Earnings Record

EARNINGS RECORD

Preparing a case requires a look at the claimant's earning record. The record is full of acronyms, abbreviations, messages that look like they are written in code. So what does it all mean? Here is some of the answers!

Consider the following:

NH NAME JOSEPH LOST SN PG001

INPUT 02/02/13 MINNEAPOLIS, MN

RUN DATE 02/02/13 V: 01/12/11 CO: 01/15

CONTROL CC:R BLK:3

EVENT EARNINGS RECORD – PIA DETERMINATION

TID DISABILITY CLAIM

DATES AP: 12/15/12 DO: 06/06/11 DENT: 12/11

(date claimant applied (claimant's alleged (the first day of the month

for benefits) disability on-set is the date the claimant becomes

date) entitled to benefits—5 months

from disability on-set date)

************************************************************

NH NAME JOSEPH LOST.....

INS STAT DISABILITY: EXCL QU:24 EXCL: HAS: 40

…...................................................DID DLI: 01/01/14

DISABILITY TEST: 20/40 MET...................................

COMPUTATIONAL YEARLY EARNINGS

MAX AMT YR REGULAR U INDEXED

70 NNNC 115.00 L $575 (examples only)

71 CCCC** 175.00 L $875

( Year) (quarters*) (actual earnings) (present value of earnings-- used to calculate

primary insurance amount (PIA))

*The amount of earnings required for a quarter of coverage (QC) in 2013 is $1,160. A QC is the basic unit for determining whether you are insured under Social Security.

**No matter how high your earnings may be, you can not earn more than 4 QC's in one year.

**You have disability-insured status if you:

1. have earned at least 20 QCs during the last 10 years (a way to estimate, worked full time 5 of the past ten years), and
2. are fully insured.
   

Disclaimer: Blogs posted herein are intended neither as legal advice, nor do they create nor attempt to create an attorney-client relationship. The person viewing my blogs is admonished that an attorney-client relationship may only be created with the express consent to the parties to it.

Thoughts on the Working Claimant

The following are thoughts by the author and not intended to be taken as representation of the law. It is comment, and comment only. There is no attempt in posting this blog to establish an attorney client relationship with any reader.
A big reason why you have private attorneys working in the area of social security disability is the same reason many claimants find it necessary to work pending a hearing; that reason being delay! The law allows attorney's fees to be paid out of past due benefits awarded to the claimant. There is an ability to earn a good fee, if the past due benefits are large, i.e. if the delay from requesting a hearing to the actual hearing date is lengthy. After a denial on a request for reconsideration, it can take 12 to 18 months to eventually appear before an ALJ. Claimants who are desperate for income to maintain a bare life style, sometimes feel forced to take a part time job. Most admit working was very hard and painful but they feel they had no choice, especially if they have a family depending on them.

The big problem with the delay is the financial hardship. The claimant has to wait without money for a hearing, this can be very, very difficult. Most hope to win benefits so that they will have some small token of their life back.

What happens in the system to these people is the subject of the blog.

Compare what an ALJ sees at every hearing, and literature put out by social security. A judge sees people unable to work with claims of disability. Some disabilities reach the level the ALJ deems subject to benefits, many others do not. The majority of claimants at this stage are suffering the impact of some disability. The majority of claimants are unemployed, down on their luck, and begging for financial assistance. Given this, in walks a claimant claiming to be totally disabled and unable to work at any job within his or her functional capacity, yet the claimant is working a part time job.

There is nothing illegal in a claimant working a part time job and claiming benefits. In some cases, where the claimant has tried several and failed at each, (an unsuccessful work attempt is work at a job that generally lasts less than 3 months) it might even assist them in a win. In the normal case, part time work by the claimant sets up a bad situation...let's say that the claimant is working 20 or 30 hours a week, but all the prior claimants that week before this ALJ were unable to work at all and benefits have been denied to some of the non-working claimants. It is hard to believe that claimant's ability to work part time does not affect the ALJ's thought process.

