Blog Page

By Posted on Posted in 2005 PDRS, Calculators, Ogilvie, PDRater, Permanent Disability Rating Schedule, Permanent Partial Disability, Technobabble, Workers Compensation Resources Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Mar
26
2009
Could THIS be the elusive Ogilvie formula?
Could THIS be the elusive Ogilvie formula?

So, here’s the deal:  I want to build the absolute most comprehensive suite of calculators and tools for workers’ compensation professionals. 1  I also want your help to making them better.

In the last few days several people have sent me questions about the Ogilvie DFEC workers’ compensation calculator:2

  1. Is it possible to get an Ogilvie DFEC adjusted whole person impairment above 100%?
    • I believe it might be theoretically possible to achieve an adjusted whole person impairment above 100% using the Ogilvie DFEC formula.  I could easily include a small variation on the calculation that would prevent it from exceeding 100, but I have not done so because I wanted to replicate the the formulas set forth in Ogilvie as exactly as possible.
  2. Why can’t I use post-injury earnings of $0.00?  What if they have no earnings at all?
    • That’s an extremely valid point.  If you try to use a post-injury earnings of “zero”, it will cause division by “zero” which is not a mathematically legal operation.  Try post-injury earnings of $1.00 or $0.01.  Doing so will give you an answer VERY close to what you need. 3
  3. When do you round each calculation when performing the Ogilvie DFEC calculation?
    • The WCAB en banc in Ogilvie rounds to three decimal places at one step and to four decimal places at a second step.  The only way we know what they actually did is by extrapolating from the examples in the decision – they never actually state “round to four significant digits here, round to three significant digits there.”  I have rounded exactly as they did in their examples.
    • At the end of the day, there are two ways to perform the Ogilvie DFEC calculation:  the exact way the WCAB did it (sometimes four, sometimes three decimal places) and the way they probably intended to do it (four decimal places until the end).  I made the judgment call to use the formula as they performed it, warts and all.
    • Why did I choose to round as the WCAB did?  I think it is more defensible to calculate exactly as the Board did, rather than as I think the Board should have calculated.
  4. How do you put the Ogilvie DFEC adjusted whole person impairment into the rating calculator?
    • At this point, you can’t use a different FEC Rank or an Ogilvie DFEC adjustment factor in the 2005 PDRS rating calculator on this site.  In order to accomodate this, I would need to either rewrite the entire calculator or write a new calculator.  One other possibility is that I could modify the Ogilvie DFEC calculation to provide one extra line of information – where it “runs the FEC numbers backwards.”
    • Let’s take this example:  Suppose the body part FEC rank is 1 and whole person impairment is 10.  The normal FEC adjusted whole person impairment would be 11.  Let’s suppose after applying the Ogilvie DFEC formula it turns out you should have an FEC rank of 8 instead.  This would give you an Ogilvie DFEC adjusted whole person impariment of 14%.  I could write a modification of the current Ogilvie DFEC calculator to put 14% into the FEC Rank chart and look up what whole person impairment you would need with an FEC rank of 1 to arrive at 14%.  Would you find this a helpful interim fix?  Please let me know by sending me an e-mail.
  5. Jay, why in the world did the Ogilvie DFEC calculator reference “standard disability”?  Shouldn’t it say “whole person impairment”?
    1. You’re totally correct.  I’ve fixed this.  Mea culpa.

Here’s my request for your help.  In order to make an Ogilvie calculation valid, you need to put in valid post-injury earnings of similarly situated employees.  The WCAB in Ogilvie suggests several possible sources:4

What do you use for post-injury earnings of similarly situated employees?  If I had a better idea where people were looking it is possible that I might be able to automate the inclusion of this informaiton as well.  Please drop me a line and let me know.   If there is a general consensus, I’ll look into the possiblity of having this informaiton automatically imported from an external website.

  1. Why?  Some people have wacky hobbies.  Maybe you build hockey arenas out of toothpicks.  I build workers’ compensation calculators and give them away for free.  If it will put you at ease, I hope to make money from advertising in the future. [↩]
  2. Photo courtesy of nerissa’s ring [↩]
  3. I know it has a less than friendly error message about this. I’ll see what I can do about fixing that. [↩]
  4. I’ve copied the links directly from Ray Frost‘s Ogilvie spreadsheet/calculator.  Ray has been kind enough to allow me the use of his extensive work restrictions lists.  So, thanks Ray! [↩]

By Posted on Posted in Laptop, Not Workers Compensation, Open Source, OpenOffice, Technobabble Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Mar
24
2009
New Laptop
New Laptop

Since I reviewed available netbooks about two months back several new options have opened up.1 There’s the new Samsung NC11023 and a slew of new Acer One’s.

