Jeremy Graboyes has written a piece for The Regulatory Review on The Search for Sound Vocational Evidence in Disability Adjudication. The impetus for the piece came from the recent Supreme Court opinion in Biestek v. Commissioner of Social Security. Graboyes notes that Social Security has been working on a new Occupational Information System (OIS) which might help allay some of the problems that have existed for years.
Grayobes doesn't mention that the process for creating a new OIS is anything but reassuring. We know almost nothing about what's going on even though it's been underway for more than ten years! There have been repeated delays in revealing the new OIS. It's obvious that there's something so unsatisfactory about the OIS that the agency cannot or will not let the public see it but no explanation has ever been given. There is reason for great concern that the Social Security Administration is trying to manipulate the presentation of data to achieve pre-determined goals for how it affects the number of disability claims approved and denied.
The Social Security Administration isn't just a neutral adjudicator. It's a party to administrative adjudications with positions it wants upheld. Why should one party to an adjudication get to secretly create and edit evidence crucial to the outcome of cases?
Grayobes doesn't mention that the process for creating a new OIS is anything but reassuring. We know almost nothing about what's going on even though it's been underway for more than ten years! There have been repeated delays in revealing the new OIS. It's obvious that there's something so unsatisfactory about the OIS that the agency cannot or will not let the public see it but no explanation has ever been given. There is reason for great concern that the Social Security Administration is trying to manipulate the presentation of data to achieve pre-determined goals for how it affects the number of disability claims approved and denied.
The Social Security Administration isn't just a neutral adjudicator. It's a party to administrative adjudications with positions it wants upheld. Why should one party to an adjudication get to secretly create and edit evidence crucial to the outcome of cases?
There is not a tug-of-war between SSA, the Courts, or even Congress, as to vocational evidence. They all seem content to rely on VE testimony, regardless of underlying data. I'm actually a little surprised SSA is even going forward with the OIS, given there's no accountability on the vocational front.
ReplyDeleteIt is no secret that the system allows claims to be decided on the basis of outdated information and vocational opinions which, to put it mildly, are highly questionable representations of the actual current labor market. Sadly,from my view those inaccuracies are mostly titled towards denying legitimate claims.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, what's missing is a sense of outrage at the notion that such a flawed, unjust system is good enough for the poor and people with disabilities. With a few notable exceptions, most ALJs I encounter express no interest in probing even the most incredible vocational testimony. Indeed some of them firmly obstruct the claimant or representative's attempts to do so.
Be careful what you ask for, you have been using the same system for years, you get a new one and they will be expecting you to know it, that means you are going to have unbillable hours of learning to do. ;)
ReplyDeleteThere's a lot of info available about the development & current status of OIS, if you look for it.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.ssa.gov/disabilityresearch/occupational_info_systems.html
https://www.bls.gov/ors/home.htm
https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ors.pdf
Anyone want to bet that the reason OIS has never been finalized is that doing so would result in an unacceptably high approval rate?
ReplyDeleteOr an even higher denial rate as there is much more assistive tech available to assist workers and work is not as hard as it used to be.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous at 4:10, your comment hardly seems relevant to disability law. Technical assistive devices is an issue for accommodated work. Accommodated work is never an issue in disability cases. As for work getting "easier," what do you mean? Do you mean physically or mentally? The two central issues to disability claims are the size of the unskilled labor market and what types of physical and mental limitations preclude unskilled work. I doubt that the labor market for unskilled work has been expending to any significant degree over that past 30 years. But one of the things we would presumably learn if OIS is ever finalized, is how large the unskilled labor market really is.
ReplyDelete