The Washington Post has an article out on the proposal to eliminate consideration of inability to speak English in determining disability under Social Security's grid regulations.
I don't see why anyone would think that English proficiency has no effect on one's ability to hold down a job. Sure, people who can't speak English hold down jobs in the U.S. but they can't be cashiers or bank tellers or bus drivers. Even in Puerto Rico, you can't work in the tourism industry or many other jobs if you can't speak English. Also, there are far, far more job opportunities for those who only speak Spanish than there are for those who only speak Russian or Yoruba or Greek.
One thing that needs to be said about this proposal, however, is that it won't affect that many people. The regulations in question matter in only a few borderline cases.
It's rich that the Trump Administration is protesting criticism of this proposal by saying it isn't intended to be anti-immigrant. We all know why this proposal is coming forward during the Trump Administration.
22 comments:
He must be trying to get DIB benefits for ten years back when he was 46. If he is restricted to sed or light work now at age 56 he would be eligible for disability if his only past work was as is stated in the article regardless of his ability or inability to speak English. The article says he has citizenship which usually requires ability to communicate in Emglish unless one shows they are insane, intellectually disabled etc. The current rule requires an inability to speak English....not just limited proficiency
@9:36
The article states he was injured in 2008, so I think you are on the right track with the 46 years of age estimate. Doesn't sound like much of a stretch either, his pelvis was shattered and multiple discs were ruptured, so there would likely be good objective evidence and a specific onset date documented. As to the English citizenship issue, article says he came as a refugee in 1998 from Bosnia. I'm not sure when English became required as part of the citizenship process. The article is a little vague when he actually applied for citizenship.
It's a little weird. The debate is largely focused on Puerto Rican applicants who know only Spanish. Even in the mainland, Spanish is not particularly uncommon, and I could see a valid finding by a VE that a Spanish-only speaker might still have significant job numbers, assuming no mental limitations and capable of sedentary or light exertion. I can understand the argument, although I believe the Social Security Act was specifically intended to cover those who are incapable of working in the national economy, so the fact that not speaking English in Puerto Rico is not particularly harmful seems to be off the point.
Regardless, Bosnian?!? Yeah, that's not exactly a common language in the US.
The OIG report that is the impetus for this proposal was conducted in 2015 -- well before Trump's election. The Puerto Rico fraud scandal that brought this issue to the fore was also investigated by Obama's OIG, in 2012-2013, and redeterminations were begun in 2013 and 2014. But I guess then it was a matter of SSA doing the bidding of a Republican Congress? Somehow in the fever swamps of this blog SSA is always taking its marching orders from Republicans no matter what branch they happen to actually be in charge of.
How relevant can this possibly be? Not speaking a language in a country where you reside is almost impossible; you are forced to learn whether you like it or not. Also, talk about an "invisible" disability, anyone can fake this!
@4:04
It's not very relevant one way or the other. Very few individuals do not speak English in the US. Even fewer of those people are seeking/receiving disability benefits. Even fewer of those cases is an inability to speak English be a relevant factor, as it would only come into play if the claimant is of a particular age and physically limited to a particular degree. That said, it's not "almost impossible" not to speak English, it just depends where you live. As to someone being able to fake an inability to speak English, not really. It's about as hard as it would be to document any disability that is not visibly obvious, and even those disabilities that are visibly obvious, it still comes down to how limiting those impairments are, which in most cases comes down to a matter of a claimant's testimony, and evidence in support of that testimony. So in any event, yeah in theory it could be "faked," but the entire system is designed to catch that.
The abuse I have seen in the system in the past....several years ago. ...www as generally not from Spanish speakers...involved situations in which well educated immigrants in good jobs brought their parents over to babysit, cook and be part of their families and applied for them. In these cases no work and no English was often alleged when it was not plausible given the success of their children in the countries they came from many likely had considerable wealth or property in their country which should have precluded them from SSI anyway.. Eligibility rules have changed and I now work in an area with a different demographic so do not know if it is still an issue.. I am an immigrant myself by the way. When I became a citizen 35 years ago English facility was required..
Just another reason to demonize immigrants mainly Spanish speakers. But this could also affect immigrants from another country.
News flash Trump. There is no official language in the U.S.
I have had several cases where the person answered the phone in English and was able to converse but reverted to no English when I told them who I was.. The system has no way of catching this. We are not going to deny someone just because they answered the phone in English. We are not going to call their doctors or ask them if they communicated in English. However like has Been said these cases are quite few though it may depend on where you are working
To 5:42 June 11, 2019:
There is no official language in the US, because we are a nation of tolerance. But the language of science universally, throughout the world is English and there is really no excuse to live in the U.S. and not speak it. (see below)
Lat week I was at a Walmart and asked one of the floor workers (doing stock work) a question and he "indicated" that he could not speak English and yet he was making minimum wage in this state which is $11 an hour- more than I get on SSDI. Go figure!
"English is now used almost exclusively as the language of science. The adoption of a de facto universal language of science has had an extraordinary effect on scientific communication: by learning a single language, scientists around the world gain access to the vast scientific literature and can communicate with other scientists anywhere in the world."
Shouldn't any proposed policy change be evidence based? Where's any recent and reliable job survey data that 45+ year old people with severe impairments, who can't speak English, are being hired in significant numbers in competitive sedentary full-time jobs? That is the category that they are proposing to change.
We're not talking about agricultural workers, as that is not sedentary work. We're not talking about intermittent part-time unskilled labor because that does not qualify as substantial gainful activity. It does seem that this proposed policy change is not based on reliable and relevant evidence. It's a bad sign when agencies start proposing rules that aren't based on good evidence. It makes you wonder what they are based on.
