Get your head out of the sand!
Get your head out of the sand!

UPDATE 9/3/2009:  Download the new en banc Ogilvie II and Almaraz/Guzman II decisions here!

There are numerous workers’ compensation professionals who are incredibly unhappy with Ogilvie and Almaraz/Guzman.  Vocational experts are unhappy with Ogilvie, and somewhat hopeful with Almaraz/Guzman.  Impairment rating specialists are not happy with Ogilvie or Almaraz/Guzman.  These people may be unhappy with these new cases, but at least they’re starting to adapt.

As Julius Young of WorkCompZone.com just reported, some people are dealing with Almaraz/Guzman by putting on “webinars.”  Phil Walker and Christopher Brigham have each announced “webinars.”  According to Walker’s promotional e-mail, he charges $2,000.00 to appear for a one day seminar – and now he’s giving it away for free.

People will try to convince you that Almaraz/Guzman is not the law or “just” a WCAB decision.  Do not believe these people.  Ogilvie and Almaraz/Guzman are both en banc cases.

En banc decisions of the Appeals Board are binding precedent on all Appeals Board panels and workers’
compensation judges. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10341; City of Long Beach v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (Garcia) (2005) 126 Cal.App.4th 298, 313, fn. 5 [70 Cal.Comp.Cases 109, 120, fn. 5]; Gee v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (2002) 96 Cal.App.4th 1418, 1425, fn. 6 [67 Cal.Comp.Cases 236, 239, fn. 6]; see also Gov. Code, § 11425.60(b).)

Ogilvie and Almaraz/Guzman are binding precedent on judges and the WCAB itself.  Don’t believe the hype and don’t stick your head in the sand. 1 If you argue it is not the law or not binding precedent, you will lose.  Yes, these cases may be appealed and may even be overturned.

I think it likely they will be appealled and highly unlikely they will be overturned.

  1. Photo courtesy of blakeimeson []

XYZZXSJO2 - The motion picture!
XYZZXSJO2 - The sequel!

Last week I posted about a recent case from the San Jose WCAB that indicated a life pension SAWW1 increase is applied on the first January 1 after the date of injury.  You can find a download of the XYZZXSJO2 case here.

I’ve just finished the COLA / SAWW future life pension rate calculator to determine what the future life pension rates are assuming a COLA / SAWW increase of 4.7% per year.  If you’re interested in becoming a beta tester for this COLA / SAWW calculator for life pension increases, please drop me a line and ask for access. 2

Please keep in mind that this is not a life pension with SAWW / COLA increase commutation calculator.  The actuarial math involved in performing that calculation is … intense.

As an interesting side note, this week I saw my very first DEU commutation of a life pension with COLA increase.  Unlike the typical commutations everyone receives from the DEU, this commutation calculation was devoid of the actual methodology used.  I was pretty disappointed to find this out.

No matter!  Help beta test the new calculator by dropping me a line.  After you’ve given it a whirl, let me know what you think.

  1. SAWW means State Average Weekly Wage []
  2. If you have already helped me out as a beta tester, you already have access to this calculator. []

Imaginary Security
Imaginary Security

I recently posted about a fun experience with the metal detectors and security staff at the Oakland WCAB.1

At the end of January I was fortunate enough to witness more security shenanigans.

A man in line behind me took off all metal from his person and placed it in the provided gray plastic bin.  Here’s a summary of the exchange between this gentleman and the security guard:

  • Security:  Sir, you’re going to have to take off your belt.
  • Man:  My belt buckle is metal.  I took it off, see?  There’s no metal in my belt.
  • Security:  That doesn’t matter, sir.  Please take off your belt.
  • Man:  But, there’s no metal in it.
  • Security:  Sir, you’re going to need to put your belt through the metal detector.
  • The man finally took off his belt…

I have several problems with this2  “security procedure.”

  1. It is irrational and absurd.
  2. This system encourages security guards to be lazy and unobservant, encouraging the hiring of unsophisticated or untrained security guards.
  3. This system places too much importance on the value of x-ray machines.

Let’s take this point by point, shall we?

