Category Archives: social security disability

Are plaintiff’s lawyers unintentionally spreading myths about claimant fraud?

Posted on by

The Social Security Administration (SSA) plans to implement rules, that if enacted, would allow SSA to review social media posts by Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) applicants and beneficiaries to check for benefits fraud.

Administrative agencies and adjudicatory bodies usually have broad authority to enact procedural and evidentiary changes that can affect the substantive rights of claimants. In the case of federal executive agencies like the Social Security Administration, those rules can be challenged in the judiciary branch and struck down by Congress.

Complaints about social security fraud are evergreen and overblown because of the difficulty in getting SSDI. SSDI benefits became even harder to receive as a result of bi-partisan reforms signed by President Obama in 2015 that included the repeal of the so-called treating physician rule.

Complaints about social security fraud echo and overlap with complaints about workers’ compensation fraud. Workers’ compensation fraud is rare on the employee side and even the workers’ compensation industry admits that workers’ compensation fraud is at least as much of a problem on the employers’ side as it is with employees.

So why does the trope of the fraudulent disability or workers’ compensation claimant continue to exist? I would argue that the plaintiff’s bar unintentionally perpetuates the myth. Here is the how and why of how I think the plaintiff’s bar perpetuates the fraudulent claim trope.

Any good plaintiff’s lawyer is going to make sure they know about their client’s social media feeds and will warn their clients about social media use. Plaintiff’s lawyers often take this standard advice and publish it on blogs and their own social medial feeds. Whenever a story breaks about an injured worker or disability claimant being caught for fraud with a social medial post, plaintiff’s lawyers reflexively post “See what happens, don’t do that.” But by engaging with these stories, the plaintiff’s bar amplifies stories about claimant fraud which are admittedly rare.

So why do we as plaintiff’s lawyers post cotnent on social media that perpetuate myths about our clients? It’s hard to say, but I have a few theories. The first is there is a pressure for plaintiff’s lawyers to engage on social media. A lot of plaintiff’s attorneys view social media engagement as marketing and outsource marketing to vendors.  When plaintiff’s lawyers take a hands off approach to social media, content tends to reflect whoever is actually producing the content rather than the attorney.

If social media posting is viewed as marketing, then from a marketing perspective, attorneys might be afraid to alienate potential clients by directly challenging client assumptions about claimant fraud. If a plaintiff’s attorney posts a generic “Be careful on social media” post, the subtext is “I only represent legitimate claimants.” Plaintiff’s lawyers are trained to frame their cases in a way that appeals to jurors that are skeptical of litigation and those who bring lawsuits. While that approach often works with juries in individual cases, that assumption can amplify those same views if used as part of attorney marketing.

Plaintiff’s lawyers try to do what is best for their clients and practices. Even if plaintiff’s lawyers don’t push back against directly about stereotypes about their clients and practices in their marketing, many of us push back against harmful laws and regulations on a state and federal level.  Social media is still a relatively new platform that has given many firms a way to engage with the public in a cost-effective way. We as plaintiff’s lawyers should use this new platform to confront negative stereotypes about our practices rather than unintentionally perpetuating harmful stereotypes.

The offices of Rehm, Bennett, Moore & Rehm, which also sponsors the Trucker Lawyers website, are located in Lincoln and Omaha, Nebraska. Five attorneys represent plaintiffs in workers’ compensation, personal injury, employment and Social Security disability claims. The firm’s lawyers have combined experience of more than 95 years of practice representing injured workers and truck drivers in Nebraska, Iowa and other states with Nebraska and Iowa jurisdiction. The lawyers regularly represent hurt truck drivers and often sue Crete Carrier Corporation, K&B Trucking, Werner Enterprises, UPS, and FedEx. Lawyers in the firm hold licenses in Nebraska and Iowa and are active in groups such as the College of Workers’ Compensation Lawyers, Workers' Injury Law & Advocacy Group (WILG), American Association for Justice (AAJ), the Nebraska Association of Trial Attorneys (NATA), and the American Board of Trial Advocates (ABOTA). We have the knowledge, experience and toughness to win rightful compensation for people who have been injured or mistreated.