On the other hand, if you look at the literature put out by social security you will see that it tells you that you can work while you apply for disability benefits (and while you receive benefits), as long as your earnings do not exceed a certain amount set by the SSA each year, called the SGA limit. SGA stands for "substantial gainful activity." In 2013, the SGA limit is $1,040 per month (or $1,740 for blind claimants).
 
Caveat! Remember that "past relevant work" (PRW) -- that is, jobs the claimant has done in the past 15 years.  If that work included part time employment and at the part time employment qualified as "substantially gainful" work, i.e. claimant was earning more $1,040.00 a month, and  SSA decides you can do your part-time PRW, you will be denied benefits.

Social Security disability is based upon a claimant's inability to work any full time job within his/her functional capacity (except as noted above). Social Security defines disability in terms of a claimant's ability/inability to work. To win, you need to prove that at the lightest job category that the claimant has the ability (his/her functional capacity) to work, the impairment(s) makes competitive employment impossible, i.e. even at a simple, unskilled job, claimant could not perform the duties to the quality demanded by an employer, i. e. show up to work consistently, be at your job site, work for 8 hours a day, 5 days a week and continue to do that for the term of employment. If you return to work before a hearing on your disability claim, the judge may have trouble dealing with part time work, and a finding of disability, i.e. “Isn't it possible with a little more effort, full time work could be handled?”

Testimony from the claimant, who is working a part time job, that “I am working at my capacity. I could not work longer hours or more days, or at a more difficult job, and I don't know how much longer I can do the little I am doing.”

Unfortunately, a judge may conclude that claimant's testimony is not credible. Claimant admits working 3 to 4 hours a day, maybe at a different job or with a little more effort, you could work 7 to 8 hours a day. What if you have consistently shown up to work your part time job, done a good job working at it for the past year, three months or whatever time period? What if you worked a part time job that required heavy lifting, medium lifting etc? There is no other way to look at it, but that part time work damages a claimant's chances of winning!

I explain this to my clients when the issue arises and let them make the decision. I understand that to some it is necessary to bring in some money to meet living expenses, and that it will take a long time to get to a hearing.
They need to understand that if their case is not cut and dry (as it would be if the client had had a liver transplant, say, which automatically qualifies for benefits for 12 months), they may want to think twice about working when you apply for benefits. It is a very difficult issue for many clients who are faced with the difficulty of attempting to win benefits.

FAILURE TO FOLLOW TREATMENT

Every now and then a client appears who, upon review of medical reports, appears not to follow one or more of his/her treating physician's recommendations on treatment. What is the effect of such conduct?

As a general rule, Social Security can use information on whether your client has been following his/her doctor's recommended treatment, taken prescribed medication, been using prescribed devices such as a cane or brace, and keeping medical appointments. If the client has failed to follow recommended treatment, the ALJ could use that failure to conclude that your client's condition is not as severe as alleged.

It is always of concern when the Administrative Law Judge questioning your client –making specific comment on the fact that the client failed to appear for doctor appointments; or, seems to have difficulty following prescribed treatment; etc.

This is of such a concern because if it appears that claimant's impairment can be remedied by treatment, to the point he/she could return to some type of work, the claimant must follow the treatment prescribed by claimant's physician. 20. C.F.R. §§ 404.1530(a)

If claimant fails to follow prescribed treatment, absent a good excuse, he/she cannot be found disabled. Ostronski v. Chater, 94 F3d 413 , (8^th Cir. 1996). Claimant failed to take prescribed pain medication or seek regular medical treatment, claimant rejected doctor's recommendations of surgery...all were sufficient to up-hold the ALJ denial of benefits.

When a client presents such facts, it is necessary to talk with them and review the medical records to determine if there was a 'good excuse' for not following prescribed treatment, or, if no 'good excuse', would compliance have made a difference in being capable to being competitively employed,-- “ doctor, would Mr/Ms X ability to work be restored if prescribed treatment were followed?” Obviously, if the treatment had been followed and it still would not restore claimant's ability to work, whether or not treatment was followed is irrelevant.

What if the doctor believes that it could have sufficiently improved the client's health? Then it is important to determine if there is a “good excuse” for the failure to follow the doctor's orders.

