Addresser -- A Persistent Favorite of Vocational Witnesses

Assume a person of the same age, education, and work experience of the claimant and assume that the person is limited to sedentary work, sitting six hours in an eight-hour day, frequent handling, frequent fingering, and limited to simple work with no more than occasional interactions with coworkers, supervisors, and the public. Any work?

That person could work as an addresser representing 30,000 jobs in the national economy. 

Is that occupation performed as described in the DOT.

Sometimes workers use typewriters and hand-address labels and envelopes. Sometimes the worker will simply apply labels to envelopes, packages, and cards.

We have heard the mantra. It is nonsense. It is also the recommended explanation that SSA gives to VW in their training. Let's also beat them at their own game.

SkillTRAN estimates that addresser works in eight industries and is also self-employed for a total of 1,952 jobs. Self-employed work is not unskilled work -- it is running a business. Most of the jobs exist in local government, 1,253 jobs. SkillTRAN does not support the existence of 30,000 addresser jobs. 

The OEWS estimates 36,030 jobs for word processors and typists (SOC 43-9022). The EP, OOH, and O*NET reporting the same data set estimate 40,000 jobs. It is curious that a word processor is applying labels. There might be people applying pre-printed labels but they are not word processors and typists, they are general office clerks or mail clerks. The crosswalk places addresser in word processors and typists. The OEWS and OOH defines word processors and typists:

Use word processor, computer, or typewriter to type letters, reports, forms, or other material from rough draft, corrected copy, or voice recording. May perform other clerical duties as assigned. Excludes “Court Reporters and Simultaneous Captioners” (27-3092), “Medical Transcriptionists” (31-9094), “Secretaries and Administrative Assistants” (43-6010), and “Data Entry Keyers” (43-9021).

The O*NET omits the "excludes" portion of the description but is otherwise identical. None of the descriptions leave room for application of labels. 

The crosswalk tells us that word processors and typists contains eight DOT codes, one of them is unskilled, all are sedentary. We should doubt that all word processors and typists are unskilled addressers. 

The 2023 ORS confirms that word processors and typists represent sedentary work in greater than 99.5% of jobs. Call it 100% and move on. The ORS estimates that 26.3% of jobs have up to one month of training. Semi-skilled and skilled work represent 70.6% of jobs. The "less than" estimate of 10% of jobs with a short demonstration (up to four hours) contains all the standard error. If the five state estimates are accurate, the residual is 3.1% of jobs. Let's round up and call it 30% of jobs are unskilled. That means that 10,800 jobs are sedentary and unskilled. Call that progress. 

The ORS describes greater than 50% of jobs have a choice of sitting or standing, less than 50% do not have a choice. Word processors and typists sit 75% of the day at the 10th percentile and more than 75% of the day at all other reported percentiles. Because the "choice" of sitting or standing is "when" and not "how much," the conclusion would leave a person limited to six hours of sitting in a day to 1,080 jobs. 

The O*NET confirms the obvious -- clerical employees work together with other employees. Word processors and typists have constant contact with other in 69% of jobs and most of the time in 31% of jobs. Any limitation on contact or interaction with others eliminates all jobs. The ORS describes all jobs as requiring at least basic people skills. The ORS states that word processors and typists have verbal interactions less than hourly in 23.8% of jobs. The ORS might lead to 2,400 jobs. 

Finally, my favorite source of job numbers. The OEQ assumes 258,841 word processor and typist jobs with one-eighth of them sedentary and unskilled, to wit 32,385 jobs. The SOEUQ suggests 22,695 jobs. Both sources claim reliance on the OES which is the OEWS. We started with the OEWS -- 36,030 jobs total. 

The existence of 30,000 addresser jobs is not sustainable. The only source consistent with that estimate is the OEQ. The SOEUQ contradicts that estimate and comes from the same publisher. Both sources state reliance on the OES, which does not exist. The OEWS and the EP/OOH/O*NET are wholly inconsistent with the OEQ/SOEUQ. And we end where we started, word processors and typists do not affix labels to envelopes, packages, and cards. That is not their job.

