Articles from prior issues of The Advocate

January/February, 1999

What’s The Difference Between NADE And The Union?
An Oregon Perspective
by Ken Forbes, Pacific Regional Director

THIS IS A COLLABORATIVE ARTICLE produced through the efforts of Ken Forbes, representing OrADE’s point of view, and Dawn
Morgan, representing the Union point of view.

It started from a passing question at an activity sponsored by our local NADE chapter when a new employee asked the question:
“What’s the difference between NADE and the union? Don’t I get the same benefit from both?”

In our zealous (no it does not start with a “j”) quest for truth, justice, and the American Way of Life, we decided to pose the question
to a couple of spokespeople for these organizations in the Oregon DDS.

Q: What is the difference between the Union and NADE?

Ken: Both organizations thrive in the Oregon DDS and both seem to address the needs of their members. Both hold meetings and
invite participation from their members and other employees. Neither talks much about the other. One major difference I see is the
service provided to the employee. A union represents employees in discussions with management about compensation, working
conditions, and employment rights. NADE represents the disability professionals interests in Congress and before the Social Security
Administration (SSA), provides professional development opportunities, certifies disability analysts and support staff, as well as
educating the public about the disability program.

Dawn: The union negotiates about compensation, hours and working conditions. Unions also represent the interests of individual
employees in cases of discipline. In the Oregon DDS, we are working toward a form of partnership that enables us to concentrate on
problem solving, rather than the more traditional adversarial relationship. In addition to representational duties, OPEU advocates with
DDS management, the federal and state government, and in the public arena regarding political decisions that affect employees.
These range anywhere from ballot initiatives that attack wages or benefits to legislative actions regarding policy decisions, program
content and the image of public employees.

Q: Which takes me to how the organizations interact with the world outside the DDS. What differences are there in your organization’s
activities beyond the workplace?

Ken: NADE represents the interests of its members at a national level before the executive branch of the federal government (which
interprets the law and sets policies on the application of the disability program) and before Congress (which makes the laws that
control the disability program). NADE has been specifically invited to testify in congressional hearings on issues affecting Disability
Redesign, contracting out, Continuing Disability Review (CDR) and childhood redetermination workloads, etc. NADE is also a partner
with the Social Security Administration in designing a disability training institute to prepare people to be disability analysts in the future
and to potentially aid in our certification process. NADE, through its regional offices and local chapters, provides training and
professional development opportunities and, in some instances addresses regional differences in application of SSA policy.

Dawn: OPEU is affiliated with the Service Employees Union International (SEIU). Through this affiliation, the union has lobbied SSA,
Congress and the White House about everything from Social Security funding to the Redesign effort. Because SEIU represents DDS
employees in a mix of states, Maine, Massachusetts, New York, Montana, California, etc., in addition to Oregon we have been able to
argue issues effectively from an employee perspective.

For those of you who don’t know, Michele Perrizo went to Washington DC to provide input to the SEIU president, Andy Stern, who will
be meeting with the heads of the Redesign project. The SEIU had a political coordinator working on Redesign and I've been involved
in a half-dozen conference calls involving DDS employees from across the country. Through these efforts we've raised questions about
the entire concept of the Disability Claims Manager (DCM), the rationales involved in the full process model, compensation for
additional duties and a number of other issues. If these efforts don't succeed in making changes, the International will help its
members lobby appropriate legislative committee members.

That leads to another difference between NADE and OPEU, which is also related to politics, but in a different way. Congress, the
State legislature and the Executive branches of the federal and state governments respond to political clout. Sometimes rational
arguments are ignored by politicians, especially if those arguments are not backed up by the kinds of political power that they either
fear or need for re-election. NADE is a good advocate, but does not have the same fully developed organization for negotiating with
politicians which unions have developed over the years.

Q: What about membership? Do both organizations represent the same people? For the same reasons?

Ken: There is a difference in the makeup of the membership. NADE represents members who are not all employees of the DDS nor
even employees of the state nor, in the case of retired members, employees at all. All the people that belong to NADE have a
common interest in the disability program at the national level. Unions must represent all members so they must often invest time and
resources to deal with issues affecting staff in agencies like Revenue, Transportation, or State Universities, etc. NADE deals
exclusively with issues of interest to the disability professional, so all resources are focused on their issues.

Dawn: A number of our own employees, myself included, would argue pretty strongly that NADE heavily represents the interests of
DDS management, rather than solely the interests of DDS employees, as membership is mixed and in at least some states heavily
weighted in favor of managers/administrators. This makes it seem that there are two organizations, NADE and the National Council of
Disability Determination Directors (NCDDD), carrying management’s message. ORADE has made significant progress in broadening
their membership, but the nationwide make-up continues to have a high percentage of managers.

Q: Are there differences in the way the Union and NADE deal with the individuals they represent?

Ken: Since NADE is an organization made up of volunteers, led by members who volunteer for those positions, the membership has a
great deal of control over how and what NADE does for and with its members. Active participation allows members to shape the kinds
of activities the local chapter does, what training is provided, what messages are sent to the national organization, etc. Members have
lots of opportunities to participate through local chapter offices, regional offices, national committees and national offices. It might be
instructive to look at what NADE does not do. NADE does not represent individual members when there is a conflict between that
employee and management. NADE does not directly address working conditions or management decisions regarding work loads or
time allotted for the work, though we do provide information to SSA and Congress about reasonable expectations. For instance, in the
discussion of adding rationales to the work that a Disability Analyst will have to do on a case, NADE presented information regarding
the time involved and reminded both SSA and Congress that adding this time will result in lower productivity and should result in SSA
reducing its expectations. This information is expected to have a trickle-down effect on DDS management and their expectations.

Dawn: A differentiation needs to be made between a legal representative, required by law to perform certain functions and conform to
legally enforceable expectations, and a totally voluntary organization without a legal mandate, beyond the limits of non-profit status,
to deliver services.

One thing that NADE does that the union clearly does not, is provide educational opportunities related to disabilities and adjudication.
The union may educate employees on their rights, the most recent ballot measures, or the ins-and-outs of the Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA) or Worker’s Compensation, but it clearly defers to NADE in this area.

Thank you both for taking the time to respond to these questions. It looks like some of the underlying assumptions about significant
differences between the goals of these organizations may have been wrong. While both clearly have different structures and
differences in what they do for members, it appears both organizations are attempting to represent the needs of their members, the
union dealing with working conditions and employee/management relationships while NADE is dealing with professional development
and training. Both seem to represent the interests of disability professionals in Congress. The next issue to explore then is whether
these two organizations can collaborate to enhance the effectiveness of both in achieving their common goals.

If you have thoughts on the issues raised in this article, please send them to the editor for consideration of a follow-up article.