Matheson Philosophy on Workplace Safety and Work Injury Evaluation

My staff and I are preparing for our February 7th webinar in which we will look at last year’s ADA legal activity. Our focus will be on the new cases that shape best practice for those offering functional capacity evaluation, post-offer testing, or employment physicals.

Interested in how the physician's role in return-to-work decisions is changing in light of the new ADAAA? Join me this Thursday at 2pm EST while I examine this hot topic!

Thank you all for another great year! Your support is what keeps us going! We appreciate all the continuing Matheson supporters and welcome and hope the new ones stick with us for many years to come.

I have been tasked with writing the cover story for the January 16, 2012 issue of Advance for Occupational Therapy Practitioners. This is Merion's annual issue devoted to Occupational Rehabilitation.

My monthly "Working Smart" column usually follows the theme of how OTs can benefit from, and how their practice must change in response to, legal developments in the arena of EEOC enforcement of ADAAA laws. Topics we have recently covered include Reasonable Accommodation, Essential Function, and FCE practice in light of ADAAA.

Having access to the bully pulpit from the cover story gives me an opportunity to send a broader message. With this in mind, I want to take advantage of your ideas to broaden my thinking.

Given this opportunity, what would you suggest as my focus?

My last webinar, "Exploring the New Rules of the ADAAA, Part 3" focused on the EEOC's emphasis on work related Reasonable Accommodation. The recent Verizon Communications settlement ($20,000,000) stirred a lot of interest in the subject among employers. We continue to receive feedback and follow-up questions after we host these webinars, showing us that this is what clinicians and evaluators are looking for. We are pleased that you are all finding the intended value in these webinars!

Hi Roy,  I really enjoyed the Baker vs. Barnhart webinar. I've recently relocated from BC, Canada to Washington state, so it was good to learn lessons that apply both here & there. I do have some questions I would like to ask:

I would like your input on the material for our September 1st webinar discussing the federal court's use of Department of Labor terminology.

The EEOC's interpreation of the ADAAA magnifies the importance of using a true metric, not Occasional, Frequent or Constant, when linking physical demands to essential functions. As with many things in life, the quandry occurs at the crossroads of compliance with the ADAAA (job analysis for return-to-work same job, same employer; job analysis for Offer of Alternative Employment as a function of Reasonable Accommodation) while also writing a job analysis within a disability system (state, union, federal, ERISA).

photo source: www.dol.gov

In the United States Court of Appeals consideration of Roger L. Baker v. Jo Anne B. Barnhart, the Commissioner of Social Security provides a scathing review of a functional capacity evaluation protocol.

Over the years many FCE students have struggled to appreciate how important it is to be a “thinking evaluator”. This case brings home the lessons of understanding the reasoning behind the order for an FCE, the necessity to tailor each evaluation to the circumstances of the case, and the need to challenge the people who sold them their FCE system.

The Case for the Thinking Evaluator is a webinar you will not soon forget.

Previous installments of this post discussed the challenges faced by the Functional Capacity Evaluator when threats of death or great bodily harm are expressed by the client (the person being evaluated). This fourth in the series builds towards a draft of the summary report; we lay the groundwork for my next post in which I discuss the use of “Functional Validity” to strengthen the Physical Effort statement.