Monthly Archives: March 2013

Social Security Disability Denied? Don’t Give Up Hope. (Part 1)

I’ve handled many Social Security disability cases over the course of my career, and helping people obtain the benefits they deserve is extremely gratifying. Today, I want to tell you about one of my clients who was eventually awarded Social Security disability benefits after a long fight.

This man – I’ll call him John – was injured at work. He was bringing a wheelbarrow loaded with materials up a flight of stairs when he slipped and fell down the stairs. He sustained significant back and shoulder injuries and was taken to the hospital that day. When I met with him, he had been out of work for several months and wanted to get back to work, but was unable to do so. I filed his application and waited for Social Security’s initial decision.

Because John was 48 years old when he was injured, I had to prove that he couldn’t do any type of work, not just the construction work he had done since he graduated from high school. John’s case was denied initially, as most cases are. I filed a request for a hearing in front of an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) and started to develop John’s case.

In addition to his back and shoulder injuries, John was also depressed due to his chronic pain and inability to live his life the way he used to before his accident.

In addition to his back and shoulder injuries, John was also depressed due to his chronic pain and inability to live his life the way he used to before his accident. He started treatment with a psychiatrist and a psychologist. All conditions count in a Social Security disability benefits case, both physical and emotional. 

As his hearing date approached, I obtained updated medical records from all of John’s doctors and obtained supportive opinions from them as well.  Before the hearing, I prepared John for the questions he was likely to face.  Going into the hearing, I felt confident that John would get the benefits he deserved.  However, at the hearing, the ALJ did not seem to feel the case was as strong as I did. I told John to prepare for a denial from the judge.

While reviewing the decision, I noticed that the judge had made several significant errors…

Sure enough, the judge denied John’s claim. While reviewing the decision, I noticed that the judge had made several significant errors, from improperly evaluating the credibility of John’s statements, to giving improper weight to the opinions of his treating doctors. I met with John to review the decision and talk about our options.  Given the number of errors contained in the judge’s decision and the strength of John’s case, we decided to file an appeal with the Appeals Council. The Appeals Council, located in Falls Church, Virginia, is charged with reviewing appeals from individuals who disagree with the decision made by the judge at their hearing.

The Appeals Council review process can take anywhere from 18 to 24 months, and only about 20 percent of appeals are successful.  Despite these odds, I felt good about John’s chances due to the support of his treating physicians and the multiple errors made by the judge. I prepared a comprehensive legal brief detailing all of the judge’s errors and sent it to the Appeals Council for review. When I sent the appeal, I felt that the Appeals Council would recognize that the judge had issued a flawed decision and vacate it.  When a judge’s decision is vacated, the case is sent back for a new hearing and a new decision. 

In next week’s post we’ll reveal the outcome of John’s case.

Prior results do not guarantee outcomes.
Attorney Advertising.

Misclassification Fraud Across the Country

North Carolina Governor Bev Perdue Signed Executive Order 125

Today’s post comes from guest author Leonard Jernigan from The Jernigan Law Firm.

“Misclassification” is a poorly chosen word to describe fraudulent conduct by employers who misclassify the status of their employees. For example, a roofing company may have 30 roofers doing the actual work but these workers are classified as “independent contractors” instead of employees. Why would they do that? At the end of the year these workers are sent a 1099 tax form that reports the wages paid, but the employer does not make any deductions for Medicare or unemployment, and doesn’t pay for workers’ compensation insurance. If you have a roofing company and you properly classify your employees, you are at a competitive disadvantage in bidding on jobs. Honest businesses are hurt by misclassification, and taxpayers are hurt because they pick up medical bills and other expenses created when one of these “independent contractors” gets hurt.

Another form of misclassification is when a construction company with 85 employees reports to its workers’ compensation insurance company that 75 of these people are staff workers, which results in a significantly reduced premium. Obviously, a construction worker is at greater risk of injury than an office worker. Again, the honest company who accurately reports the status of its employees is at a competitive disadvantage with the dishonest employer.

