New

The Advocate Study Guide

Lesson Five

Introduction to Vocational Analysis

What is Vocational Analysis?

Every job in the national economy entails some physical and/or mental demands. Vocational Analysis (VA) defines the physical and/or mental demands of a claimant’s past work so that it can be decided if he/she is capable of continuing in his/her profession or of doing other less demanding work considering the limitations caused by his/her impairment.

At What Point in a Case Should I Perform a Vocational Analysis?

As a Disability Advocate, you always begin a case by interviewing the potential client. Ask about the claimant’s work history during this interview. You won’t need a lot of detail at first. Start by finding out:

What type of work the client has done in the past
How long he/she worked
How much he/she typically earned

The reason he/she stopped workThis will help you decide if the case is potentially viable. Example: The potential client is a roofer with 13 year’s experience who earned $30,000 per year. He stopped working 6 months ago after he fell off a roof. Two sentences tell you a tremendous amount about this case if you’re paying attention! You can look up the job title “Roofer” to determine its physical demands.

Knowing that the claimant worked for thirteen years at this job tells you that he is probably going to meet the SSDI application criteria, which also tells you the case type. He definitely earned above the current SGA. He stopped working six months ago, which tells you that this is a good time to take the case. You can now further investigate the injury in order to discern if you want to formally accept the case.

On subsequent interviews with your client, get as much information about past work as possible. In Vocational Analysis you document the claimant's limitations and the demands of his/her past work and then compare the two to formulate an appropriate RFC. If the claimant’s physical and/or mental limitations preclude going back to what he/she used to do (Sequential Analysis Step 5), then he/she is unable to perform past work. Move to Step Six, which asks,

"Can the claimant do other less demanding work?"

If you consider the claimant’s age, education and remaining capabilities and answer, “Yes”, he/she will be denied benefits based on SA Step Six. To win the case, you must argue for an RFC level that reflects an inability to perform other less demanding work. If you can argue that there is no way that the claimant can adjust to less demanding work given his/her condition, the case will most likely be allowed based on Medical Vocational Factors. This is your objective!

The Vocational Analysis Process

Vocational Analysis is a complex process that is very important to Case Evaluation. It consists of the following steps:

1.   Review the medical evidence and identify physical or mental restrictions and limitations. Using this information, formulate an RFC that you feel will result in an allowance determination.

2.   Evaluate the demands (Functional Components) of the claimant’s past work.

3.   Compare the RFC with the past work demands. If you determine that he/she can still perform the duties of his/her past work, SSA will deny benefits, and that’s the end of the case. If the claimant is unable do his/her past work, your next step is to compare the RFC with the requirements of other less demanding work for which he/she is qualified.

4.   If the claimant is unable to adjust to less demanding work, (which is the objective of your argument), he/she will have a good chance of being found disabled by SSA.

5. Always base your argument on an RFC that would result in an allowance determination.

Use the Vocational Rules Table in the Program Syllabus to determine which RFC is needed for an allowance determination given the client's age, education and so on. This table is also referred to as “The Grid”. Our Program Syllabus contains a link to a sample Grid for your information.

Fundamental Components - an Important Element of Vocational Analysis

Part of the VA process is breaking the client’s past job down into its Fundamental Components - the physical and mental elements required to perform that work. VA is the process whereby you compare a person's ability to perform work, considering his/her limitations, with the fundamental components of his/her accustomed job. You’re making this comparison to determine if your client can realistically perform the work. If the claimant is limited as a result of his/her impairments, he/she will be excluded by SSA from performing work that he/she is unable to do.

Therefore, the more limited the claimant appears to be relative to the work’s fundamental components, the better the chances of winning benefits. An allowance decision that is based on medical limitations to job performance is called a Medical Vocational Allowance.VA is the foundation of any effective adult disability case argument. If you’re skilled in this process you will be far more likely to win your cases. However, we have learned from our own experiences that formal VA is not always necessary. You can usually perform an abbreviated analysis that will be fully adequate and take a lot less time.

