Month: February 2009

By Posted on Posted in Author, Business, Marketing, Not Workers Compensation, Technobabble No Comments Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Glasses, online
Glasses, online!

No matter which website you order glasses from online, I would suggest the following five steps: 1

  1. Get your prescription. When getting your eye prescription, being sure to have your physician provide your “Pupillary Distance.” 2  I’ve put together a chart at the bottom you can take with you to the doctor’s office.
  2. Measure your glasses. Measure your current glasses using a metric ruler.  The most important measurement is going to be “Temple Width.”  The “Temple Width” is the overall front width of your glasses.
  3. Choose frames. On the website of your choice, narrow down the available glasses by the “Temple Width.”  From there you can narrow down the available choices.
  4. Wait. Both of the websites I ordered glasses from took about two weeks to get the glasses to me.
  5. Double check. Take your new glasses back to your eye doctor.  They will have a machine that can check the prescriptions on the lenses.

SPH

(Sphere)

CYL

(Cylinder)

AXIS

ADD

(Addition)
O.D. (Right)
O.S. (Left)
Pupillary Distance

mm
Temple Width

mm

Coupon Codes:

  • I tried GlobalEyeglasses.com and used the coupon code “glassyeyes” for 10% off.
  • I also tried Goggles4U.com and used the coupon code “glassyeyes” for 5% off. (I have no idea why they both use the same coupon code…)

Yesterday I had my doctor’s test out all four pairs of my glasses.  Tune in next time for the reviews of GlobalEyeglasses.com and Goggles4U.com!

  1. Photo courtesy of Morningstar Lee [↩]
  2. The “Pupilary Distance” is the distance between your two pupils, measured in millimeters. [↩]

By Posted on Posted in Calculators, Case Law, COLA, Death Benefits, Life Pension, PDRater, Permanent Total Disability, SAWW, Website Updates, Workers Compensation Resources No Comments Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
XYZZXSJO2 - The motion picture!
XYZZXSJO2 - The motion picture!

Last week while Steve was at the Sacramento WCAB he heard about a recent case that held the COLA / SAWW adjustments and increases are calculated based upon the first January 1 following the date of injury. 12

This case involving SIF (the subsequent injuries fund) is from the San Jose WCAB.  The name of the case is “XYZZXSJO2 v. Subsequent Injuries Benefits Trust Fund, ADJ 1510738, SJO 0251902”.  The name of the Applicant was anonymized to protect their identity.  34

Download a copy of XYZZXSJO2 now!

Thus far the conventional wisdom has been that the COLA/SAWW increases are calculated starting with the first January 1 after life pension gets paid out.  This is a tremendous change in the COLA/SAWW calculation of life pension.

Assuming a 1/1/2003 injury at exactly 70% permanent partial disability, there would be 426.5 weeks of permanent disability paid after the permanent and stationary date before the life pension gets paid out.  This equates to 8.2 years from the permanent and stationary date that has, thus far, not been taken into account with life pension calculations to date.  To put this in perspective, if someone had an injury on 1/1/2003 and became P&S on that same date5 , the traditional method of calculating the life pension with COLA / SAWW increase would be too low by approximately 44%.

At the moment I’m finalizing a COLA / SAWW life pension 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.

Unfortunately, I don’t have a citation for the 4.7% COLA / SAWW increase, but I believe it to be the offiical average used by the DEU6 to calculate commutations of COLA / SAWW increases and adjustments.  If you have an official citation or document from the DEU, please drop me a line so I can include that citation here!

  1. COLA = cost of living adjustment. [↩]
  2. SAWW = state average weekly wage. [↩]
  3. I hope to have a scan of this decision for you soon! [↩]
  4. David DePaolo of WorkCompCentral.com has graciously allowed me permission to offer you a copy of XYZZXSJO2 for download!  Thanks David! [↩]
  5. Not likely. [↩]
  6. Disaiblity Evaluation Unit. [↩]

By Posted on Posted in PDRater, Search Engine Ranking, SEO, Technobabble, Website Updates No Comments Tagged with , ,
PDRater.com breaks another record!
PDRater.com breaks another record!

I’m out of the office for one lousy day and what happens?  A record number of visitors to PDRater.com, that’s what.1  I suppose I should spend more time up at the Santa Rosa WCAB, eh?

On Wednesday February 18, 2009 this website had a record number of individual visitors.  On that day I  234 unique visitors.  2  In the grand scheme of things, this is a fairly low number of unique visitors to a website.

However, most people come to this website looking for information about California workers’ compensation, workers’ compensation resources, workers’ compensation calculators, and updates regarding recent workers’ compensation cases.  The vast majority of website visitors (I’m extrapolating from those who have signed up for free) are claims adjusters, law office staff, and applicant and defense attorneys.

This sort of website traffic is considered to be very “high quality” as in the number of people from my target demographic comprise the vast majority of those people who actually visit my site.

