Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I applied for the VLJ job they posted last year. Got interviewed 30 days after application. Was told by Chairman that we would hear back at end of January 22. They January came and went and we heard nothing. Basically got ghosted and I know of two other that this happened too.

After reading this board it looks like I dodged a bullet. I am better of staying out at my current job till I retire in three years.

I actually declined an offer from them in 2006-2007. I still probably should have taken it but it was a huge pay cut. It probably wasn’t as horrible as I read it is today. Because I didn’t take it remained a staff attorney I don’t have any marketable experience

BVA won’t give you any marketable experience. VA disability law is a very niche area with very few opportunities outside of VA.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I applied for the VLJ job they posted last year. Got interviewed 30 days after application. Was told by Chairman that we would hear back at end of January 22. They January came and went and we heard nothing. Basically got ghosted and I know of two other that this happened too.

After reading this board it looks like I dodged a bullet. I am better of staying out at my current job till I retire in three years.

I actually declined an offer from them in 2006-2007. I still probably should have taken it but it was a huge pay cut. It probably wasn’t as horrible as I read it is today. Because I didn’t take it remained a staff attorney I don’t have any marketable experience

Anonymous wrote:I applied for the VLJ job they posted last year. Got interviewed 30 days after application. Was told by Chairman that we would hear back at end of January 22. They January came and went and we heard nothing. Basically got ghosted and I know of two other that this happened too.

After reading this board it looks like I dodged a bullet. I am better of staying out at my current job till I retire in three years.

Anonymous wrote:Isn't it more likely the new Chairman orders you all back to your cubes in DC rather than treat you with more respect re: the quota and terrible management?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seems at least 2/3 of attorneys I know are happy our leader is leaving.

Most people don't seem to be fooled by management's recent concern and caring for the serfs.

She ratcheted up production requirements, made it almost impossible to get pro-rations, engendered an atmosphere of fear and anxiety, protected ruthless judges. Will anyone miss her?

C, do you have a clue how much misery and hopelessness you've caused?

Here's to hoping that the new guy will instill a work environment that is at least less hostile. I've been there long enough to write for a large number of judges and under different leaders. A BVA where the hostility is kept at bay is actually a pretty nice place to work. Hard to believe if you've only experienced the current environment.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seems at least 2/3 of attorneys I know are happy our leader is leaving.

Most people don't seem to be fooled by management's recent concern and caring for the serfs.

She ratcheted up production requirements, made it almost impossible to get pro-rations, engendered an atmosphere of fear and anxiety, protected ruthless judges. Will anyone miss her?

C, do you have a clue how much misery and hopelessness you've caused?

Here's to hoping that the new guy will instill a work environment that is at least less hostile. I've been there long enough to write for a large number of judges and under different leaders. A BVA where the hostility is kept at bay is actually a pretty nice place to work. Hard to believe if you've only experienced the current environment.

I used to be an employee at the Board. When does the new Chairman start?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seems at least 2/3 of attorneys I know are happy our leader is leaving.

Most people don't seem to be fooled by management's recent concern and caring for the serfs.

She ratcheted up production requirements, made it almost impossible to get pro-rations, engendered an atmosphere of fear and anxiety, protected ruthless judges. Will anyone miss her?

C, do you have a clue how much misery and hopelessness you've caused?

Here's to hoping that the new guy will instill a work environment that is at least less hostile. I've been there long enough to write for a large number of judges and under different leaders. A BVA where the hostility is kept at bay is actually a pretty nice place to work. Hard to believe if you've only experienced the current environment.

Anonymous wrote:Seems at least 2/3 of attorneys I know are happy our leader is leaving.

Most people don't seem to be fooled by management's recent concern and caring for the serfs.

She ratcheted up production requirements, made it almost impossible to get pro-rations, engendered an atmosphere of fear and anxiety, protected ruthless judges. Will anyone miss her?

C, do you have a clue how much misery and hopelessness you've caused?

Anonymous wrote:Seems at least 2/3 of attorneys I know are happy our leader is leaving.

Most people don't seem to be fooled by management's recent concern and caring for the serfs.

She ratcheted up production requirements, made it almost impossible to get pro-rations, engendered an atmosphere of fear and anxiety, protected ruthless judges. Will anyone miss her?

C, do you have a clue how much misery and hopelessness you've caused?

Anonymous wrote:Seems at least 2/3 of attorneys I know are happy our leader is leaving.

Most people don't seem to be fooled by management's recent concern and caring for the serfs.

She ratcheted up production requirements, made it almost impossible to get pro-rations, engendered an atmosphere of fear and anxiety, protected ruthless judges. Will anyone miss her?

