Become part of the movement for unbiased, accessible election information. Donate today.

Association of Administrative Law Judges

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
New Administrative State Banner.png
What are administrative law judges and administrative judges?

Administrative law judges (ALJs) and non-ALJ adjudicators, sometimes referred to as administrative judges (AJs), are federal administrative adjudicators. Although many of these officials have the word judge in their job title, administrative adjudicators are part of the executive rather than the judicial branch. They are not judges as described in Article III of the Constitution. Despite not being Article III judges, administrative adjudicators may prepare for and conduct hearings or proceedings, make findings and issue decisions on behalf of the agency that employs them.


Association of Administrative Law Judges
AALJ logo.jpg
Basic facts
Type:Labor union
Website:Official website

The Association of Administrative Law Judges (AALJ) is a labor union that represents federal administrative law judges (ALJs) employed at the Social Security Administration (SSA). The AALJ was originally organized as a professional association in 1971 and became a union in 1999. It is part of the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers, an affiliate of the AFL-CIO. The AALJ engages in collective bargaining with the SSA, lobbies Congress, prepares statements for congressional committees and the news media, and organizes educational and social events for its members. The AALJ has claimed more than two-thirds of ALJs at the SSA as members.[1][2][3]

About

On its website, the AALJ describes its work in the following way:[4]

“

The Association of Administrative Law Judges is both a labor union and a professional organization that represents more than 1,000 federal administrative law judges engaged in adjudication at the Social Security Administration.

The SSA’s judiciary forms the largest adjudicative body in the western world. Each year, the SSA’s administrative law judges hold hundreds of thousands of hearings. More Americans will appear before an SSA administrative law judge than in any other judicial forum. Yet the procedures and issues related to SSA hearings are not widely understood because they are closed to the public to protect the privacy rights of claimants. Some even refer to these courts as "the hidden judiciary."[5]

”

Background

The AALJ was founded in 1971 as a professional association. It became a labor union in 1999 with the approval of a majority of its members. The AALJ is affiliated with the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers (IFPTE), which belongs to the AFL-CIO.[3] According to the AALJ, "the IFPTE has been supportive and helpful in providing legal and political advice and particularly in providing lobbying support."[2] As of May 2018, the AALJ claimed more than two-thirds of ALJs at the Social Security Administration as members.[3]

To learn more about the number of ALJs working across various federal agencies and related qualifications to serve, see here.

Work

Administrative State
Administrative State Icon Gold.png
Five Pillars of the Administrative State
•Agency control
• Executive control
• Judicial control
•Legislative control
• Public Control
Click here for more coverage of the administrative state on Ballotpedia.
Click here to access Ballotpedia's administrative state legislation tracker.

Committees

The AALJ works primarily through a committee system. The organization has 11 standing committees:[2][1]

  • Labor Management Committee
  • National Bargaining Committee
  • Legislative Committee
  • Health and Safety Committee
  • Constitution Committee
  • Membership Committee


  • Rules Committee
  • Joint Technical Advisory Committee
  • Judicial Education Committee
  • AALJ Education Committee
  • Public Relations Committee

Committee members come from both the AALJ leadership and the membership at large. Committees work on tasks designated by the leadership and produce recommendations for leadership approval. According to the AALJ, "most committees meet physically at least twice a year in the Washington D.C. area and meet more frequently through conference calls." Members can also volunteer to coordinate retirement awards, continuing legal education programs, transfers, or the organization's educational conference.[2]

The AALJ members at each SSA hearing office elect a Local AALJ Representative (LAR) from among themselves to serve as a union liason. The LAR is responsible for informing other members about the union's activities and serving as counsel for an ALJ that has been accused of wrongdoing.[2]

Activities and events

Collective bargaining is one of the AALJ's primary activities. The organization negotiates contracts with the SSA that outline terms and conditions of employment for ALJs. The AALJ also advocates for or against proposed laws and regulations that would affect ALJs and the SSA. To this end, the AALJ prepares written statements and oral testimony for congressional committees dealing with Social Security- and ALJ-related issues.[2]

The AALJ holds an annual conference each fall that includes educational and social events for ALJs and their families. The organization also hosts roundtable discussions in Washington, D.C. that feature speakers and panelists discussing issues relevant to ALJs.[2]

