WHY THE VE IS IMPORTANT

Most Social Security disability claims will be denied, go through the appeal process, and wind up before an administrative law judge (ALJ) for a hearing.


Nearly always, there will be a Vocational Expert (VE) called by Social Security to testify at the hearing.  The VE provides the judge with certain types of information, such as:

  • What is the classification of the claimant's relevant past work?
  • Can a claimant with this individual's education, skills, experience and physical or mental limitations return to his or her past work?
  • If not, is there any other work that exists in significant numbers that such an individual can perform?
If the judge is left with the final impression that, "Yes, there are jobs available that such an individual could perform," he will likely rule that the claimant is not disabled.  Case lost.

If the VE testifies that there is no work available in significant numbers that the claimant could perform, and the judge relies on that (as she usually will), he or she will find the claimant to be disabled.  Case won.

As the claimant's advocate listens to the testimony of the Vocational Expert, he is analyzing it for weaknesses, exceptions, loopholes - anything that can be used to "convert" the VE to a more favorable position.  On cross examination, the advocate may use any number of tactics to weaken unfavorable testimony from the VE.

  1. Restate the claimant's limitations.  Are you taking into account all of the claimant's limitations?  What about his mood?  The fact that he would be absent from work more than 3 times each month?  What would be the affect of his lack of concentration and ability to use good judgment in work related situations?  These kind of questions may mitigate the VE's position on the occupational base.
  2. Question the VE's data.  What is the source of your job information?  How current is it?  Is it in conflict with other reliable data?
 By far, I find # 1 above to be more effective.  I have "converted" more VE's by emphasis on the claimant's restrictions to work than by attacking the data.  I much prefer to "attack" on the ground of my choosing and with superior forces, i.e., compelling medical evidence of functional limitations in the workplace.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

GETTING MONEY FROM SSDI

POST HEARING EVIDENCE

PARTIALLY FAVORABLE DECISIONS ON DISABILITY