The Emergency Message tells the adjudicator to get a further explanation for addresser. When the adjudicators suggest and explanation without looking at the occupational description, we end with a conspiracy to commit idiocy. SSA should go back to the promise made almost 50 years ago -- take administrative notice of jobs, requirements, and job numbers. 

Disgusted.

___________________________


Suggested Citation:

Lawrence Rohlfing, Addresser -- A Persistent Favorite of Vocational Witnesses, California Social Security Attorney (September 12, 2025) https://californiasocialsecurityattorney.blogspot.com


The author has been AV-rated since 2000 and listed in Super Lawyers since 2008.

Vocational Expert Handbook Video Presentation -- Sedentary Work ID'd -- The O*NET and Interaction with Others

This is part 3 of the analysis of the vocational testimony. The March 2023 version of the Social Security Vocational Expert Handbook is out. Vocational Expert Handbook (SSA Mar. 2023). A video, not found on the SSA channel on YouTube.com, explains the Handbook. The mock hearing in the middle of it all provides an example of good testimony that shocks the conscience.  

HYPO: Assume a hypothetical individual with the claimant's age, education, and past work experience is able to perform sedentary work as defined in the regulations; can perform simple routine tasks; can make simple work-related decisions; and can occasionally interact with supervisors and coworkers, and never interact with the public. Could the hypothetical individual perform any work, and, if so, could you provide me with a few examples?

Document preparer: DOT code 249.587-018; sedentary, unskilled at SVP 2 with 30,000 jobs nationally.

Addresser: DOT code 209.587-010, sedentary, SVP 2, 25,000 jobs nationally.

And cutter-and-paster: DOT code 249.587-014, sedentary, SVP 2, with 10,000 jobs nationally. 

Let me see if I have this right: three clerical jobs in an office setting have no more than occasional interaction with other people, none of whom are members of the public? That cannot be right, ever. 

The O*NET OnLine gathers data from three sources: (1) incumbents; (2) analysts; and occupational experts. General office clerks (SOC 43-9061) contains 74 DOT codes, 99 alternate titles, and both document preparer and cutter-and-paster. The O*NET data last updated in 2018 comes from incumbent responses, how people performing the work view their job duties.

The category is contact with others. ALJs will say, "I said interact, not contact." The O*NET defines contact with others:

How much does this job require the worker to be in contact with others (face-to-face, by telephone, or otherwise) in order to perform it?

The parenthetical examples are not mere proximity but interactive in nature. Merriam-Webster defines contact as a relationship association, communication connection, and as a go-between. Contact is not mere proximity as the word is used in the O*NET nor as an agreed upon definition in American English. 

General office clerks have contact with others:

Contact With Others — How much does this job require the worker to be in contact with others (face-to-face, by telephone, or otherwise) in order to perform it?	82	Constant contact with others
	14	Contact with others most of the time
	2	Contact with others about half the time
	0	Occasional contact with others
	2	No contact with others

General office clerks engage in work with a group or team:

Work With Work Group or Team — How important is it to work with others in a group or team in this job?	64	Extremely important
	24	Very important
	7	Important
	2	Fairly important
	2	Not important at all

And general office clerks deal with the public:

Deal With External Customers — How important is it to work with external customers or the public in this job?	65	Extremely important
	14	Very important
	13	Important
	2	Fairly important
	6	Not important at all

Word processors or typists (SOC 43-9022) (the occupational group containing addresser) has similar data:

Contact With Others — How much does this job require the worker to be in contact with others (face-to-face, by telephone, or otherwise) in order to perform it?	69	Constant contact with others
	31	Contact with others most of the time
	0	Contact with others about half the time
	0	Occasional contact with others
	0	No contact with others

Work With Work Group or Team — How important is it to work with others in a group or team in this job?	49	Extremely important
	19	Very important
	20	Important
	12	Fairly important
	0	Not important at all

Deal With External Customers — How important is it to work with external customers or the public in this job?	64	Extremely important
	19	Very important
	17	Important
	0	Fairly important
	0	Not important at all

Very few general office clerks have occasional contact with others, do not engage in teamwork, and/oir do not deal with external customers. No word processors or typists have any of those characteristics. 