If it is a failure to take medication, why? Sometimes the side effects of the medication is worse than the symptoms of the impairment. Sometimes the claimant is afraid of addiction. The claimant may be offered surgery that did not work in the past. Surgery in general presents a conflict among the circuit courts.  Is it proper to force an invasion on the body when the client has in his or her mind a justifiable reason to say “no”?  i.e.  Is it proper to demand that a claimant under-go surgery, when the claimant has a heart felt fear of surgery and the problems that can be associated with surgery? Consider Ostronski, supra.

It is the commissioner's burden to show that claimant's refusal of treatment was not justified. Consider,

Walker v. Callahan, 990 F. Supp 1283 (D Kan 1997) Before the ALJ may rely on claimant's use of low-cost clinic or failure to pursue treatment or take medication as support for determination that testimony lacks credibility, the ALJ should consider whether 1. treatment was prescribed; 2. treatment was refused; 3. would restore the claimant's ability to return to work; and if so, refusal was based on a “good excuse”.

What if claimant is willing to accept treatment, but cannot afford it and there is no community agency providing such treatment within claimant's resources? Consider: SSR 82-59 – “4. The individual is unable to afford prescribed treatment which he or she is willing to accept, but for which free community resources are unavailable. Although a free or subsidized source of treatment is often available, the claim may be allowed where such treatment is not reasonably available in the local community. All possible resources (e.g., clinics, charitable and public assistance agencies, etc.), must be explored. Contacts with such resources and the claimant's financial circumstances must be documented. Where treatment is not available, the case will be referred to VR.”

Religious beliefs that run contra to the recommended treatment always raises an issue of allowance. Again consider SSR 82-59 – “1. Acceptance of prescribed treatment would be contrary to the teachings and tenets of the claimant's or beneficiary's religion. A finding of disability would be in order where the evidence establishes that the disabled individual rejects prescribed treatment on the grounds that he or she is a member of a church which teaches that healing may be accomplished only through faith or prayer. In such a case the claimant will have to identify his church, prove he is a member, and the church's position on medical treatment must be documented (there is an exception for Christian Science—you need not develop the church philosophy on medical treatment).”

If this is an issue in a case, a good place to start is SSR 82-59, it sets forth the commissioner's position on a number of these issues, in addition case law can flesh out the issues.

Of particular difficulty in this area is conditions which appear to be the result of 'bad habits'. The lay thought would be remove the 'bad habit” and the condition is remediable and as such refusal to 'act normal' should bar recovery.

When you ask a 'man on the street' - “Should obese people be granted disability benefits?” Most would argue that an obese person should not be allowed benefits, --”Go on a diet”. “Watch what you eat” etc.

Drugs and alcohol have their own provisions in the law that restricts benefits. Which is a shame. In many cases the drug user or alcoholic cannot stop, they have an addiction and try as they will, even with professional intervention, they continue to relapse. Congress in its questionable wisdom, has proscribed both outside the realm of benefits.

Smoking is another issue that pops up in the cases, i.e. Kisling v. Chater, 105 F.3d 1255 (8^th Cir. 1997) Medical evaluation of the claimant showed that her respiratory problems were related to smoking, failure to follow prescribed course of remedial treatment without good cause was grounds to deny benefits.

Disclaimer: Blogs posted herein are intended neither as legal advice, nor do they create nor attempt to create an attorney-client relationship. The person viewing my blogs is admonished that an attorney-client relationship may only be created with the express consent to the parties to it.

UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE AND SOCIAL SECURITY DISABILITY

It happens with some frequency, a client will come into the office having lost on his or her initial claim or reconsideration and (1) has applied for and is receiving unemployment insurance benefits or (2) ask, “Can I apply for unemployment while the appeal is pending?”