First, when challenged to provide any rationale for their demands, the security staff resorts to argumentum ad verecundiam. 3  There’s no reason why a non-metal belt buckle or, heaven forbid a piece of paper, needs to be fed into the x-ray machine.  They’re not security risks.

Second, the current system allows the security guards to insist all detachable belongings be fed into the x-ray machine. 45  The current system essentially removes the incentive for hiring trained, competent, or intelligent staff.  And, really, why should they?  A mannequin with a sign around its neck could instruct everyone to remove all belongings.

Finally, the current system allows all the security guards at the Oakland state building to place too much importance on the x-ray machines.  Once you’ve placed your belongings6 in the plastic bin, you aren’t given a second glance.  What happens if someone decides to conceal a dangerous non-metalic object on their person?  These security guards believe that paper should be x-rayed!  I’m supposed to trust in their powers of keen observation?

Can you tell I’m frustrated with the security situation at the Oakland WCAB?

  1. Original photo courtesy of Daquella manera. []
  2. imaginary []
  3. Latin argument for “appeal to authority” aka “I have a badge so I must be right” aka “‘Cause I said so, that’s why.” []
  4. Don’t forget to put your right to privacy in that bin.  After all, you don’t have anything to hide from Big Brother, do you? []
  5. For a while they actually required the removal of shoes too.  Taking your shoes off at the airport is bad enough.  But at the Oakland state building??? []
  6. And dignity!  Don’t forget your dignity!  Don’t worry, after a couple of times through this system it will be small enough to fit comfortably between your cell phone and belt buckle. []

Glasses, online
Glasses, online!

I recently ordered three pairs of glasses from GlobalEyeglasses.com and one pair from Goggles4U.com.1  Last Wednesday I had my doctor check all four pairs.  Read on for the details!

I chose to try Goggles4U.com because an NPR commenter had a good review for them, they seemed to have good online reviews, had a very good website, and their prices for polychromatic glasses were fantastic.  UPDATE 3/10/09: Updated Goggles4U.com review here!

Review of Goggles4U.com

  1. Website. Goggles4U.com lets you upload a photo of yourself and try on a virtual pair of glasses.  I didn’t try this feature, but I suppose it might be useful to some.  They also have the option of spinning a virtual version of each pair of glasses.  It was fairly easy to navigate their website and place the order.  One useful feature is that their website allows you to save your prescription so you don’t have to re-enter it.
  2. Selection. There were easily several hundred frames from which to choose.  They have every imaginable style and variation.  They also have a wide range of lens options: clear, tinted, polychromatic / transition lenses, and super thin materials.
  3. Price. Goggles4U.com has free shipping.  Most of the frames are about $12.99.
  4. Frame Quality. The pair I bought fit with minimal adjusting of the nose pads and behind the ears.
  5. Lens Quality. For some reason the glasses from Goggles4U.com just didn’t seem right.  They took me several minutes to adjust to and still continued to bother me in a subtle way I couldn’t quite understand.  I took this pair to my eye doctor who told me that this pair had a lower “Base Curvature” than the pairs from GlobalEyeglasses.com.   Apparently, some people are just more sensitive to variations in “Base Curvature.”
  6. Shipping. Two weeks, just about on the button.  Shipping was free.
  7. Customer Service. After trying out these frames for a week I e-mailed Goggles4U.com to let them know I was having problems with the glasses and that I was going to take them to my doctor to be examined.  The responded immediately asking me to let them know what my doctor had to say.  I e-mailed them right when I came back to let them know the “base curvature” was off.  The e-mailed me back almost immediately giving me a coupon code for $35.99 off another pair.  The bottom line is that they responded to me nearly instantly and have gone out of their way to make me happy.  I’m not interested in a refund, just a pair of glasses for a reasonable price.  I feel like Goggles4U.com has certainly earned by business.
  8. Extras. Each pair comes with its own free case, eyeglass cloth, and replacement nose pads and screws.  Shipping was free.

Verdict: I would use Goggles4U.com again and recommend them to a friend.  When placing your order, use the coupon code, “glassyeyes” for 5% off.

UPDATE 3/10/09: Updated Goggles4U.com review here!

  1. Photo courtesy of Morningstar Lee []