Agency policy confirms what the O*NET says as a matter of published administrative notice. POMS DI 25020.010 sec. B.3g. says:

3. Mental Abilities Critical For Performing Unskilled Work

The claimant/beneficiary must show the ability to:

g. work in coordination with or proximity to others without being (unduly) distracted by them.   

When the O*NET describes these two occupational groups as having the bona fide occupational qualification (the expected tolerances if not the essential functions) of work, the O*NET provides the date for the Commissioner's published observation. What kind of work does not require working with a group or team? More likely, but not necessarily, semi-skilled and skilled work:

4. Mental Abilities Needed to Do Semiskilled and Skilled Work

b.  Often, there is an increasing requirement for understanding and memory and for concentration and persistence, e.g.: the ability to:

• set realistic goals or make plans independently of others.

People engaged in skilled and semi-skilled work are more likely to have work duties and do not require coordination and teamwork as compared to unskilled work. 

Commonsense tells us that clerical work is not performed with occasional interactions with others. The Commissioner knows this. The O*NET confirms commonsense and POMS (administrative notice). 

Now for something extra for no extra charge. Word processors and typists are a rapidly shrinking occupational group. It is faster for me to type than to handwrite. Dictation is a lost art. The number of clerk typists has plummeted in the last 35 years. In 1997, BLS counted typists including word processors as representing 404,570 jobs. The 2021 OOH tallies up word processors and typists at a paltry 46,100 jobs. The 2022 OEWS estimates 41,990. So please humble vocational witness, explain to me how more than half of the currently existing word processors and typists simply affix labels to outgoing mail. 

Asking for a friend. 

___________________________

Suggested Citation:

Lawrence Rohlfing, Vocational Expert Handbook Video Presentation -- Sedentary Work ID'd -- The O*NET and Interaction with Others, California Social Security Attorney (September 6, 2023) https://californiasocialsecurityattorney.blogspot.com

The author has been AV-rated since 2000 and listed in Super Lawyers since 2008.

                        

Vocational Expert Handbook Video Presentation -- Sedentary Work ID'd -- Sitting, Reasoning, and Job Browser Pro

The March 2023 version of the Social Security Vocational Expert Handbook is out. Vocational Expert Handbook (SSA Mar. 2023). A video , not found on the SSA channel on YouTube.com, explains the Handbook. The mock hearing in the middle of it all provides an example of good testimony that shocks the conscience.  

ALJ: Assume a hypothetical individual with the claimant's age, education, and past work experience is able to perform light work as defined in the regulations, except they can occasionally climb ramps and stairs, balance, stoop, kneel, crouch, and crawl; and can never climb ladders, ropes, or scaffolds; must avoid unprotected heights, moving mechanical parts, and operating a motor vehicle; can perform simple routine tasks; can make simple work-related decisions; and can occasionally interact with supervisors and coworkers, and never interact with the public. Could the hypothetical individual perform any work, and, if so, could you provide me with a few examples?

...

Now, assume the same limitations I stated in the first hypothetical except the individual is limited to sedentary work as defined in the regulations. Can that person perform any work?

VW: Yes, jobs such as document preparer: DOT code 249.587-018; sedentary, unskilled at SVP 2 with 30,000 jobs nationally.

Addresser: DOT code 209.587-010, sedentary, SVP 2, 25,000 jobs nationally.

And cutter-and-paster: DOT code 249.587-014, sedentary, SVP 2, with 10,000 jobs nationally. 

