Tag: nerd

By Posted on Posted in Laptop, Technobabble Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Sep
9
2010
Youd have to know the theme song to really get it...
You'd have to know the theme song to really get it...

You’ll understand the title in just a moment…

For the last few months my laptop has been in bad shape.  Such bad shape I’ve been using a backup laptop. 1  Something on my laptop’s motherboard went bad and killed the battery. 23  I could still use it – but I had to keep it plugged in all the time.  If I needed to move it, I had to shut it down all the way, move it, then boot it up – since it had no battery life at all.

Well, Dell’s kick ass incredible customer service took care of me – once again.  I can’t thank these guys enough for going above and beyond.  I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, my next laptop is going to be a Dell. Thanks to Lionel my laptop is sporting a totally brand-spanking new motherboard and power cord.  I’ve also just slapped in a totally new battery as well.

Anyhow, I’m beyond happy. 4

  1. Trust me, the back up laptop is nothing to brag about. [↩]
  2. You see, the motherboard – it went bad.  It was one bad mother…  Oh, forget it. [↩]
  3. The photo does not belong to me and is probably the property of MGM. [↩]
  4. Yes, yes, I’m a nerd – whatever. [↩]

By Posted on Posted in 2005 PDRS, AMA Guides, Ogilvie, Technobabble, Wage Loss, Workers Compensation Resources Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Oct
12
2009
Back to the drawing board
Back to the drawing board

DOWNLOAD THE MATHEMATICAL PROOF AS A PDF!

A little while ago William S. Morris, an Applicant’s attorney, told me that the Ogilvie adjustment calculation could be further simplified. 1 He suggested the following2 :

  1. Earnings Loss34
    1. L = (PIESSE – PIEA) / PIESSE
  2. Individualized Proportional Earnings Loss
    1. = (WPI / L) / 100
  3. DFEC Adjustment Factor
    1. = ([1.81/a] * .1) + 1
    2. = ( (1.81 * .1)/a) + 1
    3. = (.181/a) + 1
    4. = 1 + (.181/a)
  4. Ogilvie DFEC Adjusted Rating
    1. = WPI * DFEC Adjustment Factor
    2. = WPI * (1 + (.181/a) )
    3. = WPI * (1 + (.181 / Individualized Proportional Earnings Loss) )
    4. = WPI * (1 + (.181 / ( (WPI / L) / 100) ) )
    5. = WPI * (1 + (18.1 / ( (WPI / L)  ) )
    6. = WPI * (1 + (18.1 * (L/WPI) ) )
    7. = WPI + (18.1 * L)
  5. Conclusion
    1. If the injured workers’ individualized proportional earnings loss is outside all of the FEC ranks, you may calculate the Ogilvie adjustment by adding (18.1*Earnings Loss) to the WPI.

The only flaw with the proofs offered by William and myself is that they are too exact.  The WCAB in Ogilvie never sets forth the exact process for performing the Ogilvie adjustment calculation – so the only official method involves rounding to different significant figures at different places.  Thus, a calculation performed in strict accordance with the WCAB in Ogilvie and through one of these mathematical proofs would differ very slightly.

What do you think? Leave a comment or drop me a line.

  1. Photo courtesy of Dahveed76 [↩]
  2. I’m paraphrasing here [↩]
  3. PIESSE = Post Injury Earnings of Similarly Situated Employees [↩]
  4. PIEA = Post Injury Earnings of Applicant [↩]

By Posted on Posted in Workers Compensation Resources Tagged with , , , , , , , ,
Sep
17
2009
Would you sign my copy of Ogilvie?
Would you sign my copy of Ogilvie?

As I mentioned a few days ago, I was recently at the State Bar Convention in San Diego.  While at the Steve Jimenez Memorial Special Recognition Awards Ceremony, I bumped into one of the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board commissioners.1

It was one of those days where I’m kicking myself for not lugging around my copy of Ogilvie II.2

I got to tell this commissioner, “I’m a big fan of your work.”3

  1. You’ve got a one in nine chance of guessing which one.  ;)  [↩]
  2. Photo courtesy of USAFA87 [↩]
  3. Yes, yes, I already know I’m a great big nerd. [↩]

By Posted on Posted in Author, Blogging, PDRater, Road Warrior Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Sep
3
2009
To sleep, perchance to dream
To sleep, perchance to dream

And my dream is to do four walk through settlements at three different WCAB district offices in one single day.12

I’ve given this a lot of thought and I even have a plan as to how to get this done.  If I ever got the chance to do four walk throughs at four Boards in one day, I’d do it like this:

  1. Get up early, arrive at the Santa Rosa WCAB at 8:00 AM and attempt the first walk through
  2. Head to San Francisco over the Golden Gate for the second walk through
  3. In the afternoon, do the third walk-through in San Jose
  4. Hit the road for Oakland and do the fourth walk through
  5. According to Google Maps, that’s 234 miles and 4 hours and 26 minutes