New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Virginia, Michigan, Florida, California, Texas and the vast majority of states across the country have been looking into this issue for several years and they have been aggressively prosecuting dishonest employers who try to game the system. North Carolina has finally joined these states. On August 22, 2012, Governor Beverly Perdue issued Executive Order 125, which created a task force to study this issue and try to get different agencies to communicate with each other and share information to identify employers who are failing to pay employee taxes. Hopefully, this task force will figure out how to enforce existing law. This blog will follow the progress of this task force. Stay tuned.

Prior results do not guarantee outcomes.
Attorney Advertising.

Are You Suffering From Symptoms Of Chronic Stress? Take the Stress Test!

Today’s guest post is from Kit Case of the Causey Law Firm in Washington State.

Signs of Chronic Stress:

Cognitive symptoms

  • Memory problems
  • Inability to concentrate
  • Poor judgment
  • Pessimistic approach or thoughts
  • Anxious or racing thoughts
  • Constant worrying

Emotional symptoms

  • Moodiness
  • Irritability or short temper
  • Agitation, inability to relax
  • Feeling overwhelmed
  • Sense of loneliness and isolation
  • Depression or general unhappiness

Physical symptoms

  • Aches and pains
  • Diarrhea or constipation
  • Nausea, dizziness
  • Chest pain, rapid heartbeat
  • Loss of sex drive
  • Frequent colds

Behavioral symptoms

  • Eating more or less
  • Sleeping too much or too little
  • Isolating oneself from others
  • Procrastinating or neglecting responsibilities
  • Using alcohol, cigarettes, or drugs to relax 

Take the Stress Test for Adults:

Thomas Holmes and Richard Rahe in 1967, examined the medical records of over 5,000 medical patients as a way to determine whether stressful events might cause illnesses. Patients were asked to tally a list of 43 life events based on a relative score. A positive correlation was found between their life events and their illnesses.

Their results were published as the Social Readjustment Rating Scale (SRRS), known more commonly as the Holmes and Rahe Stress Scale.

To measure stress according to the Holmes and Rahe Stress Scale, the number of “Life Change Units” that apply to events in the past year of an individual’s life are added and the final score will give a rough estimate of how stress affects health.

Note: the table, below, is from the Wikipedia page on this subject.  For a fee of $5.00, you can go directly to Dr. Rahe’s website and obtain the full test materials as well as background information and details of this and other products and services available.

To measure stress according to the Holmes and Rahe Stress Scale, the number of “Life Change Units” that apply to events in the past year of an individual’s life are added and the final score will give a rough estimate of how stress affects health.

Life event Life change units
Death of a spouse 100
Divorce 73
Marital separation 65
Imprisonment 63
Death of a close family member 63
Personal injury or illness 53
Marriage 50
Dismissal from work 47
Marital reconciliation 45
Retirement 45
Change in health of family member 44
Pregnancy 40
Sexual difficulties 39
Gain a new family member 39
Business readjustment 39
Change in financial state 38
Death of a close friend 37
Change to different line of work 36
Change in frequency of arguments 35
Major mortgage 32
Foreclosure of mortgage or loan 30
Change in responsibilities at work 29
Child leaving home 29
Trouble with in-laws 29
Outstanding personal achievement 28
Spouse starts or stops work 26
Begin or end school 26
Change in living conditions 25
Revision of personal habits 24
Trouble with boss 23
Change in working hours or conditions 20
Change in residence 20
Change in schools 20
Change in recreation 19
Change in church activities 19
Change in social activities 18
Minor mortgage or loan 17
Change in sleeping habits 16
Change in number of family reunions 15
Change in eating habits 15
Vacation 13
Christmas 12
Minor violation of law 11

Score of 300+: At risk of illness.

Score of 150-299+: Risk of illness is moderate (reduced by 30% from the above risk).

Score 150-: Only have a slight risk of illness.

 

Recommended methods for relieving chronic stress include exercise (which can be modified to accommodate physical restrictions after an injury), meditation, music therapy, breathing techniques, and such simple things as companionship – from a pet, friend or family member.