There are some differences in how the document preparer and addresser jobs are performed and currently as compared to the description and requirements in the DOT due to the availability of more modern technology now. For example, the description for document preparer says a person prepares documents, such as brochures, pamphlets, and catalogs, for microfilming, using a paper cutter, photocopying machine, rubber stamps, and other work devices. Microfilming technology has changed over time and now scanners are used to copy and help prepare documents for indexing and storage.

The rationale is the same for cutter and paster position, which is described in the DOT as tearing or cutting out marked articles or advertisements from newspapers and magazines, using a knife or scissors, and recording the name of the publication, page, location, date, and name of the customer on the label, and affixing the label to a clipping. More modern tools are used to perform this job, but the position is the same and it requires essentially the same functional abilities.

As for the addresser job, one of the tasks in the description in the DOT states "addresses by hand or by typewriter, envelopes, cares, advertising literature, and packages, and similar items for mailing." Now, envelopes, cards, advertising literature, packages and similar items for mailing are still sent, but the job may be performed by placing pre-printed labels on these items instead of doing them by hand or by typewriter, but they can still be performed by hand too.

Overall, more modern tools are used to perform these jobs, but the positional and functional requirements are effectively the same as explained in the DOT. My testimony is based on my experience and knowledge in the job market, including over 30 years of placing individuals into jobs and observing how the performance of these jobs has changed over time as well as vocational and rehabilitation counseling.

Under the guise of SSR 83-10, the agency and the vocational experts assume that a limitation to sedentary work includes a limitation to sitting six hours in an eight-hour workday. The first question is whether that assumption is true. The ruling states: 

Jobs are sedentary if walking and standing are required occasionally and other sedentary criteria are met. By its very nature, work performed primarily in a seated position entails no significant stooping.

Sedentary jobs are primarily seated and standing/walking are required occasionally. The ruling defines occasionally:

"Occasionally" means occurring from very little up to one-third of the time. 

Very little is less than two hours and one-third of the time is more than two hours. Standing/walking 

should generally total no more than about 2 hours of in 8-hour workday, and sitting should generally total approximately 6 hours of an 8-hour workday. Work processes in specific jobs will dictate how often and how long a person will need to be on his or her feet to obtain or return small articles.

1. Sedentary work does not have a rigid and fixed 6-2 split of sitting versus standing/walking. The no more than two hours and approximately six hours with the deciding factor contained in the processes of the specific jobs forms the exceptions that swallow the rule. That and of course facts. Do these jobs ever require as an essential job function or a bona fide occupational qualification the need to sit for more than two hours in an eight-hour day? Ask that question somewhere in the cross-examination. 

2. Reasoning level rests at the heart of work complexity. The Vocational Expert Handbook describes reasoning ability as part of the education component of the vocational profile. Pages 29-30. The Vocational Expert Handbook states clearly that simple or repetitive tasks have an apparent conflict with reasoning level 3 and directs the VW to "be prepared to explain how the hypothetical individual could perform this job." Pages 39-40. Document preparer requires reasoning level 3. The witness did not explain the apparent conflict. This issue does not require cross-examination. The issue must be argued at the close of the case. 

3. Job Browser Pro is the ubiquitous source for job numbers. The VW says

Document preparer: 30,000 jobs nationally.

Addresser: 25,000 jobs nationally.

Cutter-and-paster: 10,000 jobs nationally. 

JBP (ver. 1.7.4.1) says:

Document preparer: 15,670 jobs nationally in 2023.

Addresser: 2,068 jobs nationally.

Cutter-and-paster: 702 jobs nationally. 

This evidence must be presented to the ALJ before the decision is made. Some ALJs will not permit post-hearing evidence. They are wrong but put the evidence into the record during the hearing. 

In the next post on this subject, we will deal with the methodology problem including how the testimony plays into the JBP methodology. 

Stay tuned. 