This is a issue that continues to cause problems. If you are filing for Social Security disability, you are stating that you have been unable to work for at least twelve months, or that you anticipate that you'll be unable to perform substantial work activity for at least twelve months, due to a mental and/or physical impairment. When you file for unemployment, you are stating you are ready and available to perform work should you be able to find a job that fits your work skills. Based on the foregoing, the application for unemployment benefits with a pending application for social security disability benefits suggests an apparent inconsistency: a claim that you are able, available, and actively seeking work while concurrently claiming an inability to work as a result of disability.

I have spoken to other attorneys who practice in this area of the law. From these discussions, it is clear that there is no consensus of opinion on what advise should or should not be given. Some of the attorneys I talk with advise their clients against collecting unemployment benefits when applying for Social Security disability, because Administrative Law Judge have been known to have difficulty with the issue for people applying for both benefits at the same time.

Other attorneys point out that some client have no funds left to make ends meet and desperately need the unemployment benefits, and that that is the only reason they apply. They attempt to deal with the issue at the hearing. Others point out that there are situations where an older person could be legitimately entitled to disability benefits even with receipt of unemployment, e.g. if a person is in a social security case is limited to sedentary work ( a very light type of work activity), but because of his age, past job skills, and education level, isn't expected to learn how to do a sedentary job, he should be approved for disability benefits. In that case, there is the possibility that he could find a sedentary job he could work, even though under the social security law, he is disabled. In that case, both application are correct.

The position of the Social Security Administration. While it frowns upon applicants receiving unemployment benefits, it will not always prevent a claimant from being found disabled.

This situation was addressed by the Social Security Administration’s Chief Administrative Law Judge Frank A. Cristaudo in his memoranda of November 16, 2006 and August 9, 2010. Chief Judge Cristaudo noted it is often uncertain whether the Social Security Administration will find a person disabled, and the decision making process and waiting for disability benefits is quite lengthy. The Chief Judge stressed that receipt of unemployment benefits is only one of many factors that must be considered in determining disability.

The United States Supreme Court addressed a similar situation in the 1999 case of Cleveland v. Policy Management Systems Corp, 119 S.Ct. 1597 (1999) (This has been incorporated in SSR 00-1c). Justice Breyer, in evaluating a concurrent Americans with Disabilities Act claim along with an application for Social Security Disability benefits ruled that the application for Social Security Disability benefits would not prevent recovery under the ADA. The Court further noted that being found disabled by the Social Security Administration involves a five-step process with a number of factors considered. The Court also noted that the Social Security Administration can grant benefits to individuals who are not only able to work, but are working.

Is this confusing—Yes???

What do I advise? I inform all disability claimants who were receiving unemployment benefits, that the decision to file for disability is their choice however, they needed to consider the potential pitfalls of taking unemployment benefits while they wait for a disability decision. I give the same advise to a client who has filed and now wants to apply for unemployment. There are judges who take the issue very seriously. I have had judges offer a new on-set date which happen to be the date the unemployment ran out. I have had judges question the client on the apparent contradiction exists in applying for or receiving both unemployment benefits and SSDI benefits.

There is an appearance that the claimant has trouble with the truth, when he files both applications, i.e. were you telling the truth on the unemployment application or on the application for disability?

My experience has been that judges understand the economics of the system delays. They realize that there are people applying who could not support themselves for the time it took to obtain a hearing without applying for unemployment. The Judges (most) focus on the alleged impairments and spend time determining if they fit the requirements for an award of benefits, and very little time on the collateral issue.

I do not feel that I have ever lost a case based upon this issue. Still, it brings into a case another obstacle to obtain benefits. If it is not absolutely necessary to apply for unemployment, it is probably a good idea not to make the application.

If you do get unemployment benefits pending an award from social security, especially if the award period infringes on the term of the unemployment benefits, there may be a repayment issue for the period of double payment.

Disclaimer: Blogs posted herein are intended neither as legal advice, nor do they create nor attempt to create an attorney-client relationship. The person viewing my blogs is admonished that an attorney-client relationship may only be created with the express consent to the parties to it.

Thoughts on a Hearing

Over the many years in which I have handled social security cases, they all seem to have a common theme. I have never had so large of a practice that I could not personally handle each and every one of my cases.