However, none of them can touch the 4GB Dell Mini 9 on sale right now for $199 with Ubuntu.

I know I had earlier said that 8GB was too small for my purposes. I had even suggested that I was more interested in some of the other available netbooks over the Dell for this reason.  However, I want to make my next computer a Dell, true to my word.

The reason I’m considering the 4GB version where I was dismissing the 8GB version before is the incredible price and the purposes to which such a laptop would be put.  In order to do about 98% of what I need with a laptop, I could easily use a netbook.  On any given day I use:

  • Firefox for web browsing
  • Thunderbird for e-mail
  • Pidgin for instant messaging
  • FileZilla for FTP transfers
  • Notepad++ for programming/text editing
  • OpenOffice for word processing, spreadsheets
  • TightVNC for remote access

All of these programs are open source software and available for Ubuntu4 and Windows.  So, in shopping for a laptop, I really don’t care about which operating system I use.  The 4GB Dell Mini 9 with Ubuntu could do all of these things – and for a $199 price tag.  Plus, with the Mini’s SD card slot, I could pop in an extra 16GB of memory for only $26.

  1. Photo courtesy of Ciccio Pizzettaro [↩]
  2. The Samsung NC110 is the successor to the NC10 [↩]
  3. A review of the NC110 I found helpful [↩]
  4. An easy-to-use Liniux installation. [↩]

By Posted on Posted in 2005 PDRS, Almaraz / Guzman, AMA Guides, Workers Compensation Resources Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Mar
23
2009
AMA Guides 5th Ed.
AMA Guides 5th Ed.

Clearly, Almaraz/Guzman has been a boon to the U.S. Postal Service.  I’ve been receiving Almaraz/Guzman letters from Applicant attorneys on my files ever since the en banc decision came out.  These letters typically fall into one of three categories:

  1. Increased demands for settlement
  2. Demands for additional discovery per Almaraz/Guzman
  3. Letters to the PQME/AME requesting their opinions on impairment outside the AMA Guidelines to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, Fifth Edition

I’ve also heard of some doctors completely abandoning the AMA Guidelines to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, Fifth Edition, in favor of just analogizing impairment.  This is not what was intended by the en banc panel in WCAB in Almaraz/Guzman.

Here’s what Almaraz/Guzman means for workers’ compensation practitioners:

So, remember:

  1. Whether you agree with the AMA Guides or the 2005 PDRS they’re still the law of the land and must be addressed.
  2. Whether you agree with Almaraz/Guzman, it’s still good law and must be addressed.
  3. Almaraz/Guzman does not absolve a doctor from the responsibility to generate a medical report which addresses the AMA Guides and constitutes substantial medical evidence.

By Posted on Posted in Not Workers Compensation Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Mar
22
2009
When Eggs Go Bad
When Eggs Go Bad

This weekend I learned that there had been a recall of organic brown eggs produced at en Dulk Poultry Farms in Ripon, California and distributed through Safeway, Pak n’ Save, and CostCo. 1  Although no illnesses have been reported, they are initiating this recall admist concerns about Salmonella.

Here’s how to check if you have these recalled eggs:

  • You have “Kirkland Organic Brown Eggs” from CostCo in the 18-count cartons.  It will have either of the expiration and plant codes:
    • April 1 062, 35 P1776
    • April 8 069, 35 P1776
  • You have “O Organic Grade A Large Brown Eggs” from Safeway and Pack n’ Save in the 12-count cartons with the expiration and plant code:
    • April 1 062, 35 P1776

I’m glad I checked:  I had the 12 count container of recalled eggs from Safeway in my fridge.  More details about the egg recall can be found in the article from the San Jose Mercury News.