This entry was posted in Nebraska, social security disability, Workers' Compensation and tagged , , , .

I Filed For SSD on My Own and Got Turned Down – What Should I Do Next?

Posted on by

Today’s post comes from guest author Barbara Tilker, from Pasternack Tilker Ziegler Walsh Stanton & Romano.

If you get a denial notice from Social Security after filing your application for benefits on your own, don’t be surprised. Most people are turned down the first time they apply for benefits. Social Security recently released a study showing that people who filed on their own were slightly more likely to get denied initially, although they received their initial decision a little sooner. Many people make one of two common mistakes when they get turned down – they either don’t do anything or they file a new application. People who don’t do anything will, of course, not receive Social Security disability benefits. Those that file a new application are just as likely to get turned down again, and may lose entitlement to benefits they otherwise would have gotten.

When you get a denial, you should file an appeal of that decision.

When you get a denial, you should file an appeal of that decision. Filing an appeal is different than filing a new application. Depending on where you live, you will either file a request for reconsideration or a request for a hearing. A request for reconsideration means that someone else at Social Security reviews your file and makes a new decision. If you get denied at reconsideration (and about 90% of people do) you should file a request for a hearing.

After you file a request for a hearing, you’ll be scheduled for a hearing held by an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ). The ALJ will ask you questions and issue a written decision after the hearing. People who appear at a hearing before an ALJ are much more likely to get SSD than those who file a new application after getting denied.

Once you receive a denial, you should contact our office right away to discuss your options. You only have sixty (60) days to file an appeal, so it’s important to act fast. Our staff will be able to handle the appeals process for you, and one of our attorneys will appear at the hearing with you. The most important thing is to not get discouraged and continue your medical treatment so that you’ll have the medical evidence you need to prove your disability.

The offices of Rehm, Bennett, Moore & Rehm, which also sponsors the Trucker Lawyers website, are located in Lincoln and Omaha, Nebraska. Five attorneys represent plaintiffs in workers’ compensation, personal injury, employment and Social Security disability claims. The firm’s lawyers have combined experience of more than 95 years of practice representing injured workers and truck drivers in Nebraska, Iowa and other states with Nebraska and Iowa jurisdiction. The lawyers regularly represent hurt truck drivers and often sue Crete Carrier Corporation, K&B Trucking, Werner Enterprises, UPS, and FedEx. Lawyers in the firm hold licenses in Nebraska and Iowa and are active in groups such as the College of Workers’ Compensation Lawyers, Workers' Injury Law & Advocacy Group (WILG), American Association for Justice (AAJ), the Nebraska Association of Trial Attorneys (NATA), and the American Board of Trial Advocates (ABOTA). We have the knowledge, experience and toughness to win rightful compensation for people who have been injured or mistreated.

This entry was posted in social security disability and tagged , , , , .

When Should I File for Social Security Disability?

Posted on by

Today’s post comes from guest author Barbara Tilker, from Pasternack Tilker Ziegler Walsh Stanton & Romano. Please call our office if you have any questions about applying for SSDI in Nebraska. Our firm knows how SSDI claims interact with workers’ compensation claims and other employment laws.

Filing for Social Security Disability (SSD) can be a lengthy process. Every case is different, and some are processed faster than others. However, we’ve found that it takes the Social Security Administration (SSA) between four (4) to six (6) months to make an initial decision.  If that decision is unfavorable (and about 70% of initial decisions are denials), it can take between eight (8) to twelve (12) months to have a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) scheduled. A year to a year-and-a-half wait is not uncommon.

You should file as soon as you know that you will be out of work for at least twelve (12) straight months OR if your condition is expected to result in death.