If the claim is turned down on the initial application and than on reconsideration. A hearing is than requested and it takes over a year to wait for a hearing. During that time, the client is advised to keep the office appraised of his/her status, the clinic, hospitals, etc. that has provided treatment.

After case has been in the office for over a year an notice of a hearing arrives. It indicates one of the most important days in your client immediate future is close at hand. It literally means a chance for a homeless person to obtain funds which will allow him/her to get a residence.

The client's file is pulled. A check is made to assure that the medical records for all treatments have been obtained or if not, written for and awaiting receipt. The file is reviewed and questions for the client arranged. A call is made to the client to get answers to questions that the review has kicked up, and to remind him/her of the date and time.

Many times, the client is told of weaknesses in his/her case and what is needed to help. In many cases, it will be the client's testimony at the hearing that will determine the outcome of the case. The client needs to understand the case.

The case is never simply appear, show a lack of work and obtain benefits. It is not an unemployment program, it is a program to provide disability benefits to those people that have a condition that makes them so disabled that there is no employment available to them. It is something that not all people appreciate. The fact they worked for years and years and paid and paid for benefits, they believe should give them a right to benefits simply because they can not do the work they had been doing.

Gathering everything together, a memorandum is written expressing our argument on why disability should be awarded.

The hearing is not what most people picture. There is no jury. You are not required to prove to a group of your peers that you are disabled. You deal with someone who is an expert in the area, an ALJ. This person adjudicates disability claims day after day, hour after hour.

At the hearing the Administrative Law Judge asks the majority of questions concerning the case. The questioning is to be an unbiased search for the truth. It must be remembered that everyone, judges included, has a different idea of what the burden encompasses.

Questions that are felt the ALJ missed are than addressed to the client. In some cases a medical expert is called and asked to explain the medical impairments that the file discloses. Many times the expert is asked upon reasonable restrictions that the expert feels the impairments would cause. Unfortunately, in my experience, I see medical experts less often than in past cases.

Finally a vocational expert is brought into the fray. The ALJ will usually ask the expert several hypothetical questions concerning the claimant, the impairments, and limitations. It is then the vocational experts area to express to the ALJ if there are past jobs the claimant could do in the past 15 years that he/she could return to doing with the impairments as described by the ALJ.

If the vocational expert believes that the claimant could not return to do any prior work, the question than becomes is there any work in the national economy that the claimant could do.

It is at this part of the hearing that the attorney for the claimant needs to address the testimony of the vocational expert if it is believed that it does not properly express the claimant's situation.

The hearing ends with the Judge indicating that a decision will be issued in the near future. It is a custom, to spend time with the client post hearing to go over his/her testimony, answer any questions, and tell him/her to keep their fingers crossed, it appears that the hearing was favorable, but it is up to the ALJ.

The hearing is stressful for the client and believe it or not the attorney. In many cases, I deeply believe in my client's inability to work. During the course of the hearing, it appears that the ALJ does not see the case the same way that I do. ( What strikes me is that the ALJs receive uniform training and are 'learned' in the law, yet in my jurisdiction the approval percentages for the judges vary from a 28% approval to over 60%.  It appears to me, that the vocational testimony changes depending upon judge for whom the expert is appearing.  Unfortunately the well being of a family, desperately in need of disability benefits, may rest more on the ALJ drawn then the facts of the case.  I guess I would not spend so much time pondering this situation except, most of my clients are in bad physical or mental health and except for a matter of degree of judgment, some gain benefits and some don't.)

There is the waiting period post trial that hurts. In almost all of my cases the client needs an award of benefits, so that he/she can gain at least a minimal safety net, get off the street, get help for the impairment.

A loss at this level is significant, because the percentage of cases resulting in an an award on appeal after a denial at the ALJ level is small.  A loss at the hearing level results in review by the Appeals Council. It is a paper review of the hearing and a necessary step if there is a desire to have the case reviewed in the federal court system. ( The Appeals Council has the ability to self review favorable cases and reverse what an ALJ has decided which can be devastating for a client who thought he and garnered benefits only to have them taken away.)

