Helmet – PDRater – Permanent Disability Calculators

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))
Someone was going to prove that Ogilvie adds 18 points to the WPI in virtually all litigated workers’ compensation cases, so it might as well be me.

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!))

Stupid Disclaimers or Stupid People?

This last weekend I stayed overnight at a hotel in Chico. In the planters next to the parking lot they had placed these disclaimers/warning labels that read, “OXFORD SUITE HOTEL NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR WATER SPOTTING DUE TO SPRINKLERS.” ((Sign, parking lot, shrubbery, and wood chips are the sole responsibility of Oxford Suite Hotel – no matter what disclaimers they put up. Photo by Jay Shergill, all rights reserved.))

This brought to mind any number of responses:

“Oxford Suite Hotel not responsible for water”
“Oxfor Suite Hotel not responsible for H2O on your H2”
“Oxford Suite Hotel: You failed physics in high school, didn’t you?”
“Oxford Suite Hotel: Newton and Einstein – what bastards!”
“Oxford Suite Hotel: Life’s tough. Buy a helmet.”
“Oxford Suite Hotel not responsible for the administration of midnight beating for people who complain about water spotting due to sprinklers. You brought that on yourself.”

I’m sure some idiot called their management to complain about how the sprinklers had left spots on their car. When you think about it, Oxford Suite Hotel should be responsible for the installation, functioning, and maintenance of their own sprinklers, just as people who own vehicles should be responsible for the care and maintenance of their own vehicles.

There’s no making some people happy. If they are going to complain about thier vehicle getting wet, while it’s outside, they’re going to complain about the lighting, the room, the service, the sheets, the ice being too cold, the A.C. being too loud, and the TV being too dry.

Here’s a decent business model: sprinklers automatically spray a customer’s car as soon as they pull up. If they moan about spotting, send them on their way. If they thank you for washing their car, offer them a complimentary breakfast with their stay.

In any case, I blame the huge evil sign industry that has purchased our elected officials.

Tag: Helmet

Ogilvie: the finger pointing begins

Stupid Disclaimers or Stupid People?