Thursday, January 28, 2021

What Happens When the Representative Submits Evidence During and Post Hearing to the ALJ?

 I continue to encourage the submission of rebuttal evidence to the ALJ.  That is best practice.  Here is what the Appeals Council said about the submission of post hearing evidence to the ALJ:

The claimant's representative submitted a brief with additional vocational evidence attached (Exhibits 27E, 28E). Although the brief and vocational evidence were exhibited in the electronic record, they were not discussed in the decision or incorporated in the exhibit list attached to the decision. The Administrative Law Judge is not required to discuss every document in the record, however, material evidence should be exhibited with the decision and the arguments raised by the representative should be considered.

AC Order remanding case to ALJ.  

Here is what a court said in a truly unpublished opinion about vigorous cross-examination of a vocational expert at the hearing:

But “[b]ecause the DOT provides only job descriptions and specifications, and not the actual hard numbers regarding the national and regional availability of the same,” VEs must —as the one here did—“utilize additional secondary sources to ascertain the numbers of positions that exist for each of the DOT codes.” Kennedy v. Colvin, 2014 WL 3695466, at *20 (S.D. Cal. July 22, 2014). Here, the VE relied on a combination of the U.S. Publishing figures—which uses numbers from the Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics (“BLS”) and the U.S. Census—and the software program Job Browser Pro. (AR 1956, 1986). Based on those secondary sources, she explained that 50,000 toy assembler, 25,000 assembler of plastic hospital products, and 18,000 inspector/hand packager jobs existed in the national economy. (AR 1949-50).

If the facts just described were the complete state of the record, the ALJ’s reliance on the VE’s testimony to find that Mr. Buchanan was not disabled at step five (AR 44-47) would have been supported by substantial evidence. That is because “in the absence of any contrary evidence, a [VE’s] testimony is one type of job information that is regarded as inherently reliable.” Buck v. Berryhill, 869 F.3d 1040, 1051 (9th Cir. 2017). But if, on the other hand, the VE’s testimony is challenged by contrary evidence—as it was here—the conflict can sometimes trigger the ALJ’s legal duty to further develop the record. See id. at 1047, 1052. In this case, the VE testified that she obtained her numbers from two different resources, U.S. Publishing magazine and the Job Browser Pro software program. Yet when the ALJ asked her to pull up toy assembler on Job Browser Pro to confirm her numbers for that job, the VE was unable to find any job numbers for that occupation on the site. The ALJ responded that “this begs the question” where the VE obtained her numbers from. The VE replied that she “didn’t bring [her] stack of U.S. Publishing” with her. (AR 1972). But Plaintiff’s evidence presented at the hearing indicated that U.S. Publishing would not support the VE’s numbers either. Plaintiff provided conflicting job numbers from the BLS on which U.S. Publishing relies in part for its published figures. (AR 1969, 1986). Under these specific circumstances, the ALJ had a duty to develop the record further.

Contrary to Defendant’s view that the ALJ gave detailed reasons to accept the VE’s testimony, none of those reasons addressed or reconciled the core conflict between the claimant’s job numbers and the VE’s. In fact, the ALJ even incorrectly observed that the VE and claimant were relying on different sources. To the contrary, as noted above, Plaintiff’s numbers came from the BLS, and the VE’s sources—U.S. Publishing and Job Browser Pro—rely in part on the BLS. (AR 1956, 1986-87). And while a VE is generally entitled to rely on her professional judgment, nothing in the record shows that the VE did that here. The VE testified only as to two sources for her numbers, but when faced with conflicting evidence, she said nothing to reconcile the discrepancy between her numbers and claimant’s proffered numbers—whether in her professional judgment or otherwise. Thus, as a result of the unexplained and unreconciled variances in the VE’s testimony in the face of conflicting evidence and the lack of a cogent explanation from the VE on how she arrived at her numbers, the ALJ’s finding that Mr. Buchanan could perform other work available nationally in sufficient numbers was unsupported by substantial evidence. See, e.g., Buck, 869 F.3d at 1052 (reversing and remanded where “the vast discrepancy between the VE’s job numbers and those tendered by [the claimant], presumably from the same source, [was] simply too striking to be ignored”); Daniels v. Colvin, 2014 WL 794498, at *5 (C.D. Cal. Feb. 26, 2014) (remand required where VE conducted “insufficient” analysis of number of jobs allocating job numbers from broad Standard Occupational Classification category to narrowed DOT category without further explanation).
Brown v. Saul, 5:06-cv-00367-SK (C.D. Cal. Jan. 14, 2021).  