Due to the lengthy process, you should file for SSD as soon as possible. You should file as soon as you know that you will be out of work for at least twelve (12) straight months OR if your condition is expected to result in death. If you will not be out of work that long, you should not apply for SSD, unless your condition is expected to result in death. You should talk to y our doctor to see how long he/she expects you to be unable to work.  Your doctor’s support is incredibly important to your case – something we’ll talk more about in the future – so talk to him/her before making the decision to apply.

In order to make sure that you get the maximum amount of benefits you’re entitled to, your application must be filed within 17 full months from the time that you become disabled and unable to work. If you’ve already been out of work for a year or more, consider putting in an application right away to prevent any loss of benefits you would otherwise be entitled to.

Once you’ve spoken to your doctor and made the decision to apply, contact our office to schedule an appointment.

The offices of Rehm, Bennett, Moore & Rehm, which also sponsors the Trucker Lawyers website, are located in Lincoln and Omaha, Nebraska. Five attorneys represent plaintiffs in workers’ compensation, personal injury, employment and Social Security disability claims. The firm’s lawyers have combined experience of more than 95 years of practice representing injured workers and truck drivers in Nebraska, Iowa and other states with Nebraska and Iowa jurisdiction. The lawyers regularly represent hurt truck drivers and often sue Crete Carrier Corporation, K&B Trucking, Werner Enterprises, UPS, and FedEx. Lawyers in the firm hold licenses in Nebraska and Iowa and are active in groups such as the College of Workers’ Compensation Lawyers, Workers' Injury Law & Advocacy Group (WILG), American Association for Justice (AAJ), the Nebraska Association of Trial Attorneys (NATA), and the American Board of Trial Advocates (ABOTA). We have the knowledge, experience and toughness to win rightful compensation for people who have been injured or mistreated.

This entry was posted in social security disability and tagged , , .

Immigration, SEC cases send mixed signals from Supreme Court

Posted on by

Like Justice Stephen Breyer, many of us have pained looks when thinking about the Supreme Court this week

In a case with implications beyond securities law, the Supreme Court ruled in Lucia v. SEC  last week that an investment adviser convicted of securities fraud by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) was unconstitutionally convicted because the Administrative Law Judge (ALJs) who tried his case was hired rather than appointed in violation of the appointments clause

Lucia is not a high-profile case like Tuesday’s decsion in Trump v. Hawaii that upheld the so-called Muslim ban. To some extent the cases may seem contradictary. But the cases can be reconciled in a way that reveals some disturbing truths about the American political system. While Lucia is an important case in its own right, it makes Trump v. Hawaii more understandable.

In January 2017, I wrote about how a companion case to Lucia could potentially wreak havoc with Social Security Disability (SSDI) cases.  Like the SEC, the Social Security Administration appoints administrative law judges to adjudicate social security disability claims. ALJs are government employees who are hired by agency rather than appointed by the President or agency head. The Supreme Court held that since ALJs at the SEC had significant discretion in deciding important matters they were officers for the sake of the appointments clause so they needed to be appointed rather than hired as employees.

SSDI hearings may be distinguishable from SEC hearings in that they are less formal and less adversarial. A parrty challenging the constituionality of SSDI on appointments clause grounds might have a hard time showing they had standing to make a challenge. But other forms of administrative  hearings are more formal and adversarial and involve parties with standing to make challenges.

In Nebraska, the Department of Labor hires ALJs to hear unemployment appeals. In many states, like Iowa, workers’ compensation cases are heard by ALJsthat are hired as civil servants rather than appointed by the Executive. SEC v. Lucia could help employers/insurers to make persuasive appointments clause arguments under state constitutions  that such arrangements are unconstitutional. Employees/plaintiffs have had a recent string of good decisions with state supreme courts challenngng laws they believe harm workers. Employers may decide to press their luck in the states with Lucia case as persuassive authority. The same challenges based on Lucia could conceivably be made about unemployment insurance at a state level.