The Olivia Vocational Analyzer Tool

Common Sense VAAs a Disability Advocate, you will use VA to establish that the claimant cannot perform the duties of his/her past work or other less demanding work because of his/her physical and/or mental limitations. Since SSA must exclude all work that the claimant is incapable of performing, this is the best route to a favorable decision. Although the process may appear complex, it is simple once you recognize its underlying purpose. In earlier versions of our Disability Advocate Training, we consumed volumes of paper trying to explain VA’s technical aspects. All we accomplished was to thoroughly confuse our students! We now use an approach we call “Common Sense Vocational Analysis”. In Common Sense VA, we focus on the Fundamental Components of work.

Fundamental Components of Work

Once again, a Fundamental Component of Work is a physical and or mental ability that one needs to perform a given job. Examples of fundamental components are standing, walking, bending, stooping, and lifting.   The RFC is your evidence-based opinion (or that of the DDS Examiner) of the claimant’s remaining ability to perform an action, taking into consideration his/her impairment. In Common Sense VA, one simply compares the RFC with the fundamental component to decide if the claimant can do it.

The Relationship between Fundamental Components and RFCs

Example: Your client, a truck driver named Fred, has injured his eyes and can no longer see to pass his driver’s license examination. His injury, its symptoms and the subsequent limitations are medically documented. As Fred’s representative, you must determine if he is a good candidate for disability.

Of course you argue that Fred is no longer capable of performing his past work due to the restrictions imposed by his eye injury. SSA will probably agree! Fred's visual impairment has caused him to lose a fundamental component of his past job. We have shown that he is no longer capable of performing his past work. But, what about his ability to perform other less demanding work? And, what if Fred is only thirty years old?

The Vocational Secret: For any claimant under age forty-nine, you must always argue for a less than sedentary RFC. You argue for less than sedentary by pointing out the effects of all impairments combined (remember the Whole Body Principle!). The primary impairment in our above example is vision. However, if the claimant can still read normally with corrective lenses, vision alone will not eliminate his ability to perform other less demanding work. Therefore, his case will be denied – unless he suffers from other impairments as well.

One of our most successful students once asked, “Why do you use so many examples of denied cases?” Our answer:

As with any wise General in the field, your greatest lessons come from your mistakes. You’ll get ahead much faster in this business if you learn from other’s mistakes rather than making them yourself. We’ve made most of the mistakes, and we’ve learned from them. The purpose of Disability Associates Training is to give you the benefit of what we’ve learned!

To win the case for Fred, who is under age forty-nine, there must be serious secondary limitations that, when combined with a vision impairment, further reduce his ability to perform sedentary work. A good example of a secondary limitation is a verifiable back disorder that significantly restricts sitting, standing, walking, etc. When Fred’s back disorder is combined with poor vision, a reasonable argument can be made that he is incapable of performing even sedentary work, despite his young age!

Identifying Physical and Mental Job Requirements All jobs have characteristic physical and/or mental requirements. For example: To function properly as a bank teller, you must:

·     Be of average intelligence
·     Be able to read and write
·     Be able to do at least basic arithmetic
·     Be able to communicate effectively with others
·     Be able to sit or stand in one place for an extended period of time

A loss of any two of the above fundamental components would make performing as a bank teller all but impossible.

Comparing Claimant Restrictions to Job Demands

As a Disability Advocate you will use medical evidence to demonstrate a claimant's inability to perform work. You will point out that there has been a loss of a specific capability or fundamental component of work that prevents the claimant from doing a job. It is important to keep in mind that disabled individuals do not always lose the same fundamental components even when they suffer from the same disorder. Some may lose many capabilities while others lose just a few.   When it comes to limitations, treat each case as if it is unique. Remember, in VA, you’re simply comparing the claimant's physical and/or mental restrictions identified by the medical evidence to the requirements of a particular job. The work might be the claimant's past work or work cited by SSA as being within the claimant's capacity (RFC). SSA refers to jobs that they feel the claimant is still capable of performing as other less demanding work.

Rules of Practice

There are three elementary rules that you must follow when performing Common Sense VA:

1. Identify as many of the claimant's impairment-related limitations as possible. Remember, each limitation must be a direct result of a medically documented impairment.

2. Determine the requirements of the claimant’s past work and compare his/her restrictions to them. Then compare his/her restrictions to the requirements of other less demanding work.

3. In your argument, compare the claimant's remaining capabilities (the RFC you create) to the demands of other work. If the claimant cannot reasonably be expected to perform less demanding work, an allowance decision is warranted.