Suggested Citation:

Lawrence Rohlfing, What Happens When the Representative Submits Evidence During and Post Hearing to the ALJ?, California Social Security Attorney (January 28, 2021)

Monday, January 18, 2021

Questions and Answers from the January 15, 2021, NOSSCR Interview

 George Peimonte and I had a great discussion on the NOSSCR Zoom meeting on Friday.  I promised to answer all the questions.  Here they are:

1.     Alise Kellman 12:26 PM

If I try to say I have no objection to the VW testifying, some ALJs will ask if I object to their qualifications and if I say yes they go ballistic

I do not object to the agency calling the vocational witness and agree that the vocational witness meets the qualifications set by SSA.


2.     Jacqueline Justice 12:38 PM 

Since we are doing phone/zoom hearings using the O*Net seems easy during the hearing. What are some tips for using rebuttal evidence when (if?) we return to in person hearings? Laying some foundation about the statistics seems reasonable, but I am not sure how to delve this deeply into the specific jobs the VE testifies to in real time.

If your computer has internet access, you can pull up the vocational sources in real time.  If not, your smartphone substitutes.  Using your phone as the tether for your computer to the internet works as well. 


3.     Christine franco 12:37 PM 

it would be helpful to see someone navigating the O*NET system

Try – that’s my resource.  It puts all the data into single everything reports so that you don’t miss key data on an important part of the medical-vocational profile.  Or you can manually access the data sets individually. 

Access the O*NET at: 

Access the O*NET Resource Center at: 

Access the OOH at:

Access the Employment Projections at:

Access the ORS at: 

Access the OES at: 

Access the DOT at: 


4.     Jenna Karr 12:20 PM 

You mentioned "frequent interaction in 75% of jobs." Where do you find the 75%?

For Office Helper:

 Custom Report for: 43-5021.00 - Couriers and Messengers

Cognitive Work Conditions

Interpersonal Relationships



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?


Constant contact with others


Contact with others most of the time


Contact with others about half the time


Occasional contact with others


No contact with others


For Telephone-Directory Deliverer:

Custom Report for: 51-9198.00 - Helpers--Production Workers

Cognitive Work Conditions

Interpersonal Relationships



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?


Constant contact with others


Contact with others most of the time


Contact with others about half the time


Occasional contact with others


No contact with others


For Addresser:

 Custom Report for: 43-9022.00 - Word Processors and Typists

Cognitive Work Conditions

Interpersonal Relationships



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?


Constant contact with others


Contact with others most of the time


Contact with others about half the time


Occasional contact with others


No contact with others


Frequent includes half the time and most of the time.  Not sure which occupation I mentioned in this context.   Leave a comment below. 


5.     Ronald Honig 12:28 PM 

Courts have found that the job of addresser does not exist in significant numbers.  Brandie K.A. v. Saul, 2020 WL 2572461, (C.D. Cal. May 21, 2020).

See also, Skinner v. Berryhill, 2018 WL 1631275, at *5 (C.D. Cal. April. 2, 2018).


6.     Jenna Lopes 12:04 PM 

Will the PPTs be available?

7.     From Avram Sacks to All Panelists:  12:03 PM

Are there materials?   Is a copy of the powerpoint available?  If so, please a link.  Thanks.

8.     From Richard Weishaupt to All Panelists:  01:01 PM

please give cites of all sources it went by to fast  Just sign up.  No subscription needed.  You want the Indiana Bar Occucollect Presentation Slides September 25, 2020. 