Finally there was some irony in Lucia. Though ALJs hired by the SEC could only make recommendations to the commission, the court found that the commission usually deferred to the recommendation of the ALJ which was part of the reason why the ALJ was an officer rather than an employee. In Masterpiece Cakeshop an ALJ had decided that bakery had violated Colorado public accommodation laws in refusing to bake a wedding cake for a same-sex marriage. The comments made by the Colorado civil rights commissioner that caused the decision to be reversed by the court were made after the ALJ’s decision.  But in Masterpiece the argument that the commission was probably just deferring to an ALJ decision was absent. But Masterpiece and Lucia can be somewhat reconciled logically as they both show how the Roberts court is skeptical of administrative agencies when they interpret laws and adjudicate disputes.

In his dissent in Lucia, Justice Stephen Breyer stated the Supreme Court threatened to undermine the whole system of administrative adjudication with its decision.  The most high profile of these administrative systems is the Immigration Court which is backlogged with cases. President Trump proposed “solving” the backlog of cases by just doing away with due process altogether in deportation hearings.But if four-flushers and  flim-flam men deserve  due process in administrative hearings, then so do those accused of either entering or living in the United States without authorization.

The skepticism shown by the Roberts court towards admisnisative agencies that regulate the economy was absent the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and other intelligence agencies in Trump v. Hawaii. Instead the Roberts court was beyond deferential to the Executive branch in a matter they deemed to be “national security.” To those raised during  the Cold War and post-9/11 era such deference to the executive on matters of national security seems natural. But as Justice Sotomayor poitned out in her dissent, the Judiciary, Legislative and Executive are equal branches of the government.

But are the branches of the government are equal when the Executuve commands a massive standing army and massive foreign and domestic intellignece agencies? The power of the Executive in this area is even greater when combined with business interests that former President Dwight Eisenhower described as the military-industrial complex in 1961.  William Jennings Bryan made a similar warning in 1900 in what was called his “Imperalism” speech. The corrosivve effects of the military-industrial complex or empire on our democratic form of government can be seen in how the Roberts court was willing to kow-tow to the Trump administration on matters of “national security” while the corut is more than willing to second guess Congress and administtrative agencies on matters relating to regulation of the economy.

 

The offices of Rehm, Bennett, Moore & Rehm, which also sponsors the Trucker Lawyers website, are located in Lincoln and Omaha, Nebraska. Five attorneys represent plaintiffs in workers’ compensation, personal injury, employment and Social Security disability claims. The firm’s lawyers have combined experience of more than 95 years of practice representing injured workers and truck drivers in Nebraska, Iowa and other states with Nebraska and Iowa jurisdiction. The lawyers regularly represent hurt truck drivers and often sue Crete Carrier Corporation, K&B Trucking, Werner Enterprises, UPS, and FedEx. Lawyers in the firm hold licenses in Nebraska and Iowa and are active in groups such as the College of Workers’ Compensation Lawyers, Workers' Injury Law & Advocacy Group (WILG), American Association for Justice (AAJ), the Nebraska Association of Trial Attorneys (NATA), and the American Board of Trial Advocates (ABOTA). We have the knowledge, experience and toughness to win rightful compensation for people who have been injured or mistreated.

This entry was posted in Constitutional law, social security disability, Unemployment, Workers Compensation and tagged , , , , , .

Why an Obscure Securities Law Case Could Affect SSDI

Posted on by

Securities and Exchange CommissionSocial Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) cases are largely decided by administrative law judges (ALJs). A decision questioning the role of ALJs in another area of the law could cause some major complications for SSDI applicants and SSDI beneficiaries.

The 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals recently set aside a conviction for securities fraud by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) because the ALJ who decided the case should have been appointed under the Appointments Clause rather than hired by the SEC. The 10th Circuit’s decision directly conflicts with a recent decision made by the District of Columbia  Circuit Court of Appeals, which means the U.S. Supreme Court could take up the issue.