  1. When Eggs Go Bad courtesy of TimOve. [↩]

By Posted on Posted in Not Workers Compensation, Technobabble Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Mar
21
2009

SPOILER warning: This post discusses every big reveal from series finale

Battlestar Galactica: The Finale
Battlestar Galactica: The Finale

If you’re a fan of Battlestar Galactica like myself, you may have watched the finale on Friday night and thought, “What the hell?”  This show has introduced so much character development, conflict, and drama over four years that it is honestly difficult to tell whether I’m disappointed the series is ending or disappointed with the series’ ending.1 They wrapped up most of the big questions and left a lot unanswered.  Without further ado, I present you with the answers to all the outstanding questions gleaned from the post-finale press conference:

  1. What’s the deal with the Battlestar Galactica “Final Supper” picture?
    Red Herring
    Red Herringe?

    • Its an unintentional red herring. 2  basically has nothing to do with the show’s plot.  It was a photo op someone thought would be cool.3  The writers had nothing to do with the photo setup, so don’t read anything into it.
  2. What’s the deal with the “Cylon god”?
    • We don’t know.  The “Cylon god” is not necessarily the same “god” referred to by the imaginary Baltar and Six.  We probably won’t know for sure about the “Cylon god” until “Battlestar Galactica: The Plan” comes out in Fall 2009.
  3. What’s the deal with imaginary Baltar and Six and the real Baltar and Caprica Six?
    • The imaginary Baltar and Six are agents of “god” that apparently only manifest to the real Baltar and Caprica Six.  They are neither good nor bad, neither angels nor demons.  The “god” the imaginary Baltar and Caprica Six serve is something akin to the collective unconscious underlying the universe.  Their sole mission was to ensure the real Baltar and Caprica Six survive to deliver Hera to the CIC on the Galactica.  The real Baltar and Caprica Six come to believe in the god described by their imaginary counterparts.  This belief enables Baltar (a true cynic) to deliver his speach to Cavil and almost broker peace between the Cylons and humans and break the cycle of violence.
  4. What’s the deal with the opera house dreams?
    • Four people (9Sharon “Athena” Agathon – a Cylon 8 model, President Laura Roslin, Dr. Gaius Baltar, and Caprica Six)) shared the opera house dream.  This dream was meant to guide each of these people to the CIC on the Galactica at the end of the confrontation between the humans and Cylons.
  5. What’s the deal with Kara Thrace/Starbuck?
    • Who the frak knows.  While we don’t know how she was brought back to life, we do know why she was brought back.  We also have no idea where she went or how she just disappeared.  She was brought back from the dead for the purpose of entering the numeric equivalent of “All Along the Watchtower” into the FTL drive.  Starbuck, her father, and Hera all tapped into something eternal and fundamental underlying the entire universe in order to hear/play this song.
  6. What’s the deal with Daniel? Was Daniel the father of Kara Thrace/Starbuck?
    • Red Herring
      Red Herring

      He was an unintentional red herring.  He was meant to be a “Cain and Abel” back story for Cavil to show he was a right bastard – nothing more.  While there are certain pieces which support this theory, he was never meant to be Starbuck’s dad.  The “Daniel” model Cylon would have been permanently destroyed long before Starbuck was ever born.

  7. What happened to the Cylons in the base near the black hole?
    • After Racetrack’s Viper was knocked around, it accidentally nuked the Cylon baseship.  After the battle and after the Galactica jumped away, it lost its stable orbit at the edge of the black hole and was pulled in.
  8. What’s the deal with the various prophecies, the mandala/nebula/nova in Starbuck’s drawings, and “All Along the Watchtower”?
    • “Everything has happened before and will happen again.”  The cycle of humans, humans building Cylons, Cylons evolving, human-Cylon violence, has occurred for thousands of years and will occur again.  During these cycles certain people (Starbuck, Starbuck’s father, prophets, those who see the opera house dreams, etc) all tap into the collective unconscious underlying the universe.  This allows Starbuck’s father to compose “All Along the Watchtower,” Hera to paint the musical notes for it, the song to be the key to unlock the final five, and the song to be the numerical equivalent of the way to our Earth.  150,000 years after everything in this series, humankind has again evolved to the point of embracing technology.  This would allow the new BSG series to serve as a background and origin story for the original BSG series.

Most of this information is from the post-Battlestar Galactica finale interview.  I’ve tried to make it as intelligible as I can.

Do you disagree with my descriptions above?  Do you have another BSG question you need resolved?  Let me know in the comments!

  1. Photo by way of “diverse distinctive dave’s” blog [↩]
  2. Photo courtesy of stridli.  Editing, all me! [↩]
  3. And, they were right. [↩]