I received an interesting email recently. The writer noted that she had read my “blog initially with interest but then realized it was just more of the same old schlock.” She perceived that I “seem to spend quite a bit of time attempting to ‘accurately inform the public’ of what is happening at Stalag JOCC but the truth is never really revealed, is it?” She noted that we have begun requiring our mediators to account for their work time by clocking in and out” and questioned why the Judges do not do so. She also noted that “You've got absolutely no accountability where they (judges) are concerned.”
First, my apologies if this blog is the “same old schlock.” It is not intended to be, and it is hoped that occasionally there will be a nugget or two that will be of use to you in the world of workers’ compensation. Beyond that, it is certainly hoped that people generally do not perceive the Office of Judges of Compensation Claims as a German prisoner of war camp as implied by the reference to “stalag.” Over the last ten years, we have made significant strides in modernizing this agency. Computer software and hardware have been upgraded, work environments have been modernized where possible and cleaned/organized where modernization or upgrading was not practical. I believe our work environments today are better than they have ever been.
There has also been significant effort at accountability. The performance of this office is more transparent today that at any time in history, of which I am aware. I hear this perception reinforced often by the seasoned practitioners around the state, some of whom have practiced beyond 40 years, some approaching 50. They tell me that they believe we have the best bench today that we have ever had. That is high praise indeed when you consider the many diverse and dedicated people that have served this agency over the years.
Our judges are accountable to the state and to the people they serve. I will not tell you that the process of appointment and reappointment is perfect. I would argue that there likely is no perfect process that could be engaged. Indeed, the perfection is in the eye of the beholder. Regardless of what process was engaged to select or retain judges, someone would find fault with it. I respect that and recognize that people will feel differently about things. The diversity of views is to be expected, and is one of the best things about this country in which we live.
It is my hope that we are all living up to the standard of public service. It is my hope that we are delivering an efficient and effective dispute resolution process to employees and employers alike. These are the people for whom this system of workers’ compensation was intended, and they are the people whom we serve. It is my hope that this blog is not the “same old schlock,” and even more so I hope that if it is you will be kind enough to tell me.
I thank the writer who provided me the feedback that premised this blog post, and hope that I would hear from more like her. Your criticism, suggestions, and feedback are always welcome. While I cannot promise that the Office of Judges of Compensation Claims will or can solve all of the problems perceived, I can promise that the suggestions and comments of the public are always received with an objective attitude and are considered on their merits.
If you feel that “the truth is never really revealed,” state the truth as you perceive it. It is not practical to focus on “You've got absolutely no accountability where they (judges) are concerned.” That is a broad allegation. If there are specific facts which you perceive, however, I will be pleased to consider your perceptions, answer your questions, and continue to improve this Office.