This matters to SSDI applicants, their attorneys and even present SSDI beneficiaries because the vast majority of administrative law judges, roughly 1,200 of 1,400, have been hired by the Social Security Administration to hear Social Security Disability appeals. Similar to ALJs from the SEC, ALJs who hear SSDI appeals are hired on merit and are federal employees.

If the U.S. Supreme Court followed the recent 10th Circuit decision and applied it to ALJs who heard Social Security Disability appeals, at least 1,200 ALJs would have to be appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate. This could lead to further delays and uncertainty related to SSDI appeals. If the 10th Circuit decision were applied to SSDI judges, it is uncertain as to whether awards of disability would still be valid if they were made by unconstitutionally chosen ALJs. In 2014, in National Labor Relations Board v. Noel Canning, the Supreme Court held that the NLRB’s decision made by commissioners who were appointed by constitutionally invalid recess appointments was invalid.

The Social Security Administration has recently moved to abolish the treating physician rule in an effort to decrease claim payments. Uncertainty over whether the awards of SSDI benefits are constitutional would add additional hurdles to those needing SSDI benefits. If you are applying for Social Security Disability or thinking about it, contact an experienced attorney. Also, contact your lawmakers to express your concerns about the SSDI system to them.

The offices of Rehm, Bennett, Moore & Rehm, which also sponsors the Trucker Lawyers website, are located in Lincoln and Omaha, Nebraska. Five attorneys represent plaintiffs in workers’ compensation, personal injury, employment and Social Security disability claims. The firm’s lawyers have combined experience of more than 95 years of practice representing injured workers and truck drivers in Nebraska, Iowa and other states with Nebraska and Iowa jurisdiction. The lawyers regularly represent hurt truck drivers and often sue Crete Carrier Corporation, K&B Trucking, Werner Enterprises, UPS, and FedEx. Lawyers in the firm hold licenses in Nebraska and Iowa and are active in groups such as the College of Workers’ Compensation Lawyers, Workers' Injury Law & Advocacy Group (WILG), American Association for Justice (AAJ), the Nebraska Association of Trial Attorneys (NATA), and the American Board of Trial Advocates (ABOTA). We have the knowledge, experience and toughness to win rightful compensation for people who have been injured or mistreated.

This entry was posted in Courts, employment law, social security disability and tagged , , , , , .

What Could You Possibly Know About Your Own Disability?

Posted on by

disability self reportingIn 1991, the Social Security Administration drafted a rule that explained that controlling weight was given to medical opinions from treating sources about the nature and severity of claimants’ impairments if they are well-supported by medically acceptable clinical and laboratory diagnostic techniques and are not inconsistent with other substantial evidence in the record. This rule is commonly known as the “treating physician rule.”

The SSA has recently proposed a number of changes to this rule based upon a 2013 study (downloadable PDF). Among the recommendations were to no longer apply controlling weight to doctor opinions addressing the following issues:

  • Statements that an individual is or is not disabled, blind, able to work, or able to perform regular or continuing work;
  • Statements about whether or not an individual’s impairment(s) meets the duration requirement for disability;
  • Statements about whether or not an individual’s impairment(s) meets or equals any listing in the Listing of Impairments;
  • Statements about whether or not an individual’s impairment(s) functionally equals the Listings.

The SSA will also not use a diagnosis, medical opinion, or an individual’s statement of symptoms to establish the existence of impairment. A physical or mental impairment would now need to be established by “objective medical evidence.”

It’s easy to understand how discounting a treating source could adversely affect applicants for disability. These physicians have the most interaction with their patients in terms of frequency and duration of involvement. When you contrast a treating physician’s opinion with a doctor chosen by the SSA who most often never even meets or speaks with the claimant, you can see the problem. Putting these two entities on the same footing legally seems misguided at best and purposefully devious at worst.