9.     Julie Burkett 12:14 PM 

Just this week, I had an ALJ at a hearing tell me he did not have to accept rebuttal evidence because he gets to decide when the record is complete and closed.  I told him I could have the rebuttal evidence to him that same day.  He then told me he would not accept rebuttal vocational evidence from me unless I was a qualified vocational expert witness.  I notice the case has moved to decision writing and my brief (with rebuttal evidence) has not been marked as an exhibit.  I suspect he is not going to consider my rebuttal evidence or arguments.  This is a Missouri case.  Advice?

Administrative notice carries with it the right to respond.  Heckler v. Campbell, 461 U.S. 458, 469 (1983).  Claimant submits rebuttal evidence and requests that you resolve the conflict in the evidence based on substantial evidence, not based on the proposition that testimony trumps administrative notice.  20 C.F.R. § 404.1566(d); Social Security Ruling 00-4p.

A claimant can submit evidence to the Appeals Council.  20 C.F.R. § 404.970(b).  The rules for submission of evidence to the ALJ before the hearing do not apply to rebuttal evidence.  81 Fed. Reg. 90987, 90991 (Dec. 16, 2016).


10. Jari Martin 12:45 PM

Administrative Procedure Act 5 U.S.C. § 556(d) “A party is entitled to present his case or defense by oral or documentary evidence, to submit rebuttal evidence, and to conduct such cross-examination as may be required for a full and true disclosure of the facts.”

Drop the mic. 


11. Ivan Katz 12:17 PM 

The correct cite is 20 CFR Sec. 404.1566(d).  It is NOT 20 CFR 404.1666(d).



12.  Anonymous Attendee 12:43 PM 

can you run an onet search that we can follow, starting with DOT to onet

Run an Everything Report from  


13.  Danielle Beaver 12:47 PM 

Does the ALJ have the patience for you to sit there and look through the ONET while you cross examine the VE?

Once you become familiar with the process, it is seamless.  I call up the DOT codes in an Everything Report from before the ALJ finishes (mouse wheel click on reports to create a new window)


14.  Gerardine Delambo 12:13 PM 

where do I find the ONet?

Access the O*NET at: 

Access the O*NET Resource Center at: 

And of course on 


15.  MEGHAN GALLO 12:46 PM

Here is an example:  you can enter a different SOC number in place of 43-9061.00 to get to the others.  On the page, check the boxes and run the report.  A lot of what is being mentioned comes under "work context".  After you run the report,  make sure you check the "+" sign to get all of them

Very helpful!


16.  Gerardine Delambo 12:50 PM

Thank you, Meghan


17.  Violeta Arciniega 12:26 PM 

It makes sense to challenge VEs on their experience/training vs that of the DoL/BLS but I’m concerned that if I raise that at the hearing, the ALJ will point out that we’d already stipulated to their qualifications to testify — how should we address that if it happens?

See Brace v. Saul, 970 F.3d 818, 822 (7th Cir. 2020) and Goode v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 966 F.3d 1277, 1282 (11th Cir. 2020).  Agreeing that the VW is qualified is different than agreeing that everything the person says is reliable. 

Your honor, I did not stipulate to the VW testimony. I stipulated that the VW met the agency’s standards for testifying.  It would be irresponsible of me to stipulate to the accuracy of testimony that I have not heard.  For instance, if you call a medical expert and find the ME qualified, the regulations and agency policy are clear that you are not bound by that testimony.  Nor is my client bound by the VW testimony. 


18.  Alise Kellman 12:27 PM 

If I try to say I have no objection to the VW testifying, some ALJs will ask if I object to their qualifications and if I say yes they go ballistic

So my question, is what should be my respond to the ALJ?

See above.  In a civil trial, it is fair game to stipulate to the qualifications of the expert to shortcut the oppositions recitation of the expert’s CV.  Qualified vs. reliable v. persuasive.  Those are three different questions.  The first two are questions of law.  The last is for the judge. 

Your honor, if you want me to voir dire every medical and vocational expert, then we need to set out two hours for every witness.  If agreeing or failing to object to qualifications provides the agency with the inference that the claimant has stipulated to reliability and persuasive value of testimony that is yet unheard, then you are right.  I withdraw my failure to object and insert an objection now.  The witness does not have a reliable methodology for extrapolating local experience to the national economy.  The witness is neither a statistician or an economist. 