Note: Review Lesson Four on evaluating medical evidence for the purpose of identifying the claimant’s functional limitations.

When you review medical evidence you are hunting for support for the claimant's alleged physical and/or mental limitations. You then compare those limitations with the work demands, pointing out why the work is now impossible. If the claimant does not have the fundamental components needed to perform the work, SSA must find him/her disabled. In a nutshell, this is VA. Later in the course you will learn how to identify requirements for all jobs in the US economy.

Types of Restrictions

There are two basic types of restrictions or limitations (these two terms are used interchangeably):

1.   Physical - based on exertion

2.   Mental - non-exertional restriction

EXERTION-BASED CAPABILITIES

Exertion-Based Functional Components of Work are physical activities such as lifting, standing, sitting, seeing and hearing.

Exertion-Based Capabilities: Lifting is Very Important!

The following is an exertional capacity table for lifting, one of the key work components in SSA’s view.

Basic Strength Factors: Physical RFCs below

Lift and carry Heavy Medium Light Sedentary

100 lb. or more +

25lb. to 50lb max +

10lb. to 20 lb. max +

10 lb. or less max +

This chart classifies ability to lift and carry objects by weight. If a claimant can lift 100 lbs. despite his/her impairment, he/she is said to have an exertional Residual Functional Capacity (RFC) for heavy work. If he/she can lift 50 lbs. maximum and 25 lbs. frequently, he/she is said to have an RFC for medium work. If he/she can lift only twenty pounds maximum, he/she has a light RFC. Lifting of no more than ten pounds maximum indicates a sedentary RFC.

Note: Although lifting is just one of many exertional components, SSA often emphasizes it in defining a claimant's capacity.

There are many exertional components that can be involved in a disability determination. If SSA feels that certain components have the most negative effect on a claimant’s work capacity, the Disability Advocate will be well advised to focus attention on these same activities – but ultimately, you determine the final RFC. Include all appropriate restrictions in your argument, recalling that SSA’s decision to accept your RFC depends on the supporting medical evidence.

Exertion-Based Capabilities: Standing and WalkingCommon sense tells us that if a claimant is restricted in his/her ability to stand and walk, there are jobs he/she cannot perform. The table below lists SSA guidelines for assessing a claimant's standing and walking RFC: If a claimant can stand and walk for:

6 hours of an 8 hour day

Normal

Less than 6 hours of an 8 hour day

Limited

Less than 2 hours of an 8 hour day

Markedly Limited

Thus, according to the table, if a claimant cannot stand and walk for 6 hours of an 8 hour day, that person is restricted to performing work that has lower standing and walking requirements. If the claimant can only stand and walk for three hours of an eight hour day, he/she is restricted to jobs with this requirement or less – i.e., sedentary work. If, taking all other case issues into consideration, the claimant can only stand and walk for less than two hours of an eight hour day, his/her RFC falls to less than sedentary work. If medical evidence supports this, you probably have a win!

Note: If the claimant requires an assistive device to ambulate (walk), he/she is restricted to less than sedentary work, which yields a Medical Vocational Allowance.

A claimant will also be limited to less than sedentary work if he/she is unable to sit for extended periods (more than one hour), cannot bend at the waist, cannot use fine hand movements or has a visual disorder that causes inability to read standard print despite correction. Remember, all alleged restrictions must be supported by medical evidence.

Note: A clever Disability Advocate will combine as many restrictions as possible as a means of reducing the claimant's perceived ability to perform work. The more medically supportable restrictions you can present to SSA, the better are your chances of winning the case: the Whole Body Principle.

Exertion-Based Capabilities:

Sitting is Very Important!SSA often regards a person's ability to sit for extended periods of time as crucial to his/her ability to perform sedentary work. Common sense tells us that if a person is unable to sit, he/she will be restricted from performing sedentary work, since almost all sedentary work is done in a seated position. If one cannot do sedentary work, he/she has an RFC for less than sedentary. If this RFC is supported by the evidence, you win the case! In defining restrictions, SSA emphasizes how much or how often a particular action can be done. Here are the guidelines for sitting restrictions:

If the claimant can sit for a total of:

6 hours of an 8 hour day Normal

Less than about 6 hours of an 8 hour day Limited

Less than 2 hours a day without frequent breaks or changes in position Disabling

Sitting restrictions are often associated with serious back disorders or circulatory problems of the legs. If medical evidence supports the claim that a person cannot sit for two hours of an eight-hour day without additional pain or damage, you argue for a less than sedentary RFC. This approach to lowering an RFC is always necessary for a person under age forty-nine.

