Do you know of legal authority that supports using O*NET job descriptions to show the VE's testimony presents an apparent conflict with the DOT?? I guess another way of asking it is what authority is there for relying on O*NET to show the government did not meet its step 5 burden?
Production workers, all otherAll production workers not listed separately.
- 2014 employment: 236,200
- May 2015 median annual wage: $27,950
- Projected employment change, 2014–24:
- Number of new jobs: 7,700
- Growth rate: 3 percent (Slower than average)
- Education and training:
- Typical entry-level education: High school diploma or equivalent
- Work experience in a related occupation: None
- Typical on-the-job training: Moderate-term on-the-job training
Learn more about cashiers by visiting additional resources, including O*NET, a source on key characteristics of workers and occupations.
The O*NET links back to the OOH:Cashiers . Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor. Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2016-17 Edition.
For example, we will take notice of—(4) Occupational Analyses, prepared for the Social Security Administration by various State employment agencies; andThe valid question is whether the O*NET meets the prior clause’s requirements:we will take administrative notice of reliable job information available from various governmental and other publications
See Anders v. Colvin. Anders is wrong.In response to the question of "whether the O*NET could take the DOT's place in the disability adjudication process", the SSA has responded in the negative. See Soc. Sec. Admin., OIS ProjectFrequently Asked Questions: Why are you developing a new occupationalinformation system (OIS)? Why can't the Department of Labor (DOL) update theDictionary of Occupational Tiles (DOT), or why can't you use the OccupationalInformation Network (O*NET) (noting the O*Net "does not describe the physical requirements of occupations at the level of detail needed for claims adjudication.")