The whole orientation of the case shifts upon an appeal. In a system heavily weighed to support the decision of the ALJ, errors must be found, articulated and argued. Muses on post hearing matters, could take up pages and pages, and best left to another day.

Given the number of cases that are heard before an ALJ, time restraints, proof and evidence issues the system works, with some improvements it could be better, for example why not allow one strike against an assigned ALJ.  Civil trials allow such a strike, and the system hasn't collapsed.

Happy day, good day!!

Disclaimer: Blogs posted herein are intended neither as legal advice, nor do they create nor attempt to create an attorney-client relationship. The person viewing my blogs is admonished that an attorney-client relationship may only be created with the express consent to the parties to it. This blog is only the opinion of the author and are not expressed authority on any of the subjects discussed

POST TRAUMATIC STRESS, THE WAR VETERAN AND SOCIAL SECURITY

You have served your country fighting in a foreign war. You have returned home and you notice something is wrong. You are having nightmares. You have trouble concentrating. Sudden loud noises make you duck for cover. You have trouble functioning on a day-to-day basis. You very likely suffer from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).

Many people suffering a traumatic injury due to such things as assault, murder, rape, death of a friend or other traumatic event have been found to suffer the effects of PTSD. One of the worst inflicters of traumatic injury is war. A soldier can be exposed to seeing first hand horrendous death or mutilation caused by today's weapons of war. Battles and IUD's can take a close friend's life, and the soldier can be exposed to the relentless fear of death on each mission.

The statistics are alarming. Over 40 percent of the 1.6 million veterans from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are now seeking compensation for injuries. Most, if not all, claim the injuries to be service-related . Further, for the first time in modern history Reserves and National Guard have been called up and carried a large burden of the war.

Women also served in greater numbers in these wars, and are accounting for a larger percentage of claims.
The new munitions used in the war, body armor and very improved battlefield and immediately associated care have allowed more service members to survive from wounds that would have been fatal in prior wars. This has resulted in higher numbers of service members suffering new injuries.

The Social Security Administration has a program that gives service members an ability to receive expedited processing of disability claims. If you are a veteran or active duty service member and you become disabled while on active duty (anytime after September 2001), you are eligible to get an expedited decision in your Social Security disability case. It does not matter where or how you became disabled. In processing your claim, Social Security will not consider where or how the disability happened. Your disability does not need to be related to your military duty, it just needs to have occurred while you were on active duty.

What to do to apply?

First, you must let the Social Security Administration know that your medical condition began while you were on active duty. Secondly, you must identify the location where your military records are kept. Do not rely upon the Department of Defense which will routinely send the names of ill or injured service members. Many times these reports may be incomplete. Remember when you file for disability with Social Security you must make sure that you provide the proof that you are, or were, a service member.

If reported correctly, your application will be marked as a Military Casualty/Wounded Warrior (MC/WW) file and expedited through all stages of the disability decision process as a critical case. (If you have filed for benefits with the VA, that will not automatically be an application for Social Security disability benefits. Social Security will require a separate application).

Evidence that will help in your application include:

Original or certified copy of your birth certificate or proof of U.S. citizenship or legal residency if foreign born;

Form DD 214, if discharged from military service;

Proof of military pay;

Medical records that you have or that you can easily obtain from all military and civilian sources

The fact that your case will receive expedited treatment does not lesson your burden to prove that your disability or disabilities are so severe that they prevent you from working competitively employed in any job within your functional capacity. There are no provisions in the law that make a wounded warrior's burden of proof less then anyone else applying for disability benefits. Further, by the way the system is structured, if you are under 50 years of age, your burden to obtain benefits is just that much more difficult. If you have read my blog entry on how Social Security treats a disability rating from the VA, you can see that being disabled for VA does not automatically qualify you for social security disability benefits. Social Security requires additional proof of inability to be competitively employed.

If you are in this situation and believe that you are unable to work because of a disability, you need an attorney on your side to advocate your position.

Disclaimer: Blogs posted herein are intended neither as legal advice, nor do they create nor attempt to create an attorney-client relationship. The person viewing my blogs is admonished that an attorney-client relationship may only be created with the express consent to the parties to it.