Exertion-Based Capabilities:

Pushing and Pulling

The ability to push or pull is either limited or not - there’s no in-between. You will most often encounter this issue with claimants whose past work was construction, warehousing, etc., in which gross movement or heavy physical labor is required.

Other Exertion-Based CapabilitiesOf course, there are many other exertional components that might be involved in your claimant’s past work. Climbing, balancing, stooping, kneeling, crouching and crawling are good examples of exertional components that you may encounter. Develop a table like the one below to summarize medically supported limitations. This will help you to create a convincing case argument.Example: The table below is for James, who can only stoop and crouch occasionally. He cannot climb stairs, bend his knees to kneel or crawl, and his balance has been disrupted by medication he must take for his condition. James was a construction worker. Obviously, these limitations eliminate his ability to do that job.

Frequently Occasionally Never

Climbing

Balancing

Stooping +

Kneeling

Crouching +

Crawling

See how this works? You can use this same approach with the literally hundreds of physical restrictions that occur. If James was an accountant, common sense tells us that he would not be as greatly limited at performing his job, based on its non-physical nature. However, if he also was limited in his fine hand movement and vision, he may be totally unable to do his past work or less demanding work for which he would otherwise be qualified. All physical restrictions that are important to SSA in the disability decision process are listed in the RFC form. See the sample RFC form in the Program Syllabus for the restrictions you’ll most often use to argue for a reduced RFC.

Note: The information on the physical RFC sheet is important and self explanatory. The greater the physical restriction, the less likely it is that the claimant can do any kind of work. Read over the RFC pages in the Program Syllabus to get a feel for the types of physical and mental limitations most important to SSA. Remember that you must only use those restrictions that are reasonable for a given impairment and that are supported by medical evidence.

On Page Five of the RFC form there is a space for Environmental Restrictions, which are special restrictions due to diseases (such as emphysema) that dictate the type of environment in which a claimant is can work. Be sure to include environmental restrictions whenever appropriate. Example: Your client suffers from COPD. Her past work was in a chemical factory. Common sense tells us that she can no longer work in this type of environment or any other environment that would aggravate her medically diagnosed lung disease.

Residual Functional Capacity RevisitedWe defined the term “Residual Functional Capacity” in Lesson Two. Use common sense to determine your client's RFC. If your RFC takes into consideration more medically documented restrictions than the one that SSA assigned, you have a good chance of convincing them that their determination was in error. Remember that SSA must take into consideration any and all restrictions that are verifiable via the claimant's medical evidence. This gives you an enormous strategic advantage. Use our Whole Body approach to point out additional medically supported restrictions. The key to winning any case is to always use evidence supporting limitations that most reduce your client's RFC.

The Winning Concept of “Less Than Sedentary Work”If the claimant is under age forty-nine, a case is easiest to argue if you lower the claimant's RFC to less than sedentary.  This rule-of-thumb is well worth repeating because it saves so much time! If the claimant is less than forty-nine years of age with at least twelve years of education, you must always argue for a less than sedentary RFC. And here’s another of our secrets to winning so many disability claims: Less than sedentary works even better on those over age forty-nine!

What is “Less than Sedentary Work”?

Here’s another profound secret of winning:   Less than sedentary work doesn't really exist! This term simply signals to the SSA that the claimant cannot perform the minimum possible work classification. Sedentary work is as low as it goes! Anyone with a less than sedentary RFC that SSA accepts will be awarded a Medical Vocational Allowance.

Requirements for a Less Than Sedentary RFCIn most cases involving younger individuals, you’ll have to reduce their RFC to less than sedentary work using inability to lift more than ten pounds and at least one of the following:1.   The claimant requires a cane, walker or other assistive device in order to do minimal ambulating (walking)2.    The claimant cannot bend at the waist (This restriction may result from an anatomical defect of the hips or spine or may be a result of pain) 3.    The claimant cannot sit for prolonged periods without experiencing pain that requires frequent position changes to relieve discomfort 4.    The claimant does not have full use of his/her upper extremities such as is required for handling, fingering or feeling 5.    The claimant has poor close vision that cannot be corrected to read normal-sized type 6.    The claimant has significant hearing loss and cannot hear at normal conversational voice levels

Note: Even if a person were capable of lifting 50 lbs., he might still be assigned a less than sedentary RFC if any two of the above six restrictions exist.