Like 11:48 mentioned, this idea has been swimming around for a long time now. It's part of a larger modernization of the med-voc rules.
9:12 they get paid more because they are working.
10:46. It is not just sed work. It also applies to those 50 to 54 with a light RFC. A lot of cleaning, maid and sorting jobs are in this category. Also though not listed we have been told it also applies to those with even highly skilled work who say they cannot speak English. This includes those who can read and write in Englsh. ...just not speak it
Des
6:03, the system has plenty of ways to catch this. If an SSA or DDS employee speaks in English to someone who claims to be unable to communicate in English the Cooperative Disability Investigation Unit or another part of OIG can take a report and look into it. If this were common, don't you think SSA would have mentioned it in the NPRM to bolster their case for the proposed rule?
SSA spends about 1/8 of its money on program integrity even though fraud is very low. Imagine if your local grocery store spent 1/8 of its money on preventing shoplifting--lines would be long, inventory would be low, and the store would be dirty because there wasn't enough money left over to pay for enough staff and equipment. And while there might be a little less shoplifting, there probably wasn't much to begin with--and a bunch of it came from employees rather than customers. SSA is much the same: spending so much on program integrity it can't do its actual business, even though almost nobody is actually stealing from them, and of those that are many are actually SSA employees!
Program integrity is not primarily about fraud. It includes all the CDRS, income verification, etc. I do not think anyone ever sent a case for a CDI just because they said they did not speakmEnglish and they did
Since there is no official language in the US, why should inability to communicate in English be a basis to grant benefits?
There was an ALJ who would deny requests for interpreters when the record reflected claimant's ability to speak English. Waste of time and money, right? But the ALJ marching orders ("HALLEX")require that interpreters be provided upon request, so the ALJ was disciplined when he/she declined to follow Regional direction to do same. I think the ALJ won a partial victory on appeal of that, with the arbitrator (or MSPB ALJ, I forget) ruling that HALLEX is not binding when it conflicts with higher authority (ALJs have the discretion to decide who may appear at the hearing). That doesn't mean that the ALJs decision re: necessary participants isn't subject to appeal, it just means that the decision is not a disciplinable offense.
@9:13
The logic is:
Social Security has come up with a shortcut, meant to not require a vocational expert. This is the "medical-vocational guidelines," which are a matrix of factors which direct either an award or denial of benefits, based on 4 specific factors. The factors are: age, education/literacy, work experience, and exertional capacity.
Inability to communicate in English is NEVER the sole basis to grant benefits, but in rare circumstances, combined with significant age, limited exertional capacity, and limited work experience, it can be a factor which in addition to the other factors, can direct an award.
As to why an inability to communicate in English is a factor at all? I believe the logic when they wrote the guidelines was that a significant range of occupations in the national economy requires an ability to communicate in English, so it was reasonable to include this as one of the factors, since the point was to create a shortcut. Just as examples, the entire dispatcher range of work is pretty much english-exclusive. Similarly, at the very least, a vast majority of telemarketing would be english-exclusive.
It's not a perfect solution, but experts cost money, and SSA has a fiduciary duty to try and cut costs where they can, while still maintaining a claims system which is reasonable accurate in denying/awarding claims.
To: "There is no official language in the US, because we are a nation of tolerance. But the language of science universally, throughout the world is English and there is really no excuse to live in the U.S. and not speak it."
Who are you to say? No excuse please. It depends. It is a matter of necessity.
I used to live near the Arizona-Mexico border near Yuma, Ariz. If a person lived in the U.S. right across the border, there was no need to know much English. But the more they ventured into Arizona the more English they know.
This whole "no excuse not speak it" is just nonsense. It really comes from a place where U.S. citizens feel superior over immigrants. Stop it. This just is hate.
In Southern California I have many clients who became citizens of US back in the 1990's. They studied enough English to pass the test. But in their day to day lives they only speak, read and write Spanish. Now in their 50's and becoming disabled due to their physically taxing jobs. Their English is nonexistant. Think they are lying that if they passed the citizenship test, they must be able to speak English? Can you speak enough of the french, spanish or german you learned in high school to get a job where those languages are required?
To not take into consideration the ability to speak/read/write English is ridiculous and cruel. Per the article, 6500 people a year would be denied if this passes and the SSA is projected to save 4.6 billion dollars in the next decade. Instead of saving money by cutting benefits to the disabled, the cap on SSA earnings should have been lifted a long time ago. (And yes, I would have to pay more money to SSA if that happened, but would be okay with it if the money was used to support those who are in need of it).
Some people may think this is unfair and others will think it is hatred of immigrants, but the fact of the matter is that English can be learned and if you cannot speak it, then it would be in your best interest to learn so that you can work and not collect pay for not working if there is no real medical problem. The grid rules should be abolished altogether.For a health individual there are always new things to learn and skills to acquire, and like it or not, speaking the language of the land is important, not just for employment, but to secure assistance from first res ponders, communicate with neighbors, effectively voice your opinions, like and dislikes to the rest of the population.
I, [personally, feel that one common language within a geographic area will better unite us, cut down on misunderstandings, and benefit all.Diversity is great, but we need to be able to communicate with each other effectively.
@5:45 PM
This whole "no excuse not speak it" is just nonsense. It really comes from a place where U.S. citizens feel superior over immigrants. Stop it. This just is hate.
Lol. Seriously? Idiots like you are why the system is such a dumpster fire now.
Post a Comment