However, when you add in that the SSA will not use an individual’s statement of symptoms as a basis for finding disability, particularly in the mental-health field, you make proving disability a much more difficult proposition than it already is. Individuals who are applying for disability typically face difficulty seeing doctors on a regular basis due to obvious financial considerations.  They often cannot afford the “objective” tests to fully explore the extent of their diagnoses. Moreover, there are no objective tests to diagnose depression, schizophrenia, anxiety, etc. The very nature of these claims requires a thorough examination of the claimant’s expression of disability to diagnose, evaluate and treat. The SSA cannot possibly ignore the claimant’s accounts of their disability and do an adequate job of evaluating these claims, especially the ones based upon mental illness.

The SSA needs to jettison these proposed rule changes, and stick with the controlling weight standard that has been in place for 25 years. Furthermore, they need to allow the judges to evaluate claimant testimony without rigid rules that discount their personal evidence.

To comment on the SSA proposal, follow this link: Regulations.gov – Docket Folder Summary and press the “Comment Now!” button. Comments are due Nov. 8 (next Tuesday, aka Election Day).

Please contact an experienced Social Security Disability lawyer with specific questions about the details of your case.

The offices of Rehm, Bennett, Moore & Rehm, which also sponsors the Trucker Lawyers website, are located in Lincoln and Omaha, Nebraska. Five attorneys represent plaintiffs in workers’ compensation, personal injury, employment and Social Security disability claims. The firm’s lawyers have combined experience of more than 95 years of practice representing injured workers and truck drivers in Nebraska, Iowa and other states with Nebraska and Iowa jurisdiction. The lawyers regularly represent hurt truck drivers and often sue Crete Carrier Corporation, K&B Trucking, Werner Enterprises, UPS, and FedEx. Lawyers in the firm hold licenses in Nebraska and Iowa and are active in groups such as the College of Workers’ Compensation Lawyers, Workers' Injury Law & Advocacy Group (WILG), American Association for Justice (AAJ), the Nebraska Association of Trial Attorneys (NATA), and the American Board of Trial Advocates (ABOTA). We have the knowledge, experience and toughness to win rightful compensation for people who have been injured or mistreated.

This entry was posted in Government, social security disability and tagged , , , .

Five Ways Employees Can Navigate the Hassle of Temporary Partial Disability

Posted on by

returnToWorkReturn-to-work issues seem to involve the blind leading the blind, even in the best circumstances. Doctors, especially general practitioners, are unsure what exact work restrictions are needed for an injured employee. Employers may not always have a good idea, assuming they are acting in good faith, what the requirements for the job are as well.

This can be further complicated if an employee attempts to come back to work part time from temporary disability. Not only do you have to navigate the issues of whether the job is appropriate, but you also have to deal with how much you get paid for what is called temporary partial disability.

What is temporary partial disability?

Temporary partial disability represents two-thirds of the difference between what you are making and your pre-injury average weekly wage. Though this seems simple in theory, it can be complicated for many reasons. Here are five things that employees can do to ensure they are being paid the proper amount of temporary partial disability:

  1. Keep track of your pay stubs: Temporary partial disability is difference between your pay and your average weekly wage. So you need to know your pay in order to determine that amount. Sure employers can do this, but sometimes employers, especially if they are self-insured, have incentive to drag their feet. Also, many companies will outsource their payroll so that information may not be readily available to them. The best solution is to have that information on hand yourself. Having your pay stub will also allow you to know your pay period, which is also important.
  2. Keep track of your hours on daily basis and/or get a copy of time card: Temporary disability is usually paid weekly. Many employers will pay every other week. The pay periods between your paycheck and your disability check might also vary. Sometimes checks will get delayed because an insurance company legitimately has to investigate what benefits have to be paid for one week. You can simplify this for them by providing your time card. The U.S. Department of Labor has a good app for this that you might want to use that tracks hours worked.
  3. If your job is too hard to do physically, make a doctor’s appointment right away to see if you can get your restrictions changed: Delaying a visit to the doctor may not only damage your health; it can also cost you money. An employer can attempt to deny and delay payment between the time where you stopped working at a “light duty” job and when a doctor took you off work and you start receiving temporary total disability again. You may not be able to recover this money, short of going to court, but you do have some control over keeping these gap periods as short as possible.
  4. Turn in your time cards and time sheets to your workers’ compensation attorney or insurer: Don’t assume that your employer is turning over your hours to their workers’ compensation insurer. Be sure that you (or your lawyer) are turning in that information to ensure prompt and full payment.
  5. Make sure that you know your average weekly wage: Workers’ compensation benefits are generally some percentage of your average pay over a time period. Employers will often turn over this information to their workers’ compensation insurer for them to determine how much you should be paid. If you think you are getting shorted, ask the insurer for the basis of their calculations and run it by an experienced workers’ compensation lawyer in your state or the state where your claim has been filed.