Issues

In a document hosted on its website, the AALJ claims to be working on and to have made progress on the following issues and objectives:[1]

  • Lobbying Congress to remove ALJs from the SSA, increasing their independence
  • Increasing ALJ wages, benefits, job security, and working conditions
  • Increasing security at hearing offices
  • Increasing the size of hearing rooms
  • Accomodating computer equipment with larger furniture
  • Installing more ergonomic furniture in hearing offices

The document also claims that the AALJ was responsible for the following changes to security measures at SSA hearing offices:[1]

  • Hearing offices and remote hearing sites are staffed with armed guards
    • Guards have security wands to detect weapons
    • Guards search all purses, briefcases, packages, and anything else carried into hearing offices
  • Hearing rooms have locked escape doors
  • Windowless hearing rooms have emergency backup lighting
  • Hearing offices are stocked with first aid kits
  • ALJs must be notified of and given information about threats of violence targeting them

The AALJ often opposes policy changes proposed by the SSA. The organization opposed the SSA's proposal to have the agency, rather than the ALJs, set the time and place of hearings. The AALJ has also opposed, through grievance filings and statements to Congress and the media, the SSA's requirement for ALJs to issue between 500 and 700 decisions per year.[1]

Leadership

The leadership of the AALJ consists of a president, executive vice president, secretary, treasurer, and 10 regional vice presidents. These officers form the AALJ National Executive Board and are responsible for setting organization policies. The four national officers (president, executive vice president, secretary, and treasurer) form the National Executive Committee, responsible for carrying out the board's decisions.[2][6]

Officer elections are held in the spring of even-numbered years. The four national officers are elected by a vote of all the AALJ's members. The members of each region vote to elect their regional vice president. Additionally, there is an appointed national grievance chair who does not sit on the executive board or committee.[2][6]

Administrative law judges

Administrative law judges (ALJs) are adjudicators that conduct all formal adjudication proceedings and may also conduct informal adjudication. Under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) of 1946, which created and defined the role of the ALJ, agencies must have an ALJ preside when a hearing on the record is required by statute. In formal adjudication proceedings, ALJs act as judge and jury in a trial-like proceeding.[7][8][9][10]

Nearly 2,000 ALJs worked at various federal agencies as of March 2017; the largest employers of ALJs at the time were the Social Security Administration (1,655 ALJs), the Office of Medicare Hearings and Appeals at the Department of Health and Human Services (101 ALJs), and the Department of Labor (41 ALJs). Prospective ALJs are recruited and exmained by the Office of Personnel Management, then hired and paid by agencies.[7][8][9][10]

The U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) reported 1,931 administrative law judges working for federal agencies as of March 2017, the most recent year for which comprehensive data was available at the time of this article's last update in March 2024. The vast majority of these ALJs (1,655) were employed at the Social Security Administration. The role of the ALJ was created and standardized under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) of 1946. When an agency is required by statute to use a formal adjudication proceeding, an ALJ must preside. ALJs are recruited and examined by OPM, then hired and paid by agencies. When an agency needs to fill an ALJ position, OPM will offer a list of three candidates for the agency to choose from. Agencies may also hire ALJs from other agencies, either permanently or on a temporary basis, with the approval of OPM.[7][8]

The OPM website describes the work of ALJs in the following way:[8]

“ ALJs serve as independent impartial triers of fact in formal proceedings requiring a decision on the record after the opportunity for a hearing. In general, ALJs prepare for and preside at formal proceedings required by statute to be held under or in accordance with provisions of the APA, codified, in relevant part, in sections 553 through 559 of title 5, United States Code (U.S.C.). ALJs rule on preliminary motions, conduct pre-hearing conferences, issue subpoenas, conduct hearings (which may include written and/or oral testimony and cross-examination), review briefs, and prepare and issue decisions, along with written findings of fact and conclusions of law.


