Case Study: Insufficient Vocational Documentation

Group I, Category 53 Insufficient Vocational Documentation to Determine Work History

ISSUE

DDS determined the claimant is disabled at step 5 of sequential evaluation, without first completing step 4. A review of the case file shows there is insufficient vocational evidence to make a vocational decision. In addition, if an allowance is supported an earlier onset date is warranted.

CASE DISCUSSION & POLICY ANALYSIS (INCLUDING SPECIFIC REFERENCES)

The claimant is a 55-year old filing a DIB claim with an AOD of 12/18/2015 due to degenerative disc disease (DDD), anxiety, depression, tachycardia, a heart murmur, knee pain, arthritis, high blood pressure, phobias, diabetes, insomnia, a pinched, nerve, hands, joint, and ankle pain. There

On the prior SSA-3369, the claimant reported supervised eight employees as a service writer. If the claimant functioned as a supervisor, DDS needs to obtain a thorough summary of the supervisory duties performed in order to assess transferability of skills. Per DI 25015.017.E.3, skills acquired from Supervisor positions are highly likely to transfer to other sedentary work. SSE 82-41 indicates that skills obtained from clerical, professional, administrative, and managerial jobs have universal applicability across industry lines and transferability of skills to industries differing from past work experience can usually be accomplished with very little, if any, vocational adjustment. If additional vocational development reveals the claimant is unable to meet the demands of his past work and skills do not transfer, Vocational Rule 201.02 would provide the framework for a decision on 8/1/16. Prior to this date, vocational rule 202.02 directs an allowance as of 11/16/15, the date the claimant attains age 55 years. DI 24510.020.C.3 indicates multiple RFC assessments may be required, depending on individual case facts, to demonstrate the beginning, duration, or ending of disability. This includes instances where the onset is later than when the claimant alleged. In this case, the evidence in file supports a worsening of symptoms effective 8/1/16. However, the evidence also establishes that a severe impairment existed prior to that date and a RFC was