19.  Charles Kreimendahl 12:29 PM 

What about the details of the ONet, which seems to rank abilities, skills, etc by importance. But are those actually percentages that can be correlated with the Freq/Occ categories?

Never confuse qualitative assessment with quantitative assessments.  I use the work context reports and the education, training, and experience reports.  I have not used the O*NET for skills analysis nor do I think that the ORS will give sufficient detail to provide a TSA.  The work fields and the MPSMS codes are the keys to a TSA. 


20.  anne wagner 12:31 PM 

How about bakery worker/candy spreader or hand packer for light work occasional contact?

Bakery worker is a production worker all other occupation.  There are circa 238K production worker jobs in the nation.  Manufacturing employs 93K production workers.  All of food manufacturing employs 12K production workers.  Bakeries employ 1,500 production workers – in the nation.  Hypyerlink from the OccuCollect report for the OOH to 

Candy spreader is a helper occupation.  Who are they helping?  Helpers have 188K jobs in manufacturing.  Food manufacturing employs 51K helpers.  Sugar and confectionary product manufacturing employs 2,000 helpers. 

Helpers have occasional contact with others in 17% of jobs.  O*NET.  Helpers lift 25 pounds at the 25th percentile and 15 pounds at the 10th percentile.  Helpers engage in unskilled work in just under 70% of jobs.  Helpers engage in medium work in just under 50% of jobs.

I would use the OOH and OES data to rebut testimony that these occupations represent a significant number of jobs.   


21.  Jenna Lopes 12:35 PM 

Where on O*NET are you findingthis info. I can't find it.

Access the O*NET at: 

Access the O*NET Resource Center at: 

And of course on 


22.  Philip Gauer 12:37 PM 

Here's what the regulation says:

Philip Gauer 12:38 PM 

Sorry, I meant to paste this:  (d) Administrative notice of job data. When we determine that unskilled, sedentary, light, and medium jobs exist in the national economy (in significant numbers either in the region where you live or in several regions of the country), we will take administrative notice of reliable job information available from various governmental and other publications. For example, we will take notice of—

(1) Dictionary of Occupational Titles, published by the Department of Labor;

(2) County Business Patterns, published by the Bureau of the Census;

(3) Census Reports, also published by the Bureau of the Census;

(4) Occupational Analyses, prepared for the Social Security Administration by various State employment agencies; and

(5) Occupational Outlook Handbook, published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

For example … the DOT.  Social Security Ruling 00-4p does not represent a reasonable interpretation of an unambiguous regulation by nominating the DOT/SCO as the sole source of data.  Kisor v. Wilkie, 130 S.Ct. 2400, 2415-18 (2019). 


23.  MEGHAN GALLO 12:39 PM 

What can I do about the ALJ's that now try to anticipate my cross and adjust their hypos to make them extremely vague so they are not addressed directly in the onet such as: can interact with others on a "routine but superficial basis" or can perform work that is "learned by experience and performed by rote" ?

You can object on vagueness or simply ask the VW, “What does routine but superficial mean to you in your capacity here?”  Another question, “Does learned by experience allow for more than 30 days of experience?”  One more, “Does performed by rote mean the work never changes?”


24.  Philip Gauer 12:39 PM 

Sorry, still trying to ask my question!  Is the ONET one of these five things?  I'm guessing it is not.  Thanks

The general language of the regulation is “we will take administrative notice of reliable job information available from various governmental and other publications. For example, we will take notice of— [the list of five].”  20 CFR 404.1566(d). 

Use your tools of statutory and regulatory construction … if it is just the DOT then four examples are null.  If it is just the five examples, then the word examples is wrong.  Those are examples of reliable published job information.  The question is whether the O*NET, ORS, and OES are reliable governmental data published according to OMB standards?  The regulation says that it is all relevant and subject to administrative notice. 


25.  Lisa McNair Palmer 12:42 PM 

VE testifies bakery conveyor line worker does not have a pace of production.  Response?