___________________________

Suggested Citation:

Lawrence Rohlfing, Vocational Expert Handbook Video Presentation -- Sedentary Work ID'd -- Sitting, Reasoning, and Job Browser Pro, California Social Security Attorney (September 3, 2023) https://californiasocialsecurityattorney.blogspot.com

The author has been AV-rated since 2000 and listed in Super Lawyers since 2008.

Common DOT Codes -- Sedentary, Unskilled -- Addresser

Sedentary work that does not exceed six hours of sitting in an eight-hour day represents a small window.  The DOT and the regulations define sedentary work as involving standing or walking not more than occasionally, 2.3 hours.  Sedentary work as depicted by a residual functional capacity question with a lower limit of 5.7 hours an upper limit of 6.0 hours constitutes a slender reed.  

 Understanding sedentary work rests on the difference between and and or.  Light work exists (1) when it requires walking or standing to a significant degree; OR (2) when it requires sitting most of the time but entails pushing and/or pulling of arm or leg controls; AND/OR (3) when the job requires working at a production rate pace entailing the constant pushing and/or pulling of materials even though the weight of those materials is negligible.  

Sedentary work exists when the work (1) when it does not require walking or standing to a significant degree; AND (2) when it requires sitting most of the time and does not involve pushing and/or pulling of arm or leg controls; AND (3) when the job requires working at a production rate pace but does not entail the constant pushing and/or pulling of materials even though the weight of those materials is negligible.  Transgressing the standing/walking, lifting/carrying, pushing/pulling with the arms or legs, or production rate pace strips away any hope for that sedentary label.  

The cadre of vocational experts rely on 16 different DOT codes in the sedentary range.  Ignoring obsolescence and industry, the question is whether the occupations are unskilled, sedentary, and do not exceed 6.0 hours of sitting in a full-time workday.  We will tackle this problem on occupation at a time.  

1.  Addresser (DOT 209.587-010)

Word processors and typists (SOC 43-9022) is a rapidly vanishing occupational group.  Current data describe word processors and typists at circa 43,000 jobs.  The OES estimated over 96,000 jobs a decade ago.  The Occupational Requirements Survey does not report data for word processors and typists.  That leaves the O*NET OnLine:

Spend Time Sitting — How much does this job require sitting?	90	Continually or almost continually
	10	More than half the time

Spend Time Standing — How much does this job require standing?
	2	About half the time
	79	Less than half the time
	19	Never

Constant is more than frequent.  To describe continually, almost continually, or more than half the time as falling inside or outside of the 5.7-6.0 range is not possible on the data presented.  

Never standing does preclude a 6.0 hour ceiling.  Standing about half the time precludes the 5.7 hour floor.  We can exclude 21% of the jobs.  

Skill level is easier.  Specific Vocational Preparation (SVP) turns on three factors:  education, training, and experience.  A short demonstration is 1 point, not more than 30 days is 2 points.  Less than or equal to a high school education is 0 points.  No related work experience is 0 points.  Up to one month of related work experience is 1 point.  More than 30 days of related work experience is 2 points.  

On-the-Job Training
Duration	Value
None or short demonstration	3.99%
Anything beyond short demonstration, up to and including 1 month	47.55%

Related Work Experience
Duration	Value
None	4.03%
Up to and including 1 month	0%

Required Level of Education
Education Level	Value
Less than a High School Diploma	1.96%
High School Diploma or the equivalent	49.61%

Half the jobs do not require skills based on on-the-job training and education.  But over 95% of jobs require related work experience in excess of 30 days -- skills.  The reported standing removes 21% of word processing jobs; SVP eliminates 95% of the jobs.  A significant number of jobs as an addresser does not exist even if it is not obsolete, which it is.  

___________________________

Suggested Citation:

Lawrence Rohlfing, Common DOT Codes -- Sedentary, Unskilled -- Addresser, California Social Security Attorney (December 9, 2021)  https://californiasocialsecurityattorney.blogspot.com    

Ford v. Saul -- What Jobs and How Many?

