employer cover photo
employer logo
employer logo

Social Security Administration

Is this your company?

Social Security Administration reviews

3.0

36% would recommend to a friend

(2,782 total reviews)

Carolyn W. Colvin

34% approve of CEO

23% positive business outlook

Social Security Administration has an employee rating of 3.0 out of 5 stars, based on 2,782 company reviews on Glassdoor which indicates that most employees have an average working experience there. The Social Security Administration employee rating is in line with the average (within 1 standard deviation) for employers within the Government & Public Administration industry (3.6 stars).

Reviews by job title

3K reviews
1.0
Jul 20, 2018

Disability Analyst

Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Generous leave, TSP. Healthcare is okay. Not the best.

Cons

Where do I begin? As someone who’s been with the Agency nearly 15 years and held a variety of roles in the Field Office and PSC, I’ve seen a lot of waste, mismanagement, favoritism, and poor ethics. The Agency sells employees on the mission of being public service driven, yet this does not show in reality. Employees in the Field, PSC, and DDS are given caseloads too heavy to manage and yet are expected to produce numbers at unrealistic rates. The only way to meet Public Service Indicators aka numbers goals is to cut corners. Those who cut corners receive performance awards and those who are slower but work with integrity are often told to hurry up in direct and indirect ways. I even spent some time in management. Thankfully this was only a temporary role, as I quickly saw how much of a gossip fest and brown-nosing marathon it was. I feel sorry for middle management, as they are often the messengers of bad news and must deliver it whether they agree or not. The use of vagueness and loopholes to cover up unethical behavior is rampant, as to be expected in federal government. I have been hopeful and perhaps even purposefully ignorant about how bad it really is up until now. Innovation is advocated for but in reality employee suggestions tend to go nowhere. Once in a while they do, and those few times are used as proof that suggestions are valued. The training process is horrible. Many times mentors’ workloads are not decreased enough or at all to accommodate new hires. There is a “sink or swim” mentality — and this phrase by the way, has been said to me personally. In some offices paper is still used for case reviews. PAPER. Sending a sheet of paper back and forth for each case, then sending a daily time sheet encompassing all cases worked on that day. We are supposed to be “paperless” ? Young new hires often end up resigning within a few months to 2 years because the training is so bad, the starting pay is too low to live on, and the technology is outdated. They see quickly what they were told about how the Agency runs is not how it really is. Claimants end up waiting in the lobby for an hour to three hours past their appointments at times. Some of these people are sick, elderly, or otherwise disabled. We do not have enough employees to meet the demand, yet we are expected to do more and more with less and less. And the current administration wants to decrease the federal workforce? As someone else said in their review of SSA, if you didn’t already have a mental health problem before working here, you surely will develop one.

1.0
Jul 3, 2018
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Telework means not having to see the office 3 days a week.

Cons

DQB Boston is a terrible place to work. The executives currently in charge of the component are awful managers and don't really know the difference between numbers flying around and actual quality. These offices are supposed to stop the public from getting bad decisions but are now mostly about making incompetent people feel good about themselves by giving them high paying jobs they would never be able to compete for in the private sector. A disability case has hundreds of pages of medical records. 5 a day, which was the cap years ago, is perhaps doable but more than that is not. Are humans capable of reading thousands of pages a day for comprehension? People can say yes but think about it. The people who are supposedly handling more work are literally hopped up on ADHD meds and doing other things they shouldn’t be. (There is an abuse problem in Boston TBH with the younger staff trading and sharing Adderall on duty). The managers in Boston frequently "volunteer" the office to do more work. The work is never divided evenly in the office because there are too many people who got their jobs politically and people who just can’t handle it - like people with mental issues that prevent reading and writing. Also, the managers don't care that the workers in this office do more work than the other DQBs and get less compensation. There is less OT and other perks available here than at some of the other DQBs whose management and union officials actually advocate for them. Headquarters loves this arrangement and pretty much told us literally told us this during a recent, embarrassing waste of taxpayer dollars to send the executives up here to brag in our faces about how they take advantage of us. Typical civil service - the best and brightest get passed over for butt sniffers and other wholly political appointments. We have a guy who does almost nothing but is politically well-connected and holds parties for the office at his house regularly. So, he does almost nothing and gets ROC awards every year. That is how Boston works. There is also ageism as the staff development programs are mostly reserved for young people who are politically connected. Again, generally not people who can compete in the private sector. Let’s not even get into the other-isms. Lots of people with roots in Southie working here, unfortunately. You don't want to give up a good job for one at the DQB. Most of the people who work here don’t have anywhere else to go. I have been working for this agency for nearly 40 years. If it weren’t for the telework, I would have left when this office became as unprofessional as it is.

1.0
May 23, 2016

Awful

Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Flexible time-band scheduling, electronic time card system for signing in and out. Highest ranking officials in the building are friendly and accessible.

Cons

The PC in Richmond does not accommodate disabilities as a matter of course. Not a good environment for veterans. The building is infested with rodents and the water system carries legionella bacteria. Morale is extremely low. Bullying is rampant and harassment is commonplace. Common sense, dedication and intelligence are punished - silence and cowardice are embraced. The fact that a workplace like this exists in the year 2016 is beyond me. I would highly suggest passing on any opportunity located at PC5. It is truly an awful place to work.

Viewing 43 - 45 of 2,782 Reviews

Glassdoor has 2,926 Social Security Administration reviews submitted anonymously by Social Security Administration employees. Read employee reviews and ratings on Glassdoor to decide if Social Security Administration is right for you.