Social Security Disability and Supplemental Security (disability); there is a difference!

One of the common issues that I must explain to clients is the difference between supplemental security income (SSI) and social security disability insurance benefits (SSD,SSDI or DIB). Simply saying one is an earned benefit program and the other is a safety net program, really does not work.



The Social Security Administration offers two different types of disability benefits, namely Social Security Disability Insurance Benefits and Supplemental Security Income for the disabled.



SSI or Supplemental Security Income: The program is a nationwide federal welfare program providing monthly cash benefits to eligible needy individuals or couples who are aged, blind or disabled. It is administered by the social security administration to help people who have not worked and who are in need of medical health insurance and supplemental income to survive.



To be eligible for SSI, a claimant must be either age 65 or older, blind, or disabled. In addition, there are additional requirements of citizenship or qualified alien status and legal residence, limited income, and resources. If found disabled under SSI, unlike having been found disabled under DIB, there is no five month waiting period. The only waiting period before payment of SSI disability benefits is the month is the month of application, i.e. SSI disability benefits are available from the month following the month of application.



DIB or Disability Insurance Benefits: This system is similar to the SSI system, but was originally created to help out disabled workers. The difference between SSI and DIB is you have to have worked 20 out of the last 40 quarters (essentially 5 our of the last 10 years) and paid into social security with your taxes to be eligible. SSA will calculate a DLI or date last insured to determine when you will last be eligible for DIB benefits. There are several big advantages DIB provides over what SSI provides. One advantage is that DIB benefit cash payments are based on your income and are often significantly more each month than SSI only. Income earned at a much lower level reduces the amount of SSI received and the receipt is also determined after your other non-income resources are counted.



Unfortunately for some claimant's caught in the disability process. They may apply for SSDI benefits and be denied and appeal the denial as far as District Court and lose. They later file a new application only to find that even though they had worked their whole life, now that over five years have elapsed since last day of work, they are no longer eligible for SSDI benefits and have only SSI benefits to support them in their disabled condition prior to reaching retirement age.

In this vein, consider the case of Collier v Barnhart,473 F.3d 444(2^nd Cir.2007) . Claire Collier had amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and on application for disability benefits was over 31 years of age. 20 CFR § 404.130(b). Ms. Collier had worked for 15 years from 1979 through 1994, she then left the work force to have and raise three children. During the period that she worked, she and her employer had contributed over $40,000.00 in Social Security and Medicare taxes. In 2003 she was diagnosed with ALS. Ms. Collier applied for disability benefits. She lost because she did not have sufficient work credits (an applicant above the age of 31 must have worked twenty of the previous forty quarters, i.e. 5 of the past 10 years). She brought a constitutional challenge to the recent work history requirements. She lost!

In summary consider the table provided in most part by the Social Security Administration.

	Social Security Disability Insurance	Supplemental Security Income
	A disabled or blind individual must have paid Social Security taxes for benefits.	A disabled or blind adult or child must meet all of the following categories: 1. Have limited income If you are an individual: you must have less than $2,000 in resources, can only own 1 automobile, can only own 1 home (must be your primary residence). If you are married: you must have less than $3,000 in resources, can only own 1 automobile, can only own 1 home (must be your primary residence). If you qualify for SSI benefits, you also qualify for Medicaid. SSI benefits can only be paid as far back as the month after you filed your application. So, if you filed an application in March 2008, your benefits can’t start until April 2008. 2.Be a U.S. citizen or national, or in one of certain categories of aliens; and 3.Live in the United States or Northern Mariana Islands.
	The monthly disability benefit amount is based on the Social Security earnings record of the insured worker.	The monthly payment is based on need and varies up to the maximum federal benefit rate. Some states add money to federal SSI payments.
	The worker will get Medicare coverage automatically after receiving disability benefits for two years.	In most states, beneficiaries are automatically eligible for Medicaid. (Not in Minnesota which imposes additional criteria. It is considered one of the (209(b) States.)