The offices of Rehm, Bennett, Moore & Rehm, which also sponsors the Trucker Lawyers website, are located in Lincoln and Omaha, Nebraska. Five attorneys represent plaintiffs in workers’ compensation, personal injury, employment and Social Security disability claims. The firm’s lawyers have combined experience of more than 95 years of practice representing injured workers and truck drivers in Nebraska, Iowa and other states with Nebraska and Iowa jurisdiction. The lawyers regularly represent hurt truck drivers and often sue Crete Carrier Corporation, K&B Trucking, Werner Enterprises, UPS, and FedEx. Lawyers in the firm hold licenses in Nebraska and Iowa and are active in groups such as the College of Workers’ Compensation Lawyers, Workers' Injury Law & Advocacy Group (WILG), American Association for Justice (AAJ), the Nebraska Association of Trial Attorneys (NATA), and the American Board of Trial Advocates (ABOTA). We have the knowledge, experience and toughness to win rightful compensation for people who have been injured or mistreated.

This entry was posted in Disability, Employment, employment law, Health, Injury Reporting, social security disability and tagged , , , .

Workers’ Compensation Basics: Understanding Social Security Disability Offsets

Posted on by

This is the next post in the series that looks at the basics of workers’ compensation. If you receive both workers’ compensation benefits and Social Security Administration disability benefits, please be aware of the concerns raised here.

The most important thing a worker who is entitled to receive both workers’ compensation and SSA disability benefits can do is report the amount of workers’ compensation benefits to the Social Security Administration, in writing if possible. Failure to do so can result in an overpayment that may not be uncovered until years later and may be thousands of dollars.

However, the reporting of these benefits doesn’t ensure the SSA will make the proper adjustment to your SSA monthly benefit. As such, it’s important to follow up with the SSA once you have reported your benefit amount to ensure they adjust your SSA benefit to account for this. This will help ensure an overpayment is not found years later. Be sure to ask an experienced workers’ compensation lawyer if you have questions.

Please read the previous blog posts in the workers’ compensation basics series by clicking on these links: 

The offices of Rehm, Bennett, Moore & Rehm, which also sponsors the Trucker Lawyers website, are located in Lincoln and Omaha, Nebraska. Five attorneys represent plaintiffs in workers’ compensation, personal injury, employment and Social Security disability claims. The firm’s lawyers have combined experience of more than 95 years of practice representing injured workers and truck drivers in Nebraska, Iowa and other states with Nebraska and Iowa jurisdiction. The lawyers regularly represent hurt truck drivers and often sue Crete Carrier Corporation, K&B Trucking, Werner Enterprises, UPS, and FedEx. Lawyers in the firm hold licenses in Nebraska and Iowa and are active in groups such as the College of Workers’ Compensation Lawyers, Workers' Injury Law & Advocacy Group (WILG), American Association for Justice (AAJ), the Nebraska Association of Trial Attorneys (NATA), and the American Board of Trial Advocates (ABOTA). We have the knowledge, experience and toughness to win rightful compensation for people who have been injured or mistreated.

This entry was posted in social security disability, Workers' Compensation and tagged , , , .