  1. Photo courtesy of Ann Althouse. [↩]
  2. The previous record of 180 visitors was set on August 23, 2008. [↩]

By Posted on Posted in Medical Provider Network, Workers Compensation Resources No Comments Tagged with , , , , , ,
Doc-in-a-box
Doc-in-a-box

I began maintaining a list of MPN providers about a year ago specifically because I find them so frustrating.1 (Explanation of the photo on the right2 ) Admittedly, a year ago I was an Applicant’s attorney, but that’s besides the point.  Even as a workers’ compensation defense attorney and I’m still frustrated by MPN lists.

In order to find a treating physician with an MPN you need to have a conflagration of events.   The right Medical Provider Network link to the right website for the right carrier with the right password.

According to the Division of Workers’ Compensation website, there are 1,334 official and approved Medical Provider Networks for California.  Unfortunately, the Division of Workers’ Compensation list of MPN’s is almost completely worthless since it doesn’t include a website link or other useful information about these various Medical Provider Networks.  The most useful part about the DWC’s list of MPN’s is that it will tell you whether or not a particular employer/self-insured/insurance company has an MPN.  There is a lot of amount of duplication on the official MPN list.  I would estimate there are really only about 500 or so unique Medical Provider Networks operating in California.

In any case, I’m maintaining a list of Medical Provider Networks links and passwords.  If you know of any additional MPN websites, logins, or passwords, please drop me a line and let me know.  Right now, I’m looking for updated links and passwords for:

  • Concentra MPN (Medical Provider Network)
  • CorVel MPN (Medical Provider Network)
  • Keenan & Associates MPN (Medical Provider Network)

Hopefully workers’ compensation professionals on both sides will find this information useful.

  1. Photo courtesy of aussiegall [↩]
  2. A “doc-in-the-box” is a derragotry phrase for a physician who is, for lack of a better term, in someone’s “pocket.”  Doctor Who is a is a British sci-fi television show about someone called “The Doctor” who travels through time in a police box.  The photo on the right with the caption is my attempt at humor. [↩]

By Posted on Posted in 2005 PDRS, Calculators, Case Law, Downloads, Free, Ogilvie, PDRater, Permanent Disability Rating Schedule, Permanent Partial Disability, Technobabble, Website Updates, Workers Compensation Resources No Comments Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Workers Compensation Calculator
Workers' Compensation Calculator

I had an interesting e-mail exchange with a friend (and fellow workers’ compensation professional) the other day.1

We were discussing the impacts of Ogilvie on 2005 schedule ratings.  He had asked me whether I intended to update the 2005 permanent disability rating calculator to include FEC Ranks after the scheduled 8.  I believe he had suggested FEC Ranks 9 through 20.

I have no intention of manufacturing FEC Ranks 9 through 20 for the following reasons:

  • Maintaining Standards. The entire point of a rating schedule is to allow a standardized method for calculating disability and expressing those disability calculations.   If I invented my own FEC Rank system beyond the scheduled 1-8 Ranks, I would essentially be creating my own rating calculation system.  I’ve gone to considerable lengths to ensure that the rating strings produced by these permanent disability calculators are as standardized, recognizeable, and universal as possible.
  • FEC Ranks are Irrelevant. The FEC Rank system is a simplified method of applying DFEC adjustment factors.  When you use the FEC Rank of a particular body part to adjust the standard using the charts on pages 2-6 and 2-7 of the 2005 PDRS (permanent disability rating schedule), what you’re really doing is essentially multiplying your standard disability against the FEC adjustment factor associated with the particular FEC Rank for the body part in question.  An FEC Rank is only useful for telling you the appropriate FEC adjustment factor to apply to the standard disability.  Thus, FEC Ranks are irrelevant and FEC adjustment factors are all important.
  • Arbitrary FEC Ranks. FEC Rank 1 has an FEC adjustment factor of “1.100”.  However, using the Ogilvie DFEC rebuttal formula, it is possible to end up with very low FEC adjustment factors.  In extreme circumstances it would be possible to have a negative FEC adjustment factor.  The only way to resolve this would be to have several possible negative FEC Ranks.  Besides being somewhat silly, worrying about additional FEC Ranks2 misses the point.  If you’re using the Ogilvie DFEC rebuttal formula properly, the result will be a new FEC adjustment factor.  If you already have the FEC adjustment factor, you have no need for the FEC Rank!

When I had discussed the impact of Ogilvie earlier, I had pointed out that in some cases the resulting formula will dictate that you use a different FEC Rank than the one indicated by the affected body part.  In other cases you will need to use an entirely new FEC adjustment factor.  In order to keep the 2005 disability calculator current I will eventually have to create a way for the user to override a body part’s standard FEC Rank and specify a new FEC Rank or their own FEC adjustment factor.

I’m not in any particular rush to develop this feature since Ogilvie seems to require three years of post-injury earnings.  I doubt we’re going to see litigation begin in earnest over Ogilvie issues for another 18 to 24 months.

  1. Photo courtesy of Street Fly JZ [↩]
  2. Both higher and lower than the normal 8 [↩]