I honestly don’t even know if this is possible. 3 There are a million things that could go wrong.  I could hit traffic, I could be missing a page from a benefits printout, someone could change their mind about the settlement, a doctor could issue a supplemental report.  I also know that I would need a LOT of things to go right.  Here’s my tentative checklist:

  1. Four walk through settlements ready to be approved at four different Boards (this is easily the toughest part)
  2. Four claims examiners standing by on speed dial
  3. One full calendar day
  4. A fully charged GPS, two fully charged cell phones
  5. A full tank of gas
  6. $55.00 or so ($10 for bridge tolls, about $5 for photocopies, and easily another $40 for parking)
  7. A bag of snacks (I’m probably not going to have time for lunch)
  8. Call ahead to all of the Boards to make sure I can do a walk through that day
  9. The good will and cooperation of the Board staff and my colleagues

However, having done two walk through settlements in a single morning gives me hope.

  1. Photo courtesy of robertrice [↩]
  2. I told this dream to a co-worker yesterday and he laughed and called me a nerd.  Pssh – tell me something I don’t know, Steve. [↩]
  3. Perhaps this might be easier in Southern California – there’s as many as seven Boards within about 15 or 20 miles of one another. [↩]

By Posted on Posted in 2005 PDRS, Case Law, DFEC Rebuttal, Ogilvie, Workers Compensation Resources Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Jul
17
2009
Ogilvie for Dummies
Ogilvie for Dummies

UPDATE: DOWNLOAD THE MATHEMATICAL PROOF AS A PDF!

Get ready to stop paying people to do Ogilvie calculations, recycle your Gearheart/Gerlach handouts, and delete your Frost Excel spreadsheet.1  We’re about to go all “Beautiful Mind.”

Yesterday while at the Oakland WCAB an Applicant’s attorney mentioned he noticed an interesting trend in the Ogilvie formula. 23 He said that whenever he does an Ogilvie calculation for someone with a 100% earnings loss and a modest WPI, the WPI is always increased by 18. 4

I ran a number of test calculations on this theory and it appeared to be right.  My calculations show that up to a WPI of 44 the increase appears to always be 18.1, but the last “0.1” always gets rounded down.  However, appearing to be right just isn’t good enough for me.  And, because I am just truly that nerd, here’s the fully mathematical proof:

Let’s break down the calculations at the heart of Ogilvie:

  1. Earnings Loss56
    1. = (PIESSE – PIEA) / PIESSE
    2. = ($1.00 – $0.00) / $1.00
    3. = $1.00 / $1.00
    4. = 1
    5. = 100%
  2. Individualized Proportional Earnings Loss
    1. = (WPI / Earnings Loss) / 100
    2. = (WPI / 100% )/100
    3. = (WPI / 1) / 100
    4. = WPI / 100
    5. Thus, for any WPI less than 45 and a total loss of earnings, the Individualized Earnings Loss will always be less than 0.450 in Table A.
  3. DFEC Adjustment Factor
    1. = ([1.81/a] * .1) + 1
    2. = ( (1.81 * .1)/a) + 1
    3. = (.181/a) + 1
    4. = 1 + (.181/a)
  4. Ogilvie DFEC Adjusted Rating
    1. = WPI * DFEC Adjustment Factor
    2. = WPI * (1 + (.181/a) )
    3. = WPI * (1 + (.181 / Individualized Proportional Earnings Loss) )
    4. = WPI * (1 + (.181 / (WPI / 100) ) )
    5. = WPI * (1 + (.181 * 100 / WPI ) )
    6. = WPI * (1 + (18.1/ WPI ) )
    7. = WPI * ( (WPI/WPI) + (18.1/ WPI ) )
    8. = WPI * (WPI + 18.1/ WPI )
    9. = WPI * (WPI + 18.1/ WPI )
    10. = WPI + 18.1
  5. Conclusion
    1. If you have an Applicant with a 100% post injury earnings loss and a WPI of 44 or less, you should rebut the FEC and arrive at an adjusted WPI that is equal to the original WPI plus 18.1.

Therefore, I propose a new Ogilvie formula that will be easy for anyone to remember:

  • Step 1: If the injured worker has a 100% earnings loss and a WPI of 44 or less, add 18.1 to the WPI and round down.
  • Step 2: If the injured worker has less than 100% earnings loss or a WPI of 45 or higher, go to Step 3.
  • Step 3: For heaven’s sake, just make your life easier and use the calculators here at PDRater.com.

What do you think?  Leave a comment or drop me a line.

  1. Sorry Jeff, Mark, Mark, and Ray! [↩]
  2. Thank you “S”!  Unfortunately, he did not want to be named. [↩]
  3. Man, I *wish* I could take credit for this observation. [↩]
  4. Not multiplied by 18, but an addition of 18. [↩]
  5. PIESSE = Post Injury Earnings of Similarly Situated Employees [↩]
  6. PIEA = Post Injury Earnings of Applicant [↩]