NON-EXERTIONAL-BASED CAPABILITIES

Non-Exertional Fundamental Components of Work are non-physical activities such as the ability to understand, remember, concentrate, communicate, work appropriately with others or adapt to changes in the working environment. They are cognitive or emotional in nature. Evaluating mental disorders is the same as evaluating physical impairments. Review the medical evidence to pick out key findings that support restrictions in the claimant's ability to function. Compare the restrictions to the work demands and organize the information into an argument on your client’s behalf. Many cases involve both physical and mental disorders. To evaluate these types of cases, analyze the exertional and non-exertional limitations separately, noting all limitations within each category. Once you have identified all restrictions, you can combine them into the most restrictive RFC possible. To get a better idea of the types of possible non-exertional restrictions, turn to the sample mental RFC form in your Program Syllabus. It contains what SSA considers to be the most important types of mental restrictions related to a person's ability to work. These are the restrictions you’ll most often use to argue for a reduced RFC. Use the mental RFC form, like the physical RFC form, as a restrictions reference guide when evaluating case medical evidence.

Note: Of the limitations listed on the mental RFC form in the Program Syllabus, the most restrictive according to SSA are A-1,2, B-4,6,7,8,10,11, C-12,14,15,16 and D-18,19. The more of these components that are limiting your client, the more likely you are to win the case based on his/her mental inability to perform work.

Use these non-exertional restrictions to create disability arguments for claimants with mental impairments. According to SSA's internal policy, a claimant who is moderately restricted in A-1and/or B-4, and moderately to markedly restricted in any of the remaining components listed above, can be realistically found incapable of performing work. Always use the medical evidence and your common sense to determine which restrictions best fit a particular case.

Other Fundamental Components of WorkAge, education and skill level are three other important factors affecting ability to work. It is up to you as the claimant's representative to bring forth such considerations in your disability argument. See the Vocational Rule Table (The Grid) in the Program Syllabus.

1.      Chronological Age

SSA believes that as a person gets older, he/she loses capacity to adjust to new or different work. Therefore, the disability standard is easier over age fifty. This unspoken policy is hidden in the Vocational Rules. We discuss these rules and how they’re used later in this lesson.

2.      Education

The less education a claimant has, the less capable SSA considers him/her to be to adjust to new or different work. Less education means better chances for a Medical Vocational Allowance.

3.      Skill Level = Specific Vocational Preparation

The amount of experience and/or education needed for average performance in a job is called its “Skill Level” or “Specific Vocational Preparation (SVP)”. SSA assigns higher SVPs to more complicated work. SVP 1 is the lowest skill level and SVP 9 is the highest. It requires many years of preparation in order to be a research scientist, for example, so this job has a high Skill Level/SVP.

IMPORTANT: SSA will often deny a claim citing the claimant's ability to do jobs of a higher skill level than his/her past work. In fact, SSA is not allowed to deny a claimant because he/she is capable of work that has a higher SVP than his/her past work. If you catch this common SSA error, you can reverse a denial.

Example:

Your client worked for 15 years as a janitor. SSA defines this job as SVP = 3, physical RFC = medium. You reduce your client’s RFC to light work based on some additional restrictions you discovered in the medical evidence. This new RFC precludes janitorial work. SSA defines the occupation of a doctor SVP = 8, physical RFC = light. SSA cannot ask your client, whose past work is janitor (SVP = 3), to perform the duties of a doctor (SVP = 8) because of the difference in skill level or SVP.

Janitorial work has the same physical RFC as doctor, but the ex-janitor cannot be expected to perform work for which he/she is not trained unless he/she attends medical school! SVP takes precedence over physical RFC. SVP refers to the skill level of a job and should never be higher than that of the claimant's past work.   If SSA says the claimant is capable of other work, make sure it is within the claimant's usual SVP level.