The Federal Government employs ALJs in a number of agencies throughout the United States. Cases may involve Federal laws and regulations in such areas as admiralty, advertising, antitrust, banking, communications, energy, environmental protection, food and drugs, health and safety, housing, immigration, interstate commerce, international trade, labor management relations, securities and commodities markets, social security disability and other benefits claims, and transportation.[5]

”
—U.S. Office of Personnel Management, "Qualification Standard For Administrative Law Judge Positions"[8]


ALJs by the numbers

ALJs by agency
The following table shows the distribution of ALJs among federal agencies as of March 2017:

Number of ALJs by agency[7]
Agency (Subcomponent) Number of ALJs
Commodity Futures Trading Commission 0
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau 1
Department of Agriculture 3
Department of Education 2
Department of Health and Human Services (Departmental Appeals Board) 5
Department of Health and Human Services (Food and Drug Administration) 0
Department of Health and Human Services (Office of Medicare Hearings and Appeals) 101
Department of Homeland Security (United States Coast Guard) 6
Department of Housing and Urban Development 2
Department of the Interior 9
Department of Justice (Drug Enforcement Administration) 2
Department of Justice (Executive Office for Immigration Review) 1
Department of Labor 41
Department of Transportation (Office of the Secretary) 3
Environmental Protection Agency 3
Federal Communications Commission 1
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 13
Federal Labor Relations Authority 2
Federal Maritime Commission 2
Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission 15
Federal Trade Commission 1
International Trade Commission 6
Merit Systems Protection Board 0
National Labor Relations Board 34
National Transportation Safety Board 3
Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission 12
Office of Financial Institution Adjudication 2
Securities and Exchange Commission 5
Small Business Administration 0
Social Security Administration 1,655
United States Postal Service 1
Total federal administrative law judges as of March 2017: 1,931


ALJ qualifications
The following table outlines the qualification standards required by law for ALJs:

Qualification requirements for ALJs[8]
“

A. Licensure

Applicants must be licensed and authorized to practice law under the laws of a State, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or any territorial court established under the United States Constitution throughout the selection process, including any period on the standing register of eligibles. Judicial status is acceptable in lieu of 'active' status in States that prohibit sitting judges from maintaining 'active' status to practice law. Being in 'good standing' is acceptable in lieu of 'active' status in States where the licensing authority considers 'good standing' as having a current license to practice law.

B. Experience

Qualifying Experience
Applicants must have a full seven (7) years of experience as a licensed attorney preparing for, participating in, and/or reviewing formal hearings or trials involving litigation and/or administrative law at the Federal, State or local level.
Cases must have been conducted on the record under procedures at least as formal as those prescribed by sections 553 through 559 of title 5, U.S.C.
Qualifying litigation experience involves cases in which a complaint was filed with a court, or a charging document (e.g., indictment or information) was issued by a court, a grand jury, or appropriate military authority, and includes:
  • participating in settlement or plea negotiations in advance of trial;
  • preparing for trial and/or trial of cases;
  • preparing opinions;
  • hearing cases;
  • participating in or conducting arbitration, mediation, or other alternative dispute resolution approved by the court; or
  • participating in appeals related to the types of cases above.
Qualifying administrative law experience involves cases in which a formal procedure was initiated by a governmental administrative body and includes:
  • participating in settlement negotiations in advance of hearing cases;
  • preparing for hearing and/or trial of cases;
  • preparing opinions;
  • hearing cases;
  • participating in or conducting arbitration, mediation, or other alternative dispute resolution approved by the administrative body; or
  • participating in appeals related to the types of cases above.
Non-qualifying Experience
Experience involving cases with no formal hearing procedure and uncontested cases involving misdemeanors, probate, domestic relations, or tort matters is not qualifying.

C. Examination

Applicants are required to pass an examination, the purpose of which is to evaluate the competencies/knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs) essential to performing the work of an Administrative Law Judge.[5]
 ”
—U.S. Office of Personnel Management, "Qualification Standard For Administrative Law Judge Positions"[8]