First, bakery worker conveyor line doesn’t exist in significant numbers.  The bakery industry employs too few production workers, even if it does exist.  See the employment projections or the OES occupation-industry index or use Job Browser Pro using the same methodology. 

Labor (O*NET) puts bakery worker in three SOC codes.  51-9161 Computer numerically controlled tool operators has no production workers in food much less bakery.  51-9162 Computer numerically controlled tool programmers has 200 production workers and all of them are in fruit and vegetable preserving.  That leaves 51-9199 production workers, all other:  12,300 in food manufacturing generally and 1,500 in bakeries. 

Most production workers work at a fast pace, most have some ability to pause work, most require frequent gross manipulation, most require medium exertion, most require standing eight hours, and less than 30% are unskilled.  Tell the VE to square the number cited with the data.  It is a math problem not a matter of discretion. 


26.  Manuel Franco 12:44 PM 

What is the ruling that says you have to be able ot get the job and KEEP the job? Thanks

27.  From Manuel Franco to All Panelists:  12:43 PM

What is the ruling that says you have to be able ot get the job and KEEP the job? Thanks

SSR 96-8p. 

RFC is the individual's maximum remaining ability to do sustained work activities in an ordinary work setting on a regular and continuing basis, and the RFC assessment must include a discussion of the individual's abilities on that basis. A "regular and continuing basis" means 8 hours a day, for 5 days a week, or an equivalent work schedule.


28.  Arthur Stevens 12:46 PM 

When we get back to live hearings, using Ipad for ONET online is great to have. Need to have an ipad that can reach the towers or a satellite hub. laptop is screen for exhibits. People really do need to use both. Just a comment.

Once the VE starts and you finish with your additional hypos, the numbers game does not require the exhibits to be open.  JMHO, YMMV. 


29.  Jacqueline Justice 12:50 PM

a second screen/device and hot spot is a good idea- Certain buildings have crappy service though :-)

Use a hotspot or your phone. 


30.  Rachel Hepburn Masters 12:54 PM 

In my area, the VEs are pretty good--they will give me the answer I want when I ask questions and respond appropriately to the ALJ questions (for the most part...there's always one or two bad answers every so often).  The main issue I run into is the RFC that the ALJs present to the VE. Is there a way to use the ONET to rebut what the ALJ is saying?

You may like the VE testimony, but I doubt it is accurate or reconcilable with the published data.  Drop a comment below and give an example of an occupation and a job number in response to a hypo. 

As to using the O*NET, some limitations cross over well.  Some take some thinking.  Contact with others, teamwork, pace, part vs. full-time, and others have direct application to many hypothetical questions. 


31. Arthur Stevens 12:54 PM 

The VE's often get handling and fingering stuff wrong. ONET would be great for that. Also, I diminish hand function when there is significant cervical ROM loss due to multilevel fusion. so If a person can only look down 1/3 of the day to where hands do their stuff (widget assembly etc..) then ONET can he used to dump those jobs that have a higher use of hands. I woud assume that one can use the ONET to diminish hand function jobs that make it difficult to look at hands either due to vision or cervical ROM diminishment.

The ORS is probably more helpful as it has better data for working at or below shoulder level. 

Series ID: ORUP1000031J00000830

Not seasonally adjusted

Series Title: % of production workers, all other; reaching at or below the shoulder is required

Requirement: Physical Demands

Occupation: production workers, all other

Estimate: reaching at or below the shoulder is required








Labor does not publish detailed data for occupations ending in “9.”  Looking at 51-9161, the O*NET says:




Spend Time Using Your Hands to Handle, Control, or Feel Objects, Tools, or Controls — How much does this job require using your hands to handle, control, or feel objects, tools or controls?


Continually or almost continually


More than half the time


About half the time


Less than half the time




It depends on the occupation. 


32.  anne wagner 12:56 PM 

Can you repeat the two questions to VE for beginners?

Is your testimony consistent with other department of labor data – the OOH, the OES, the O*NET, and the ORS?

What is your methodology for estimating job numbers?