The Ninth Circuit decided Ford v. Saul on February 20, 2020.  Ford is capable of a limited range of sedentary work.  We consult the District Court decision to fill in some of the gaps.  Ford can perform sedentary work with no climbing of ladders, ropes, or scaffolds; no climbing of stairs, crouching, crawling, or kneeling; occasional stooping; frequent handling and fingering; avoiding concentrated exposure to extreme cold; understand, remember, and carry out simple and routine tasks; no fast-paced production work; superficial contact with the public; can work in small groups; can interact with co-workers and supervisors to complete tasks.

The Ninth Circuit reports that the vocational expert identified 130,000 jobs as an addresser and 9,800 jobs as ink-printing.  Addresser belongs to the occupatinal group of word processors and typists (SOC 43-9022)..  Ink printer belongs to the occupational group of printing press operators (SOC 51-5112).

Addresser is obsolete.  Addresser is a word processor and typist (SOC 43-9022) occupation.  Word processors and typists contains eight DOT codes.  BLS reported in May 2015 (data that would have been published in 2016 and have been the most current data in the November 2016 hearing) that there were 68,660 word processors and typists in the nation.  The OOH relied on the 2014-24 employment projections as of November 2016, estimating the number of word processors and typists at 90,700.  That would represent the number for the O*NET OnLine as of November 2016.  The two BLS sources (EP and OES) do no support the 130,000 jobs as an addresser in 2016 or even 130,000 jobs in the group of word processors and typists.  The vocational expert lied and the failure to submit available evidence from the BLS allowed the witness to get away with it. 

An “everything report” from OccuCollect gives the data that we need to destroy the testimony.  The O*NET reports that addresser is the only unskilled DOT code.  The O*NET Resource Center reports that 51.54% of word processors and typists have 30 days or less of on-the-job training; 4.05% do not require related work experience of more than 30 days; and 51.57% of jobs require a high school education or less.  SVP is a function of training, work experience, and education.  The SVP can never be lower than the smallest component.  The exception is the exchange of experience or education where those criteria are treated interchangeably as qualifications.  Then the lowest of the two defines the SVP.  For word processors and typists, the requirement for six months to two years of related work experience means that most of the jobs are skilled.  Relatively few (8.12%) of word processors and typists are semi-skilled. 

The O*NET Resource Center does not support the presence of more than 4,500 addresser jobs in the nation in 2016. Current OOH job numbers permit the inference of 3,000 addressers.  Current OES job numbers permit the inference of 2,600 addressers.  The testimony of the vocational expert in Ford, that there were 130,000 addresser jobs, is patently false. 

Ink printer is a printing press operator (SOC 51-5112) occupation.  The ORS component of the  “everything report” from OccuCollect tells us that the OOH describes printing press operators stand/walk five hours per day at the 10th percentile.  Printing press operators engage in unskilled work in 23.8% of jobs.  Printing press operators engage in medium work in 62.7% of jobs and lift up to 25 pounds at the 25th percentile.  That data point tells us that at least 13% of the jobs require heavy or greater exertion (62% above the 25th percentile is 87%).  If there are sedentary printing press operators, they represent less than 10% of the jobs.  The testimony that ink printer represent 9,800 jobs is possible. 

Ford waived the important issues at the hearing level.  The vocational expert gave unreliable testimony.  The court embarrassed itself by allowing junk to decide the entitlement to benefits.  SSA embarrassed itself by defending that kind of testimony.  The public confidence in the system of administrative justice should go down. 