Job Transferability

Using a job characteristics text like the Dictionary of Occupational Titles (DOT) or the O-Net Consortium (http://www.onetcenter.org/usingOnet.html), you and SSA can determine which jobs might be within a disabled claimant's RFC. If SSA can cite three jobs that a claimant could transfer to given his/her RFC and SVP, they will deny the case.

The act of finding other work within the claimant's remaining capacity is called job transferability.In the process of job transferability, the claimant's past 15 years of work experience is used to determine if he/she can perform other similar work that requires less physical or mental exertion. The other work must be similar in nature and of the same or lesser SVP. It cannot contain any of the physical or mental requirements that the claimant is restricted from performing as a result of his/her impairment.

Do not overly concern yourself with transferability of skills unless it’s obvious that SSA is trying to deny your client by claiming capacity for a job that he/she cannot perform. You argue against this by pointing out how the claimant's restrictions prevent transferability to other less demanding work. You can also argue against transferability if the other work has a higher SVP than the claimant's past work.

Medical Vocational Rules

The Medical Vocational Rules Table, also known as The Grid, is an SSA chart used to determine certain work components’ effects on disability. The only information you need from the Voc Rules Table is the age, education and SVP that would result in an allowance for your client, which helps you decide RFC level. Using the Voc Rules Table, you determine in advance exactly how much to restrict a claimant in order to achieve a Medical Vocational Allowance.

Note: The Disability Associates approach almost always involves arguing for a less than sedentary RFC.

A look at the Voc Rules Table will show you why arguing for less than sedentary is almost always the best strategy to use, but don't cite Voc Rules unless they clearly support your position. We provide the table solely as a reference to help you decide the best RFC for your client. Trick-of-the-trade: Concentrate on documenting physical and/or mental restrictions that SSA has under-emphasized or ignored. Use them to argue for a further reduced RFC when the primary limitations are not severe enough for an allowance. Remember, the Voc Rules Table gives you an idea of how low to set an RFC in order that to get an allowance determination.

Identifying Work RequirementsIn order to evaluate the functional requirements of a claimant's past work, you must have access to his/her work history. SSA uses the “Vocational Report” or Form 3369, the new version of which is somewhat redundant with the “Client Application” (3368 or F16 Form).

If the claimant has applied previously, work history should already be in his/her file and you can request a copy from SSA directly. Request vocational information at the same time you request medical evidence and the PDN.

Acquiring Work History

Gathering past work history is one of the first steps in the VA. This information, coupled with an idea of the claimant's capabilities, will help you decide how to approach your vocational argument. To start the formal VA process, find out:

1.      Time on the job

2.      Age

3.      Educational level

4.      Type of job

5.      Job title

Get the facts on all jobs the claimant performed for more than three months at SGA over the last fifteen years. Describe them in detail. Include:

·        Job duties
·        Physical demands
·        Responsibilities
·        Tools used
·        Level of training required
·        Other details pertinent to successful job performance

Here’s a short list of the most relevant questions to ask about past work:

·       How long did you perform the job?
·       Did you earn at least monthly SGA? (If not, don't include the job in the past work profile)
·       Did you manage or supervise?
·       What were your primary duties?
·       What tools, machinery, etc., did you use on the job?
·       Did the job involve lifting, climbing, balancing, stooping, kneeling, etc.?
·       If physical activity was involved, how much for each activity?
·       Did you do these named actions frequently, occasionally, or never?
·      Did the job require physical movement now restricted by your impairment?
·       If so, did the job require this movement frequently or occasionally?
·       Was the working environment in any way harmful to your health?

Note: In reviewing vocational history, look for evidence of job requirements that are no longer within your client’s capability. The objective is to compare the claimant's remaining capacity (RFC) to the demands of his/her past work to decide if he/she is physically and mentally capable of returning to work.

Example:

In the hypothetical case of Mr. Katz in Lesson Four, recall that his past work was as a carpenter. Mr. Katz described his job as involving medium work (lifting 50 lbs. maximum). The DOT and the O-Net describe this job as being heavy work (lifting 100 lbs. maximum).

SSA felt Mr. Katz was only capable of light work, (lifting 20 lbs. maximum). Therefore, SSA denied him to past work. However, because of his remaining capacity to perform light lifting, they did not deny him to other less demanding work. SSA assigned a light work RFC because it could still deny the case based on Mr. Katz’s ability to do other less physically demanding work.