If you don’t get a mathematical expression of SOC numbers to DOT numbers that includes consideration of industry and the medical factors, it isn’t reliable.  See Goode and Brace. 


33.  Alise Kellman 12:56 PM 

Please repeat your summary query to the VE, i couldn't write that fast

I think 29 covers it. 


34.  MEGHAN GALLO 12:57 PM 

The occucollect he mentioned is AMAZING and has everything he is talking about at your fingertips.  It was a game-changer for me.

Glad that you find it useful!


35.  Lynne Brown 12:57 PM

Where can we find that? 

36.  Jacqueline Justice 12:58 PM

Yes, curious where this is found. 


37.  MEGHAN GALLO 12:59 PM

Sorry, put that the wrong place.  it is $300/yr and worth every penny

Thanks again for the endorsement.  Occucollect is my effort to organize my own thinking. is the result of that effort. 


38. Lynne Brown 01:00 PM

Thank you!

39.  Asha Sharma 01:00 PM 

Thanks, Larry! Excellent as always....


40. anne wagner 12:16 PM 

Please give the cite to  USSC case that said ok to take administrative notice.

20 CFR 404.1566(d).  It is the regulation construing the statute and entitled to Chevron deference. 


41.  Susan Hogg 12:18 PM 

Please provide cite for the two cases I & 2 dealing w/use of O*Net evidence (or other DOL, et al) as rebuttal evidence re: jobs

You will find adverse rulings all over the fourth circuit and in California where I practice.  Those districts think that SSR 00-4p is law.  It is not.  It gets deference to the extent that it is not inconsistent with the regulation.  It is inconsistent.  The favorable cases in the CD CA are unpublished and the CD CA does not permit many of its decisions to get into West or other services. 


42.  William Wombacher 12:18 PM 

What about the VE that testifies their numbers come from the skilltran software program and testify that is recognized as a legit source by experts in the field. Why do we need the VE --pull out the program

SkillTran (JBP) performs a rough occupational density calculation by assigning DOT codes first to an occupational group and second to one or more industries.  That occupation industry intersection, JBP uses equal distribution to calculate job numbers for the DOT code. 

Take production workers.  52 sedentary unskilled DOT codes, 405 light unskilled DOT codes, and 185 medium DOT codes.  238,600 jobs.  Less than 30% are unskilled.  Almost 70% of the total jobs are medium.  Equal distribution even at the occupation-industry intersection is not reliable. 


43.  David Barish 12:25 PM 

I am  not sure  if  I  am missing something. I  am looking at cashier on O-Net and do not see where the the funcitional requirement such  as light, medium etc is  listed. Is this  listed?

The biggest reason that SSA did not transition to the O*NET in the late 90s or in the past 20+ years is that the O*NET does not describe exertion other than standing/walking. 

The O*NET says that 65% of cashiers never sit and 4% sit continually or almost continually.  The O*NET states that 49% of cashiers work part-time.  Part-time does not count at step 5.

The ORS is where you want to analyze cashiers.  Cashiers do not have a choice of sitting or standing in 97.2% of jobs.  Cashiers stand 95% of the day at the 10th percentile.  When a worker has the option of sitting or standing, the ORS classifies the required posture as sitting.  Cashiers lift/carry 25 lbs. max at the median and 15 lbs. max at the 25th percentile. 

Use the ORS. 


44.  Jacqueline Justice 12:29 PM

I don't think it is. :-)

Right.  See above. 


45.  John Leiter 12:29 PM 

Can you give examples of using the o*net in cross examination?

The ALJ asked you to assume occasional contact with coworkers, supervisors, and the public.  You identified marker.  Do you agree that the occupation belongs to stockers and order fillers, SOC 53-7065?

I have 43-5081 for Stock Clerks and Order Fillers. 

Is that consistent with the 2010 SOC or the 2018 SOC?\

I don’t know. 

I make an offer of proof that the O*NET version 25.0 classified marking clerks SOC 43-5081.02 as having occasional contact with others in 1% of jobs and no contact with others in 0% of jobs.  Do you have a statistical basis for rebutting the Department of Labor data?

I don’t use the O*NET. 