_______________________________________________________

SUGGESTED CITATION:

Lawrence Rohlfing, Ford v. Saul -- What Jobs and How Many?, California Social Security Attorney (March 1, 2020) edited (March 2, 2020),
https://californiasocialsecurityattorney.blogspot.com/2020/03/ford-v-saul-what-jobs-and-how-many.html

Case Study - Limited Range of Sedentary - No Work

We look at a prior denied claim subject to the continuing presumption of non-disability.  The presumption attaches in the Ninth Circuit, Sixth Circuit, and the Fourth Circuit.  The Sixth Circuit has an additional Acquiescence Ruling to address.  The continuing presumption shifts the burden to the claimant to show changed circumstances.  We start the case study with the prior residual functional capacity assessment:

4. After careful consideration of the entire record, the undersigned finds that the claimant has the residual functional capacity to perform sedentary work as defined in 20 CFR 416.967(a) except she can climb ramps and stairs occasionally. She can never climb ladders, ropes, or scaffold. She can stoop occasionally, but never kneel, crouch, or crawl. She can balance frequently. She should avoid unprotected heights, moving machinery, and vibration. She should be in a clean-air work environment meaning low levels of pollutants and stable temperatures. She would require a sit/stand option in thirty-minute intervals. She should work in a moderate noise environment. She is limited to simple, routine, and repetitive work and a low-stress work environment, which means none production-oriented work, but can do goal-oriented work. She can have only occasional contact with supervisors and coworkers. She could interact with small group of coworkers, as long as those interactions were infrequent and superficial. She can have little to no interaction with general public. She can have only occasional changes in the work setting. She cannot do work that would require directing others, abstract thought, or planning. She can only make simple, work related decisions.

The vocational profile is a younger individual, at least a high school education, able to communicate and literate in English, and no past relevant work.  ALJ announces that he will find changed circumstances, that the claimant has additional impairments or additional limitations and asks for an opening statement.  Claimant argues that she wins on the prior residual functional capacity and if that isn't enough, she wins on the additional limitations.  ALJ propounds the  residual functional capacity to the vocational expert -- no jobs. 

The prior ALJ decision accepted vocational expert testimony identifying work as:

inspector (DOT: 669.687-014), with 100,000 jobs in the national economy; assembler (DOT: 734.687-074), with 100,000 jobs in the national economy; and packer (DOT: 209.587-010), with 80,000 jobs in the national economy.

Put aside the question of the job numbers.  They are utter garbage.  We are focused on the first question of whether occupations exist regardless of job numbers.  Inspector is dowel inspector in the woodworking industry.   The woodworking industry exists in the manufacturing sector.  It is repetitive work.  It is a production occupation. 

Assembler is slide-fastener-chain assembler in the button and notion industry.  The button and notion industry exists in the manufacturing sector.  Assembler is repetitive work.  It is a production occupation. 

Packer is misidentified.  The DOT code refers to addresser.  That occupation is obsolete.  Packers could point to ampoule sealer or hand bander -- both production related work. 

The world of work for simple tasks involves mostly production work.  Simple and limited contact with others wipe out clerical unskilled work.  We must see limitations as erosive and cutting.  When the limitations attack the world of work from opposite directions, there is rarely anything left. 

The ALJ accepted the vocational testimony and stated the intent to issue a favorable decision -- on this application.  The other application is too far gone to reopen and revise. 

Word Processors and Typists (SOC 43-9022) - Very Few Unskilled Jobs

We covered the concept that Specific Vocational Preparation (SVP) is more than on-the-job training.  It includes prior work experience, training, and apprenticeship programs.  We discussed the proposition that at least five occupations in the DOT are obsolete.  This piece explores the proposition that Word Processors and Typists are typically semi-skilled.  This occupational group includes the nefarious Addresser.  We start with the Occupational Outlook Handbook. 