 

Prior results do not guarantee outcomes.
Attorney Advertising.

My Friend Got SSD Right Away. Why Is My Case Taking So Long?

Many people currently applying for Social Security disability benefits know someone who has been through the process before and is currently receiving benefits.  In fact, many of our current clients were referred to us by former clients who were pleased with how we handled their case.  This means we often hear the question “Why is my case taking so long?  My friend was awarded disability right away and didn’t have to wait.”

The short answer to this question is that every case is different.  Each case is assigned to someone at the Social Security Administration to handle, and some people work faster than others, or have less cases to work on.  If the person handling your case at SSA get sick or goes on vacation, you may wait longer for a decision.  If you are treated by several doctors, it may take SSA longer to get your records, and the more records there are to review, the longer the case can take.  Make sure you tell your doctors that you have filed your application so that their office staff will be aware that SSA’s request for records will be forthcoming.  The faster your doctors respond to SSA’s requests, the sooner a decision can be made.

The SSA does the best they can, given the increase in claims and decrease in staff members, to make decisions in a timely manner.  The best way to get a quick decision is to make sure that you give SSA all the information they need to process your claim and get your records.  If SSA is not told about a doctor that you see until they have already started the process, it may take them longer to get those records, delaying your decision.  You should also make sure that you respond to letters and phone calls from SSA as soon as possible.  Make sure that you promptly report any changes in your medical condition or care, such as a new doctor, a new medication, or a hospital visit. 

If you want assistance with your Social Security disability claim, please contact our office and speak with a member of our staff.  We’ll be happy to set up a free consultation so that we can discuss your case, either in one of our offices or over the phone.

Prior results do not guarantee outcomes.
Attorney Advertising.

OSHA Reaches Employer Agreement to Stop Discouraging Employee Accident Reports

Today’s post comes from guest author Jon Gelman from Jon Gelman, LLC – Attorney at Law.

Statistics regarding the reporting of accidents have historically been challenged for accuracy as employees have been fearful about reporting events, and employers have been reluctant for numerous reasons, including the potential of increased insurance costs. Now OSHA has taken a significant step to legitimize the process by seeking an employer accord not to take adverse actions against employees for reporting injuries in the workplace.

The U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration has signed an accord with BNSF Railway Co., headquartered in Fort Worth, Texas, announcing BNSF’s voluntary revision of several personnel policies that OSHA alleged violated the whistleblower provisions of the Federal Railroad Safety Act and dissuaded workers from reporting on-the-job injuries. FRSA’s Section 20109 protects railroad workers from retaliation for, among other acts, reporting suspected violations of federal laws and regulations related to railroad safety and security, hazardous safety or security conditions, and on-the-job injuries.

“Protecting America’s railroad workers who report on-the-job injuries from retaliation is an essential element in OSHA’s mission. This accord makes significant progress toward ensuring that BNSF employees who report injuries do not suffer any adverse consequences for doing so,” said Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health Dr. David Michaels. “It also sets the tone for other railroad employers throughout the U.S. to take steps to ensure that their workers are not harassed, intimidated or terminated, in whole or part, for reporting workplace injuries.”

The major terms of the accord include:

  • Changing BNSF’s disciplinary policy so that injuries no longer play a role in determining the length of an employee’s probation following a record suspension for a serious rule violation. As of Aug. 31, 2012, BNSF has reduced the probations of 136 employees who were serving longer probations because they had been injured on-the-job.
  • Eliminating a policy that Continue reading →

Prior results do not guarantee outcomes.
Attorney Advertising.

My Doctor Says I am Totally Disabled – Can I Get Social Security Diability?

Many people think that they will easily get Social Security disability benefits because they got a letter from their doctor that states that they are “totally disabled” and cannot work. This is a great first step for obtaining benefits – but it is only a first step. If your doctor is willing to write you a letter that says you are totally disabled, that shows that he or she will support your claim for benefits.  The support of a treating physician is very important to your claim.