I didn’t ask if you did. I asked if you have a reliable basis for rebutting published data from the Department of Labor.  Do you?

I have 35 years of experience in the field.

I understand that.  What is your methodology for extrapolating your 35 years of experience to the national economy? 

I look at the BLS and OES data and I have experience. 

Do you have a method for estimating job numbers that considers any BLS data on job numbers and job requirements other than the DOT data set?



46.  Jennifer Haskins 12:39 PM 

Has anyone asked a vocational expert about the ability of obtaining the "possible" job under the current economy?

That question is legally irrelevant.  Holding a job is proper.  Getting a job is irrelevant. 


47.  Celeste Scalise-Qubrosi 12:40 PM 

Where istht pace requirment I was looking at Onet on Cleaner housekeeper?




Pace Determined by Speed of Equipment — How important is it to this job that the pace is determined by the speed of equipment or machinery? (This does not refer to keeping busy at all times on this job.)


Extremely important


Very important




Fairly important


Not important at all


And the ORS:

Series ID: ORUC1000020Y00001167

Not seasonally adjusted

Series Title: % of maids and housekeeping cleaners; workload is self-paced

Requirement: Cognitive And Mental Requirements

Occupation: maids and housekeeping cleaners

Estimate: workload is self-paced








Series ID: ORUC1000020Y00001171

Not seasonally adjusted

Series Title: % of maids and housekeeping cleaners; with consistent, generally fast work pace

Requirement: Cognitive And Mental Requirements

Occupation: maids and housekeeping cleaners

Estimate: with consistent, generally fast work pace








Series ID: ORUC1000020Y00001172

Not seasonally adjusted

Series Title: % of maids and housekeeping cleaners; with consistent, generally slow work pace

Requirement: Cognitive And Mental Requirements

Occupation: maids and housekeeping cleaners

Estimate: with consistent, generally slow work pace








Series ID: ORUC1000020Y00001173

Not seasonally adjusted

Series Title: % of maids and housekeeping cleaners; with varying work pace

Requirement: Cognitive And Mental Requirements

Occupation: maids and housekeeping cleaners

Estimate: with varying work pace








Series ID: ORUC1000020Y00001176

Not seasonally adjusted

Series Title: % of maids and housekeeping cleaners; with the ability to pause work

Requirement: Cognitive And Mental Requirements

Occupation: maids and housekeeping cleaners

Estimate: with the ability to pause work









48.  Arthur Stevens 12:43 PM 

OIDAP...isn't that from 2008?

OIDAP is 2011 for the Claims Review Study.


Arthur Stevens 12:43 PM 

good point about serial employment. Gatliff? like the employee who keeps punching the supervisors in the nose and then doing that same thing over and over and gets fired over and over.


49.  carter 12:46 PM  

How can you prove an inability to play well with others is not volitional?

50.  Phyllis Rubenstein 12:51 PM

Based on mental health diagnosis and records

With a diagnosis of a personality disorder; with clinical findings of irritability, isolation, withdrawal, etc.  We prove mental limitations out of the objective medical record.  A finding of occasional contact with others is a frequent inability to interact with others.  Play well with others is a colloquial expression that I do not use in hearings. 


51.  Alise Kellman 12:51 PM 

Please repeat again where you found the numbers for the entire optical employment (optical manufacturing)

Click on codes.  Select all 6-digit NAICS.  Download the .csv file.  Filter for ophthalmic good, NAICS 39115. 

The answer for 2018 is 25,070 jobs in the industry in all occupations. 


52.  MEGHAN GALLO 12:59 PM  it is $300/yr and worth every penny


53.  From Barbara Silverstone to All Panelists:  11:55 AM

Hi! Sorry about that, was setting up the slide


54.  From Phyllis Rubenstein to All Panelists:  12:07 PM

Would you repeat the citation to the regulation?

20 CFR 404.1566(d), 416.966(d). 


55.  From Barbara Silverstone to Everyone:  12:08 PM

Thank you.


