Emily Tincher has recently provided a vocational expert’s perspective on the Ogilvie and Almaraz/Guzman decisions.
Have you got an article on workers’ compensation you’d like to see published? Drop me a line and let me know. ((Photo courtesy of Stephen Cummings))
Thanks Emily!
P.S. For those of who keeping score at home, this is my 200th post!!! That’s 200 posts in 357 days or roughly a post every 1.7 days.
What’s that? You haven’t memorized ALL of the FEC ranks to go with each of the 2005 Permanent Disability Rating Schedule body parts? ((You’ve only had four years, right?))
Why didn’t you say so? (Actually, someone did ask for an easy way to look up the FEC ranks back on April 1).
I’ve been working on an easy way to allow a user to look up and quickly insert the FEC rank for the affected body part. I finally got around to building it a few days ago and launched it this morning. Please give it a shot and let me know what you think.
Here’s all you need to do to perform your very own Ogilvie calculation:
If you can think of a way for me to make this calculator even easier, please let me know. ((Photo courtesy of Vicki’s Pics))
Cost: $0.00
Savings: $150/computer
Here’s an easy way to save your law practice several hundred dollars in the next few months. The next time you have to purchase a new computer do not buy a copy of MicroSoft Office, MicroSoft Word, or WordPerfect. Even basic versions of these programs can run several hundred dollars per computer. ((Photo courtesy of Krug6)) You don’t have to purchase these programs!
Try OpenOffice instead! I have been using OpenOffice on my home and work computers for the last three years and have been extremely happy with it. I have given copies of this program to family, friends, and colleagues who are also all very happy with it. I’ve used it for simple correspondence, legal pleadings, spreadsheets, and presentations.
Here are a few “real world” benefits:
Free as in free. Give it to your friends. Install it at home and on your kids’ computers. Don’t worry about software piracy. Its totally, completely, free.
Its important to know that OpenOffice is much more stable than anything MicroSoft or WordPerfect has to offer. It is extremely rare that OpenOffice crashes on me. If you’re using MicroSoft Word and you haven’t saved your document at least once, a single crash will completely erase all of your progress. The very few times that OpenOffice has crashed on me I have gotten all of my data back – even when I haven’t saved the file once.
OpenOffice has all the features of MicroSoft Word, Excel, PowerPoint, and WordPerfect. You can also use the OpenOffice suite of software to open, edit, and save to MicroSoft Word and WordPerfect formats. It won’t automatically open the MicroSoft Office 2007 formats yet, but you can find plugins and software to do this for you (also for free). OpenOffice has spell check, grammar check, autocorrect, macros, and templates (even legal pleading templates!).
OpenOffice can save as, open, and even edit a PDF. Editing a PDF requires a plugin, but it is very easy to install (and also free!). Just being able to print to a PDF is going to make your documents easier to share with others and, hopefully, one day easier to share with EAMS too. ((Not that EAMS will share with you.)) (( Don’t take it personally – EAMS pretty much hates everyone.))
If you’re not convinced to make the leap with your next computer purchase, then download OpenOffice now and give it a shot on your current computer. Here’s their website link:
Download OpenOffice.org – free word processing, spreadsheet, and presentation software
For context, its best to see the prior post about the WCAB’s Weiner v. Ralph’s (en banc) decision. There’s even a link to the Weiner v. Ralphs (en banc) decision for download – just so you can play along at home.
The question in the title of the post is really a question about the WCAB’s rationale – not their end legal justification behind Weiner. I believe the Weiner case hints that the WCAB is going to go the other way and uphold their rulings in Almaraz/Guzman and Ogilvie.
However, I think the WCAB’s rationale for ending vocational rehabilitation was because of the potential for enormous retroactive vocational rehabilitation maintenance allowance awards at the temporary total disability rate outside the cap (VRTD). ((Photo courtesy of Stephane Raymond)) ((You see, I’m suggesting that the bathwater is VRTD and the baby itself is vocational rehabilitation. Kinda kills the metaphor, eh?))
The Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board recently solicited amicus briefs regarding the Weiner v. Ralphs case. After review of the amicus briefs on the topic of the repeal of Labor Code Section 139.5 and vocational rehabilitation, the WCAB has just issued their en banc opinion. ((Photo courtesy of larryfishkorn))
Download a copy of Weiner v. Ralphs (en banc) right here:
Obviously, you’ll need to read and interpret Weiner v. Ralph’s for yourself. Here’s the Board’s own summary:
What does Weiner v. Ralph’s mean to you?
