STATEMENT OF
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO
LOCAL 17
SENATE COMMITTEE ON VETERANS’ AFFAIRS
HEARING ON
REVIEW OF VETERANS’ DISABILITY COMPENSATION:
WHAT CHANGES ARE NEEDED TO IMPROVE THE APPEALS PROCESS?
FEBRUARY 11, 2009
INTRODUCTION
AFGE Local 17 appreciates the opportunity to present its views on the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) disability compensation appeals process to the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs. AFGE Local 17 represents all the professional and nonprofessional staff at VA Central Office (VACO), including the entire professional and nonprofessional bargaining unit members at the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board).
AFGE Local 17 makes the following recommendations for process improvement:
I. EXPAND LEGAL STAFF:
The Board needs additional attorneys to handle its caseload. We use the term “caseload” rather than “backlog” because it more accurately describes the flow of claims from VA Regional Offices (ROs) and the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) by operation of statutes and regulations. The Board’s jurisdictionin claims by veterans is established by receipt of a substantive appeal signed by either the veteran or by the representative of the veteran. All cases for which a substantive appeal has been entered become the Board’s caseload.
AFGE Local 17 urges Congress to provide funding for the Board to hire at least fifty additional attorneys in addition to maintaining current staffing levels. That expansion should continue with additional attorneys being hired thereafter until the current caseload decreases. The expanded legal staff should remain in place until the caseload significantly declines, as measured by a percentage of the total caseload or another measure that accurately reflects a decrease in the number of cases for which a substantive appeal has been filed.
II. EXPAND ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF:
The Board currently faces a fairly significant bottleneck in the administrative processing of claims caused by a shortage of staffto process claims. An initial inadequate ratio of support staff to attorneys has worsened over the years as the Board has increased the number of attorneys without a comparable increase in support staff. Administrativestaff members are as critical to sending completed decisions to the veterans as the attorneys and Veterans Law Judges (VLJs) who write and sign decisions. We suggest an approximate ratio of one administrative support staffer for every two attorneys.
III. SPECIALIZATION:
Specialization by both the attorneys and the VLJs would increase their familiarity with laws governing a specific set of benefits, which in turn would increase the quality of the decisions as well as their quantity (the quantity would increase due to greater familiarity with the pertinent case law and a consequent decrease in the need for research).
Therefore, AFGE Local 17 recommends that Congress require the Board to identify twenty areas of specialization and to assign no more than three such areas to each VLJ. Each VLJ would retain those areas of specialization for three years. Other cases not involving an issue of specialization could be assigned to any VLJ.
Attorneys would also benefit from this specialization. Attorneys who completed their probationary period and are performing successfully for the VLJ would continue working in that VLJ’s area of specialization for three years. If the attorney passes his or her probationary period and thereafter performs unsuccessfully, he or she will be reassigned to a different supervisor for a year, with that supervisor allowed to administer a performance-based action after 90 days.
IV. ESTABLISH ANOTHER DECISION TEAM:
The Board should be reorganized to add an additional decision team to the four presently in place. The additional decision team would be larger than the others and would handle all issues appealed from decisions by the other four teams, by reconsidering them (a current part of the law) and issuing a decision that is ready for appellate review. This would increase both the quality of the decisions reviewed by the Court and the quality of decisions received by veterans. It should also speed up the issuance of decisions generally.
In addition, the four current decision teams should be required by statute to write “veteran friendly” decisions, i.e. decisions meant solely for the veteran and his or her representative, and not the Court. Thus, these decisions would be shorter and would not contain the legal explication only required to pass Court muster. Decisions would be more accessible to veterans since there would be no requirement to use language designed to be defended before the Court.
V. USE EMPLOYEES OF THE BOARD TO TRANSFORM THE BOARD’S ADJUDICATION INTO A PAPERLESS SYSTEM:
AFGE Local 17 strongly supports conversion of the Board to a fully paperless system, moving with all due dispatch to have all files be paperless.Rather than contract out the scanning and other related tasks to a private contractor, we urge Congress to create additional employment opportunitiesby establishing a new administrative unit within the Board (but not necessarily stationed in Washington, DC) to convert files at a reasonable pace and reasonable cost. In this way, the Board’s in-house knowledge base would grow and other Board staff would have access to technicians who are directly responsive to the Board and to the veterans--in contrast to private contractors, who in addition to being excessively expensivework first and foremost in the interests of an enterprise concerned with making a profit as opposed to helping our nation’s veterans.
VI. PRESUMPTION IN FAVOR OF TREATING PHYSICIAN EVIDENCE:
We recommend the following when a claim includes a physician's assessment of a veteran’s subjective complaints and observations (also called a diagnosis),a treatment plan, and a physician’sstatement relevant to the issue: This evidence shouldbe dispositive of the issue. Further development would only be in order if medical evidence exists elsewhere in the claims folder that directly contradictsthe physician's relevant statement.
VII. CHANGE ELIGIBILITY RULES FOR VICE CHAIR POSITION:
We urge Congress to modify the current statutory provision related to the Vice Chair of the Board to require that that person be employed at the Board for at least 12 months prior to appointment as Vice Chair. Veterans and the Board’s attorneys are both adversely impacted when the Vice Chair lacks sufficient familiarity with Board operations.
VIII. OTHER COMMENTS:
A. RO Training: During the hearing on February 11, Chairman James P. Terry of the Board referred to training that the Board conducts at the RO level. We support this training and believe it improves the quality and timeliness of decisions made at the RO level. However, AFGE members from the field report that this training program is sporadic and not available at most ROs. We urge Congress to provide the oversight and funding to ensure that this valuable training is provided consistently across all ROs.
B. VCAA: The letter notifying claimants of their rights under the Veterans’ Claims Assistance Act should be much shorter and use nontechnical language.
C. Revise VAForm9:Instead of requiring the veteran to submit a VAForm 9 to indicate whether he or she wants to continue or withdraw the appeal, a form should be attached to the front of the Statement of the Case (SOC)that the veteran can fill out to state his or her preference in this regard. Also, the deadline for receipt of the form bythe RO should be made much more visible than it is currently.
William Angulo Preston
Acting President
AFGE Local 17
VA Central Office
Washington, DC20420
William H. Wetmore
Third Executive Vice President
National VA Council, AFGE
Steward
AFGE Local 17
VA Central Office
Washington, DC20420
{00260528.DOC}