To counter SSA's decision, you argue that Mr. Katz's RFC should be further reduced to less than sedentary, making any type of work impossible. Your basis is physical and/or mental limitations that SSA either ignored or under-valued. Clever Disability Advocates always look for omissions that further reduce RFCs.

How Does SSA Reach Vocational Conclusions? There are two answers to this question:

1.      The Vocational Rules Table

2.      Formal Employment Texts

Voc Rules Table:

Yes, SSA looks at the same table that you do to decide the desired RFC. The difference is that you look at the table to find the necessary RFC for an allowance and SSA looks for the RFC needed for a denial! SSA will always develop an RFC that substantiates a denial decision.

REMEMBER: their RFC has no more merit than yours! An RFC is only an opinion and you and SSA have equal rights to an opinion about what the claimant's RFC should be. The victor will always be the one who presents the best common-sense argument incorporating the best documentation!

Formal Employment Texts:

SSA also derives formal descriptions using employment texts like the Dictionary of Occupational Titles (DOT) or the O-Net Consortium. The O-Net, DOT and the old SCO (Selected Characteristics of Occupations) manuals are simply texts that describe the fundamental components of most jobs in the national economy. Advocates and SSA use these vocational sources as guides to job requirements. If, for example, SSA wants to know the maximum lifting requirements of a blacksmith’s job, they refer to DOT or O-Net to decide if it is appropriate to deny a claimant to that work. The formal description of fundamental components of any given job can be more or less demanding than the job really is.   If there is a less demanding formal job description SSA will use it to justify a denial.

Example: The claimant describes her past job to you as being heavy. SSA disputes it using a less demanding formal description found in the DOT. The DOT says that the job is of light exertion, and SSA quotes this in the denial argument.

As an astute Disability Advocate, you counter this easily. You do not use the job description from the DOT, but rather use the claimant’s own description. After all, shouldn’t she know best what she used to do?We as Advocates don’t care if SSA has a fancier argument than we do. We only care that our argument makes good common sense and is backed by strong evidence. Why? If the Advocate wins the RFC argument he/she wins the case.   It really doesn't matter what the claimant's past work exertional RFC level is. All that matters is the RFC accepted by SSA at decision time. If SSA accepts a low enough RFC for an allowance, the “official” past work RFC is irrelevant.

Note: You can access the old SCO from the U.S. Department of Labor. You can access the O-Net online at http://online.onetcenter.org

Identifying Other Work We have discussed how to argue that a claimant is not capable of performing past work (SA Step Five). Usually, to win an allowance in an adult case you must also argue that he/she is not capable of performing less than sedentary work (SA Step Six). There are three categories of work to consider when arguing that a claimant cannot adjust to any type of work. These categories are:

1.    Other Work

2.    Similar Work

3.    Less Demanding Work

Other work is work that the claimant has actually performed and so has experience in.

Similar work is jobs that the claimant might be able to perform because they are similar to his/her past work, yet less demanding.

Less Demanding Work: To identify similar work or less demanding work, use one of the occupational texts.

Summary
Vocational Analysis is the process by which you determine the physical and/or mental requirements of the claimant's past work. You accomplish this by:

1.      Identifying his/her physical and/or mental limitations via medical evidence

2.      Reviewing his/her job description to determine how he/she performed past work and what it required

3.      Comparing his/her remaining abilities to the requirements of the past work (SA Step Five)

4.      Comparing the RFC you determine for the claimant with other less demanding work (SA Step Six).

5.       Formulating an argument for a less than sedentary RFC

If SSA accepts your argument, you win!

If the claimant is forty-nine years old or less, he/she will be denied to similar or less demanding jobs unrelated to past work because of his/her age alone. To counter this, you must show how his/her condition restricts him/her from performing even sedentary work.

Remember, any claimant under age forty-nine will only be allowed benefits if he/she meets or equals the listings or he/she is incapable of performing sedentary work.   If you can create a reasonable argument to support the claimant's inability to perform sedentary work, you’ll have a good chance of winning the case based on Medical Vocational Factors.

Preview of Lesson Six

Lesson Six focuses on the Case Evaluation process used to evaluate a claimant's evidence of record.