43-9022 Word processors and typists

Typical Education Needed	High school diploma or equivalent
Work Experience in a Related Occupation	None
Typical On-The-Job Training Needed to Attain Competency	Short-term on-the-job training
2016 Employment	74,900

The OOH sets the bar at high school education and short-term on-the-job training. High school education is not an SVP add-on. Short-term on-the-job training implies an unskilled occupational group. The Bureau of Labor Statistics provides data on the education level of incumbents through the employment projections:

Education Levels of Incumbents

43-9022 Word processors and typists

Typical Education Needed	High school diploma or equivalent
Less than a High School Education	2.8
High School Education or Equivalent	28
Some College, No Degree	32.1
Associates Degree	14.3
Bachelor's Degree	18.2
Masters's Degree	3.8
Doctoral or Professional Degree	0.7

This report points out that almost 70% of incumbents hold a greater level of education than the OOH describes as typical. The Department of Labor tells us to look to the O*NET for up-to-date information about work, so we do:

On-the-Job Training
Duration	Value
None or short demonstration	3.99%
Anything beyond short demonstration, up to and including 1 month	47.55%
Over 1 month, up to and including 3 months	6.01%
Over 3 months, up to and including 6 months	8.32%
Over 6 months, up to and including 1 year	3.66%
Over 1 year, up to and including 2 years	13.63%
Over 2 years, up to and including 4 years	3.28%
Over 4 years, up to and including 10 years	13.39%
Over 10 years	0.18%

Related Work Experience
Duration	Value
None	4.03%
Up to and including 1 month	0%
Over 1 month, up to and including 3 months	5.01%
Over 3 months, up to and including 6 months	3.11%
Over 6 months, up to and including 1 year	40.36%
Over 1 year, up to and including 2 years	28.1%
Over 2 years, up to and including 4 years	5.97%
Over 4 years, up to and including 6 years	13.25%
Over 6 years, up to and including 8 years	0%
Over 8 years, up to and including 10 years	0%
Over 10 years	0.18%

Required Level of Education
Education Level	Value
Less than a High School Diploma	1.96%
High School Diploma or the equivalent	49.61%
Post-Secondary Certificate	0%
Some College Courses	45.45%
Associate's Degree (or other 2-year degree)	2.98%
Bachelor's Degree	0%
Post-Baccalaureate Certificate	0%
Master's Degree	0%
Post-Master's Certificate	0%
First Professional Degree	0%
Doctoral Degree	0%
Post-Doctoral Degree	0%

The data for on-the-job training fits with the OOH report of short-term on-the-job training. The plurality of the jobs require one month of less of training. The required level of education puts the education level of incumbents into context; many workers in this occupation have more education than is required by the work functions. The majority of word processors and typists have a high school education (including equivalents) or less.

The related work experience provides the ah ha moment. The plurality of these jobs require more than six month of related work experience, 40.36% of them. The percentage of jobs requiring one month or less (but some) of training is 0% and and the percentage requiring no related work experience is 4.03%.

With 74,900 word processors and typists in the economy, that percentage of no related work experience means that the number of unskilled jobs cannot exceed 3,019 jobs.  The number of unskilled jobs cannot exceed the lowest rating withing training, experience, and education.  Using that number assumes that the work requiring no experience are the same jobs that require one month of training or less and a high school diploma or less.  

This conclusion is not surprising.  Of the eight DOT codes within Word Processors and Typists, one of them is unskilled, three of them are semi-skilled, and three are skilled.  

DOTCode	DOTTitle	SVP
209.587-010	ADDRESSER	2
203.362-010	CLERK-TYPIST	4
209.382-010	CONTINUITY CLERK	5
203.382-030	WORD PROCESSING MACHINE OPERATOR	5
203.582-050	TELEGRAPHIC-TYPEWRITER OPERATOR	4
203.582-058	TRANSCRIBING-MACHINE OPERATOR	5
203.582-066	TYPIST	3
203.582-078	NOTEREADER	5

Addresser - obsolete and if unskilled work exists for word processors and typists, it does not represent a significant number of jobs.

A word about the education, training, and experience report:  the data is available form the O*NET Resource Center, as are all O*NET data.  OccuCollect puts the data into a report format that is readable, usable, and presentable.  Click on Account and start your experience today.