The Ogilvie mathematical proof has been available for several weeks for peer review. I’ve only received positive feedback. ((An anonymous source from the DWC actually called it “cool”!)) The above Ogilvie Adjustment Chart has been testing by myself and other workers’ compensation attorneys, but like everything else on this site is provided subject to all legal disclaimers.
I think we can dispense with the caption, just this once...
A defense attorney friend of mine called me up yesterday to say (I’m paraphrasing here), “You jackass. Thanks to your Ogilvie proof every Applicant’s attorney I know is calling me up, gloating, and asking for 18 points on top of the whole person impairment on every case! Why the hell did you do that???” ((Photo courtesy of giuliomarziale)) My first thought was of my favorite quote from Swingers. ((Just for you Ray!)) What I actually said was something along the lines of:
It’s not like CAAA wouldn’t have found out about Ogilvie if it wasn’t for Jay Shergill mentioning it in a blog post.
Nothing has changed except that now anyone can perform an Ogilvie adjustment calculation in their head. ((And save $129.99 in the process))
For the moment, let’s set aside the issue of whether California’s injured workers have gotten a raw deal since SB899. Suppose there’s an injured worker with a finger injury, stays on temporary disability for two years, and is immediately made permanent and stationary. If instead they get a 0% WPI, they get nothing. If they gets a 1% WPI, Ogilvie tells us this person gets a DFEC adjusted WPI of 19%.
Nearly every litigated case involves an extended period of temporary disability and a whole person impairment less than 45. ((Hell, a permanent irreversible coma is only a WPI of 80.)) Ogilvie effectively removes the first 18% permanent partial disability levels.
I really don’t think the WCAB intended this consequence. Don’t get upset with me – as long as Ogilvie is the law I might as well make Ogilvie calculations easy for you, right? ((Remember, just add 18 to the WPI!))
Perhaps its the political climate, or the recent daylight savings time change, or that I’m an argumentative guy. Today’s post is my argument against daylight savings time. ((I wonder if I should try to put it on the ballot as a proposition…)) ((Original photo courtesy of Laffy4k.))
If Wikipedia is to be believed, Daylight Savings Time was not invented by Benjamin Franklin. ((Third best Ben Franklin quote here.)) ((Second best Ben Franklin quote: “Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to prosper.”)) ((Best Ben Franklin quote: “They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” Too political for a Friday? :/ )) ((Thanks QuoteDB! )) If Wikipedia is to be further believed, some guy named “William Willett” was the one who thought of it.
Its a mixed blessing for Mr. Willett that no one knows his name. Ben Franklin gets the credit for daylight savings sandwiched between kudos for electric kites and bifocals. Then again, Franklin also has to put up with abuse from people who hate daylight savings. Such as myself.
The Benefits
Set aside for the moment the historical benefits to daylight savings time – the farmers getting out of bed and whatnot. I’ll stipulate that it may have served some terrific purpose yeas ago. The real issue is whether daylight savings time has any ongoing net benefits for our society.
Let’s assume arguendo there are practical benefits to getting everyone in your state to wake up, get home from work, and go to bed an hour earlier or later. They have more “time” to do whatever is they want to do. ((Keep in mind, they get no more than one “extra” hour.)) Let’s even suppose that having an “extra hour” improves the mood of people with seasonal affect disorder. ((Not that I think anyone’s arguing this. I’m just setting up the best possible arguments in favor of daylight savings time.))
The Problems
Infrastructure. You have to admit that a truly Herculean effort is required to support the infrastructure necessary for daylight savings time. People engineer wall clocks that manipulate the time twice a year. Cell phones, computers, and TiVo’s all have to be pre-programmed to change the time twice a year. Its exactly this kind of ridiculous time-accounting nightmare that lead to the Y2K bug in the first place.
Manual Upkeep. All of non-computerized devices such as coffee pots, car stereos, wristwatches, ovens, microwaves, climate control devices, and sprinkler systems need to be manually reset. In this way, daylight savings time is almost like having a guaranteed power outage twice a year.
Productivity. The missed appointments, reschedulings, and groggy commuters and workers. I wouldn’t be surprised if Starbucks was behind the continued use of daylight savings time.
Uniformity. Not every state, let alone every country, uses daylight savings time. What happens why you’re in California and you need to call Hawaii or Arizona before the close of business? ((Those Arizonans really are mavericks.)) ((Or, how about: “Well, I guess Hawaiian and Arizonans are both mavericks!”)) ((Too soon?))
Workers’ Compensation Claims. The workers compensation implications alone are staggering. ((I bet you thought this wasn’t going to have anything to do with workers’ compensation.)) Every home and every office must keep one poor bastard around whose job duties include dragging a chair or step ladder around the office to change all the wall clocks.
If the Office Poor Bastard falls and gets hurt, you’re going to have to hand him a claim form. If the Office Poor Bastard gets an attorney, that attorney is going to see the mechanism of injury and argue for a higher occupational code than “Office Poor Bastard.” ((“211 OFFICE CLERK, GENERAL clerical,” for those of you playing at home.)) ((<shameless plug>I’d suggest this great workers’ compensation website to help you find such things.</shameless plug>)) The Office Poor Bastard will be considered an occupational code 482, “RIGGER, HIGH amuse. & rec.” ((I say this only half-jokingly. Years ago I had someone make this exact argument to me. Ken, I’m looking at you.))
The Solution
There are two possible solutions.
First, we eliminate daylight savings time. If the potential drawbacks of daylight savings time outweigh the benefits, then it should be eliminated it.
Secondly, as an alternative we could agree to set the entire coutnry on the time halfway between daylight savings time and non-daylight savings time. If you get 100% of the benefits and drawbacks from daylight savings time, then at the time halfway in-between you’d get half the benefit and drawbacks. ((This assumes an arithmatic progression of benefits and costs associated with daylight savings time.)) ((This also assumes that no new benefits or costs are conferred by half-daylight savings time. I can concieve of at least one additional drawback – namely that the United States would be in time zones half an hour from the rest of the world. Then again, I suppose that’s better than being a full hour off?))
I’m in favor of eliminating daylight savings time altogether, but I would certainly be willing to “split the baby.”