Equally important to your claim is how your doctor’s opinion is expressed. A brief statement that you are totally disabled and/or that you cannot work will not be given a lot of consideration by the Social Security Administration (SSA). In order to make sure that your doctor’s opinion is properly considered and given the proper weight, your doctor will need to provide SSA with a “function by function” assessment of your ability to work.  SSA wants your doctor to provide them with an opinion that lists specific restrictions, such as how long you can sit, stand, and walk, how much weight you can lift and carry, and any limitation in your ability to get along with co-workers, the public, or to concentrate and follow instructions. Your doctor must also support his opinion with evidence such as examination findings or the results of diagnostic tests (such as MRIs and CT scans). If your doctor’s opinion is not properly expressed, it may not be given the weight it deserves, making it more difficult for you to get the benefits you’re entitled to.

To make sure that our clients get the benefits that they deserve, we contact the treating physicians to gather all of the evidence we need – including opinion evidence in the format required by SSA. If your doctor has told you that you are totally disabled and/or unable to work, please contact us if you need assistance with your claim.

Prior results do not guarantee outcomes.
Attorney Advertising.

PTSD and Police Officers at the Newtown Massacre

Today’s post comes from guest author Leila A. Early from The Jernigan Law Firm.

Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) is a type of anxiety disorder that can occur after a person has seen or experienced a traumatic event that involved the threat of injury or death. In civil war battles a soldier may be sitting next to his best friend when a cannonball takes off his friend’s head. The horror of such events put some soldiers out of action. Similarly, police officers have a higher incidence of PTSD/Anxiety Disorders than the general public due to the gruesome scenes and situations that they witness in their occupation. Classic symptoms of PTSD fall into three main categories: (1) reliving the event (such as nightmares and flashbacks); (2) avoidance (including feeling detached, numb, and avoiding things that remind them of the event); and (3) arousal (including difficulty concentrating, startling easily, and difficulty falling asleep).

Some of the police officers who responded to the shootings in Newtown, Connecticut are suffering from PTSD, calling it the worst crime scene they ever walked into. They are suffering from severe emotional distress and shock and have been unable to return to work due to the trauma they witnessed. Unfortunately, PTSD is not covered by workers’ compensation in Connecticut. Therefore they have been forced to use vacation and sick time to cope with the situation.

Our law firm has represented multiple police officers who have developed PTSD as a result of the gruesome scenes and situations they have been involved in at work. Fortunately, PTSD may qualify as an occupational disease under North Carolina workers’ compensation law. Hopefully the Connecticut legislature will amend their statutes in light of the school shootings to help these police officers get medical care and get back to work as quickly as possible.

Prior results do not guarantee outcomes.
Attorney Advertising.

Buying a Cheap Shirt at Wal-Mart? Consider the real cost (in lives).

Wal-Mart’s low prices have led to unsafe working conditions.

Today’s post comes from guest author Tom Domer from The Domer Law Firm.

The recent Bangladesh factory fire killed over 100 workers.  The factor produced goods for Wal-Mart.  Wal-Mart now concedes it “needs to do more to control its supply chain.” 

Wal-Mart’s Vice President of “Ethical Sourcing” (irony noted here) said the company control could “only go so far” in preventing an unauthorized factory producing its goods.  Wal-Mart said its Faded Glory clothing should not have been produced in the factory, which Bangladesh officials said was not safe.

Wal-Mart’s “factory certification” program focused on Bangladesh and China was allegedly “dedicated to improving the status of foreign labor.” Tell that to the families of the workers who died.

At a meeting last year where Wal-Mart’s Vice President of Ethical Sourcing was in attendance, the Bangladeshi Garment Workers Union proposed that producers such as Wal-Mart help ensure prices are high enough to provide for safety measures for their workers.

Wal-Mart’s Vice President indicated Wal-Mart could not support such a program because of the high cost.  Consider that next time you buy a cheap shirt at Wal-Mart.

Prior results do not guarantee outcomes.
Attorney Advertising.