56.  From Ivan Katz to Everyone:  12:10 PM

It is 20 CFR 404.1566(d) - NOT 1666

57.  From Priscilla Medina to All Panelists:  12:10 PM

Thank you


58.  From jere fletcher to All Panelists:  12:12 PM

Heckler v Campbell , USSCt. 461 U.S. 458 (1983)


59.  From Yolanda Arias to All Panelists:  12:12 PM

What advantage is there using ONET over DOT?

Here is what DOL says:

The Dictionary of Occupational Titles (DOT) was created under the sponsorship by the Employment and Training Administration (ETA), and was last updated in 1991. The DOT was replaced by the O*Net, and ETA no longer supports the DOT.

The O*Net is now the primary source of occupational information. It is sponsored by ETA through a grant to the North Carolina Department of Commerce. Thus, if you are looking for current occupational information you should use the O*Net.

The DOT was loaded onto the OALJ website because it was a standard reference in several types of cases adjudicated by the OALJ, especially immigration related matters. Time has passed, DOL’s regulations have changed, and OALJ now rarely adjudicates cases that reference the DOT.

So, why is the DOT still on the Office of Administrative Law Judges (OALJ) website? It is because the DOT is still used in Social Security disability adjudications and the OALJ copy of the DOT is often cited as an authoritative source of the DOT.

The Social Security Administration (SSA) is developing a new Occupational Information System (OIS), which will replace the DOT as the primary source of occupational information for use in the SSA disability adjudication process. SSA intends to have the OIS operational and to make necessary regulatory and policy updates by 2020.


60.  From Barbara Silverstone to Everyone:  12:15 PM

Hi! As George said at the outset of this webinar, questions will be answered on Larry’s blog after this webinar and we will share the link out. Please ask all questions in the Q&A tab.


61.  From Randall Head to All Panelists:  12:15 PM

As someone who grew up raising tobacco, I can say there are ZERO full-time jobs tying tobacco hands - and there never have been any.

It is a seasonal job involved with tobacco harvest, and it is part of the job of stripping.

NOBODY has EVER employed anyone to do nothing but tie hands of tobacco.

My family lives near the NC border with VA and they concur. 


62.  From Phyllis Rubenstein to All Panelists:  12:16 PM

Would you spell Chiebe

63. From Jocelyne Martinez to All Panelists:  12:17 PM

Spell Schehhi 1 case. What is the cite

Shaibi v. Berryhill, 883 F.3d 1102 (2017).


64.  From Jocelyne Martinez to All Panelists:  12:28 PM

What is the name of the text that states that certain jobs (labeler; addresser, etc.) are no longer existing?

65.  From Jeffrey Senter to All Panelists:  12:28 PM

What is the best source to cite for that these jobs are obsolete?

66.  From Arthur Stevens to All Panelists:  12:39 PM

what was that source attain that addresses obsolete jobs. OIDAP? thanks. My recollection is that the report was from 2008. is there an update?

OIDAP Claims Review Study.

google OIDAP obsolete jobs to find the link manually or to my blog. 


67.  From Barbara Silverstone to All Panelists:  12:31 PM

I think I just made it possible for Larry to share screen

Next time!


68.  From Randall Head to All Panelists:  12:40 PM

One VW here in SoCal keeps giving Marker jobs - Placing price tags on items for retail sales.

Marker is part of stockers and order fillers SOC 43-7065. 

Stockers and order fillers lift/carry 25 lbs at the 10th percentile and stand/walk 75% of the day at the 10th percentile.  Those workers are unskilled in about 86% of jobs. 

Unless SSA agrees that light work has a maximum lift/carry of 25 lbs., there are no light jobs left.  They require medium exertion. 

Extra at no extra charge:  Labor now defines light work as 25 lbs. maximum. 


69.  From Jennifer Haskins to All Panelists:  01:00 PM

Thank you so much!!!

70.  From laura bagwell to All Panelists:  01:00 PM

THANK YOU for this great presentation.

71.  From Ada_Lenia Mena to Everyone:  01:00 PM

Thank you for all the information. Very informative.


Suggested Citation:

Lawrence Rohlfing, Questions and Answers from the January 15, 2021, NOSSCR Interview, California Social Security Attorney (January 18, 2021)