fa238a

So if the Board cut only probationary attys they’d meet the 15% goal (assuming these numbers are right and there aren’t a lot of vet preference probies). But of course in other agencies they just eliminate whole offices, so who knows if that’s what they will do. The only preexisting divisions that I can think of are DVCs and judge teams, but eliminating either of those wholesale would mean firing VLJs. Are there any other preexisting divisions or offices that could be used for cuts that I’m not thinking of?

[Anonymous]

"Our goal is to reduce VA employment levels to 2019 end-strength numbers – roughly 398,000 employees – from our current level of approximately 470,000 employees,” Collins said, adding, “That's a 15 percent decrease.”

That doesn't mean the 15 percent will be evenly distributed across all divisions, especially those that saw no increase since 2019. It could also mean getting to the 2019 employment level at the Board? How many attorneys were at the Board in 2019?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So that would mean probationary staff and newer non-veteran hires, say those with less than 5(?) years of experience, would likely be subject to RIF? If there’s approx 1000 attorneys then about 150 positions would be eliminated. According to DOGE website, 161 employees have 1 year tenure; 88 have 1-2 years tenure; 168 employees have 3-4 years tenure, 454 have 5-9 years tenure (significantly largest group); 163 have 10-14 years tenure; and 172 have 15-19 years tenure. It goes down significantly after that.
https://doge.gov/workforce?orgId=791615dd-6293-4e19-bf50-e63282fa238a

So if the Board cut only probationary attys they’d meet the 15% goal (assuming these numbers are right and there aren’t a lot of vet preference probies). But of course in other agencies they just eliminate whole offices, so who knows if that’s what they will do. The only preexisting divisions that I can think of are DVCs and judge teams, but eliminating either of those wholesale would mean firing VLJs. Are there any other preexisting divisions or offices that could be used for cuts that I’m not thinking of?

The judge groups are not different divisions because they all perform the same function under OVLJ.

[Anonymous]

So I'm no longer at the Board but I'm helping a friend pro bono with what appears to be a CUE claim. I was never on SCT, so I learned very little about CUE other than to spot it and send it to SCT.

The fact pattern is residuals post removal of an organ a couple of years ago. The RO rated the scar, and denied SC for symptoms under a separate DC, incorrect DC, rather than under the correct DC for post surgical residuals.

Any pointers? This will be a CUE claim to the RO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So I'm no longer at the Board but I'm helping a friend pro bono with what appears to be a CUE claim. I was never on SCT, so I learned very little about CUE other than to spot it and send it to SCT.

The fact pattern is residuals post removal of an organ a couple of years ago. The RO rated the scar, and denied SC for symptoms under a separate DC, incorrect DC, rather than under the correct DC for post surgical residuals.

Any pointers? This will be a CUE claim to the RO.

The CUE claim has to be based on the evidence of record at the time of the rating.
Look and see if they used the correct facts about the diagnosis and the residuals that were known at that time. If there was conflicting evidence about residuals then it is a difference in the way the facts were weighed. A difference in weighing fact is not CUE. However if there was not conflicting evidence and a medical record at the time clearly identified a residual, it could be a clear error in the application of the rating criteria.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"Our goal is to reduce VA employment levels to 2019 end-strength numbers – roughly 398,000 employees – from our current level of approximately 470,000 employees,” Collins said, adding, “That's a 15 percent decrease.”

That doesn't mean the 15 percent will be evenly distributed across all divisions, especially those that saw no increase since 2019. It could also mean getting to the 2019 employment level at the Board? How many attorneys were at the Board in 2019?

1,156 FTE at the end of FY19 according to this: https://www.bva.va.gov/docs/Chairmans_Annual_Rpts/BVA2019AR.pdf#page7

I don’t know how many of those were attorneys though

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Our goal is to reduce VA employment levels to 2019 end-strength numbers – roughly 398,000 employees – from our current level of approximately 470,000 employees,” Collins said, adding, “That's a 15 percent decrease.”

That doesn't mean the 15 percent will be evenly distributed across all divisions, especially those that saw no increase since 2019. It could also mean getting to the 2019 employment level at the Board? How many attorneys were at the Board in 2019?

1,156 FTE at the end of FY19 according to this: https://www.bva.va.gov/docs/Chairmans_Annual_Rpts/BVA2019AR.pdf#page7

I don’t know how many of those were attorneys though

I believe there were 750 attorneys at the end of FY19. That’s why some people are speculating that the upcoming RIF will be somewhat deep.

[Anonymous]

Who would ever want to apply for a federal job after all of this? Our ability to hire will be destroyed for years to come.