See also

External links

Footnotes

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 Association of Administrative Law Judges, "Why Should You Join the AALJ?" accessed May 9, 2018
  2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 Association of Administrative Law Judges, "What is the AALJ?" accessed May 11, 2018
  3. ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 Association of Administrative Law Judges, "Mission & History," accessed May 14, 2018
  4. ↑ AALJ, About, accessed May 31, 2023
  5. ↑ 5.0 5.1 5.2 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
  6. ↑ 6.0 6.1 Association of Administrative Law Judges, "Union Leaders," accessed May 11, 2018
  7. ↑ 7.0 7.1 7.2 7.3 Office of Personnel Management, "Administrative Law Judges," accessed April 1, 2025
  8. ↑ 8.0 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.5 8.6 Office of Personnel Management, "Classification & Qualifications," accessed April 1, 2025
  9. ↑ 9.0 9.1 JUSTIA, "Administrative Hearings," accessed July 21, 2017
  10. ↑ 10.0 10.1 JUSTIA, "Administrative Law Judges," accessed July 21, 2017
v • e
The Administrative State
MainThe Administrative State Project Badge.png
Pillars
Reporting
Laws
Administrative Procedure Act • Antiquities Act • Civil Service Reform Act • Clayton Antitrust Act • Communications Act of 1934 • Congressional Review Act • Electronic Freedom of Information Act • Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act of 1938 • Federal Housekeeping Statute • Federal Reserve Act • Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914 • Freedom of Information Act • Government in the Sunshine Act • Independent Offices Appropriations Act of 1952 • Information Quality Act • Interstate Commerce Act • National Labor Relations Act • Paperwork Reduction Act • Pendleton Act • Privacy Act of 1974 • Regulatory Flexibility Act • REINS Act • REINS Act (Wisconsin) • Securities Act of 1933 • Securities Exchange Act of 1934 • Sherman Antitrust Act • Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act • Truth in Regulating Act • Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Cases
Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner • A.L.A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States • Association of Data Processing Service Organizations v. Camp • Auer v. Robbins • Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council • Citizens to Preserve Overton Park v. Volpe • Federal Trade Commission (FTC) v. Standard Oil Company of California • Field v. Clark • Food and Drug Administration v. Brown and Williamson Tobacco Corporation • Humphrey's Executor v. United States • Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) v. Chadha • J.W. Hampton Jr. & Company v. United States • Lucia v. SEC • Marshall v. Barlow's • Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency • Mistretta v. United States • National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) v. Sebelius • National Labor Relations Board v. Noel Canning Company • National Labor Relations Board v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. • Panama Refining Co. v. Ryan • Securities and Exchange Commission v. Chenery Corporation • Skidmore v. Swift & Co. • United States v. Lopez • United States v. Western Pacific Railroad Co. • Universal Camera Corporation v. National Labor Relations Board • Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council • Wayman v. Southard • Weyerhaeuser Company v. United States Fish and Wildlife Service • Whitman v. American Trucking Associations • Wickard v. Filburn • Wiener v. United States
Terms
Adjudication (administrative state) • Administrative judge • Administrative law • Administrative law judge • Administrative state • Arbitrary-or-capricious test • Auer deference • Barrier to entry • Bootleggers and Baptists • Chevron deference (doctrine) • Civil servant • Civil service • Code of Federal Regulations • Codify (administrative state) • Comment period • Compliance costs • Congressional Record • Coordination (administrative state) • Deference (administrative state) • Direct and indirect costs (administrative state) • Enabling statute • Ex parte communication (administrative state) • Executive agency • Federal law • Federal Register • Federalism • Final rule • Formal rulemaking • Formalism (law) • Functionalism (law) • Guidance (administrative state) • Hybrid rulemaking • Incorporation by reference • Independent federal agency • Informal rulemaking • Joint resolution of disapproval (administrative state) • Major rule • Negotiated rulemaking • Nondelegation doctrine • OIRA prompt letter • Organic statute • Pragmatism (law) • Precautionary principle • Promulgate • Proposed rule • Publication rulemaking • Regulatory budget • Regulatory capture • Regulatory dark matter • Regulatory impact analysis • Regulatory policy officer • Regulatory reform officer • Regulatory review • Rent seeking • Retrospective regulatory review • Risk assessment (administrative state) • Rulemaking • Separation of powers • Significant regulatory action • Skidmore deference • Statutory authority • Substantive law and procedural law • Sue and settle • Sunset provision • Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions • United States Code • United States Statutes at Large
Bibliography
Agencies
Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=Association_of_Administrative_Law_Judges&oldid=10302083"