C, do you have a clue how much misery and hopelessness you've caused?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have an interview with the BVA for this position. After reading this, I don't know if I even want to interview for the position. It all makes me nervous. I have pretty extensive litigation experience, and I love being in court. I left my previous job due to intolerable work conditions. I can't work in another hostile, toxic work environment. Yeesh.

former litigator here. If you said you hated litigation I would say BVA might be good for you. If you loved litigation, but not your particular office, then you need to find another office somewhere and keep litigating. You will be bored at BVA.

There are many non-litigation attorney positions in the federal government. BVA is only one option; however, it’s not a good place to keep your attorney skills sharp because as the other poster stated, much of the work at BVA is copying and pasting text into decisions. Moreover, BVA recently downgraded the max promotion level for BVA attorneys from GS-14 to GS-13 to reflect the boilerplate nature of the work.

I wish you would stop with this "reflecting the boilerplate nature of work" nonsnese. You're either clueless or arrogant, or both, but you're not telling the truth. The downgrading reflects management's hostility toward the attorneys, and their desire to hire more people with less money to churn out more decisions. It doesn't mean the work got any easier. There are still very complex and ridiculously impossible cases, management just wants you to do more with less.

Weren't you the one who, on April 14 of this month, wrote, "It was a dumb test - I can’t imagine it provided useful information. Timed test and you couldn’t cut and paste - most of the job is cut and paste, so it was pretty unrealistic. Probably unwieldy, too?" How come you're allowed to characterized the BVA attorney position as boilerplate/cut and paste, but no one else is allowed to say the same thing?

Cut and paste boilerplate is not exclusive to BVA nor to administrative decision writers. It is a way to ensure uniformity and is present through much of the law.

Just because there is a lot of boilerplate in ANY job does not mean there is not a lot of additional writing to be done and complex legal analysis.

Are ya’ll 1Ls for something? You seem to have no clue. And the troll bashes no matter what anyone says, but people, use your brains and stop trying to dramatically construe everything as meaning that BVA is the worst place to work.

You're referring to boilerplate statements of the law. While BVA and other agencies use boilerplate statements of the law, BVA decisions routinely use boilerplate analyses in most decisions. Please don't compare BVA decisions to SEC or FLRA decisions There's simply no comparison in terms of the quality of analysis. That difference is reflected in management's decision to downgrade the BVA attorney position from GS-14 to GS-13.

“Boilerplate analyses” - good one - makes so much sense. You are very wise, Learned Troll

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have an interview with the BVA for this position. After reading this, I don't know if I even want to interview for the position. It all makes me nervous. I have pretty extensive litigation experience, and I love being in court. I left my previous job due to intolerable work conditions. I can't work in another hostile, toxic work environment. Yeesh.

former litigator here. If you said you hated litigation I would say BVA might be good for you. If you loved litigation, but not your particular office, then you need to find another office somewhere and keep litigating. You will be bored at BVA.

There are many non-litigation attorney positions in the federal government. BVA is only one option; however, it’s not a good place to keep your attorney skills sharp because as the other poster stated, much of the work at BVA is copying and pasting text into decisions. Moreover, BVA recently downgraded the max promotion level for BVA attorneys from GS-14 to GS-13 to reflect the boilerplate nature of the work.

I wish you would stop with this "reflecting the boilerplate nature of work" nonsnese. You're either clueless or arrogant, or both, but you're not telling the truth. The downgrading reflects management's hostility toward the attorneys, and their desire to hire more people with less money to churn out more decisions. It doesn't mean the work got any easier. There are still very complex and ridiculously impossible cases, management just wants you to do more with less.

Weren't you the one who, on April 14 of this month, wrote, "It was a dumb test - I can’t imagine it provided useful information. Timed test and you couldn’t cut and paste - most of the job is cut and paste, so it was pretty unrealistic. Probably unwieldy, too?" How come you're allowed to characterized the BVA attorney position as boilerplate/cut and paste, but no one else is allowed to say the same thing?

Cut and paste boilerplate is not exclusive to BVA nor to administrative decision writers. It is a way to ensure uniformity and is present through much of the law.

Just because there is a lot of boilerplate in ANY job does not mean there is not a lot of additional writing to be done and complex legal analysis.

Are ya’ll 1Ls for something? You seem to have no clue. And the troll bashes no matter what anyone says, but people, use your brains and stop trying to dramatically construe everything as meaning that BVA is the worst place to work.

You're referring to boilerplate statements of the law. While BVA and other agencies use boilerplate statements of the law, BVA decisions routinely use boilerplate analyses in most decisions. Please don't compare BVA decisions to SEC or FLRA decisions There's simply no comparison in terms of the quality of analysis. That difference is reflected in management's decision to downgrade the BVA attorney position from GS-14 to GS-13.