UGH! I'm so, so sorry! I knew this was a state program, by I thought I remembered reading recently that every state offers it. Unfortunately, that is not the case. I try to always link to avoid making mistakes but there's times I post from my phone...and I blew it!

Only five states currently offer it: CA, HI, NY, NJ, RI. http://employeeissues.com/state_disability.htm

You should speak with Human Resources to see if the company provides another type of short term insurance, if you don't live in one of the states listed above.

If your doc is supportive of continuing to reduce your hours and increase your restrictions further, until you're no longer working by his or your employer's decision, this would address your concern regarding an ALJ being suspicious of you suddenly stopping work as a result of the SSDI decision. Research unemployment insurance in your state before you ask your doc to do this, though! You'll want to verify what happens to your weekly unemployment benefits if you go from let's say 10 hours a week to stopping, as opposed to 20 hours a week to stopping?

[QUOTE=puppy66;821021]As I said, my work is out of my home and I am getting away with more breaks than not without my employer to date suspecting. I worked for the same company for 10 years but this work I'm doing now is a different company.[QUOTE]

I just reread this last post and your first post. You're in VA so your state does not offer Disability Insurance. Sorry again.

This is a new job for you, so other options based upon long term employment that others have suggested also don't apply in this situation, unfortunately.

So your doc has cut your hours to 4 a shift, 4 days a week. Has he provided additional work restrictions? If frequent breaks are being hidden from your employer, this could discredit your claim to SS that you have sheltered work. It is a very different scenario if your employer is providing special accomodations due to a long relationship with a valued employee, or a business that receives a grant for disabled employees, than for an ALJ to just accept your word that you require frequent breaks.

Please read this:
http://www.socialsecurityinsider.com...-activity-sga/

PLEASE READ THIS:
http://social-security.lawyers.com/s...isability.html

Based upon your denial, the ALJ didn't get past the 1st step.

I know you're only working 16 hours, but there is also the issue of how much you're making. If it's over $720 per month, you'll likely have a hard time with many ALJs. If it's over $1000 per month, I believe you're automatically disqualified.

An ALJ considers your ability to perform SGA, not just the actual SGA you performed. You said: "it will not be considered SGA and they will not just assume because of it that you can work more." That has not been my experience at all. During my first application, I was taking 1 class for 3 hours per week. The ALJ tried to claim that activity proved I was potentially capable of SGA...

If you're working 16 hours, and $720 or less, then you're possibly borderline. Would additional treatment or medication allow you a slight improvement to work at an SGA level? (I'm trying to give you an idea of how they might think.) By working, SSDI approval is certainly more difficult in many cases. Remember it is frequently difficult to get approved even when you're not working!

In my case, I received a Fully Favorable Decision 8 years after my last work activity. I had previously received a Partially Favorable Decision for a closed period award. My local office lost my paperwork for my appeal, etc. so my journey to approval was very complicated. The FF decision came with my 2nd application. (A Supervisor suggested it would be faster due the fiasco of the missing appeal.)

In the five-step sequential evaluation process (as explained in the link I provided) the focus of my ALJ hearing was on the 5th step--my ability to do "Other Work." My Residual Functional Capacity left the Voc Expert citing the only job I could perform was as a Surveillance System Monitor. I had a LENIENT ALJ based upon his approval statistics, but I was forced to go round and round with her about the real numbers of this completely bogus job, the current physical requirements, the fact that trusting me to monitor government infrastructures was unsafe due to my drowsiness, etc... (And let me say, the Voc Expert was not looking to try and cause me a denial, she was just doing what was required of her job. She congratulated me and looked relieved when I was approved.)

Since I was handling my application pro se, I was the one activily asking questions. It was this crazy intellectual exercise about a job I could perform that doesn't even exist today. This is a good link describing how people are frequently denied citing this "job":http://www.socialsecuritydisabilityl...-outcomes.html

Anyways, brain freeze struck, and the ALJ recognized it. My fatigue and pain had been escalating, and the adrenaline that been helping me cope just kind of vanished. But it took him seeing the evidence with his own eyes--that while I can function for short bursts of time, like my medical records documented, I am in severe pain that is exacerbated by a very small amount of activity--before he interrupted the Voc Expert testimony.

The ALJ then asked about my meds. He wanted to confirm my description of what I was taking and to look at the dosages. While he was gone, my brain was still on pause and I was starting to panic a little. Luckily, I was given an on the bench FF decision when he came back.

At the time I was approved: My doc was in support of my application. I was averaging probably 18 hours a day of sleep. I was on time release and immediate release opiates. I had a severe illness (RSD) that had been requiring doc visits every 2-4 weeks for years, 4 surgeries, a dozen stellate ganglion blocks, a Radiofrequency Neurotomy, countless tests and procedures, and years of PT. My RFC ruled out all but that one bogus job. I hadn't worked in 8 years. I had a lenient ALJ, and a supportive Voc Expert.

The things that delayed my approval: My age and education. I had an open WC case and their reports trying to deny the severity of my illness. The fact that when I submitted my first application, I didn't have a correct diagnosis, and I was in denial that my disability was going to be long term. Lost paperwork by SS. Bad info received about the status of my appeal...I was so ill during the 2nd application I was not a good advocate for myself. Attempting the ALJ hearing pro se (The ALJ allowed me to handle much of the Voc Expert issues by mail, which helped me but took several months longer.)

Regarding the waiting time for the Appeals Council, what has your attorney said? She should know your local statistics. You can ask for intervention by a US Senator or Congressman. The more desperate your situation, dealing with a looming foreclosure and so on, the more they'll generally advocate for you.

This post is unwieldy in length, I know! I hope it will be of some help, in some way. While there are rules, the ALJs have alot of discretion in how to interpret them. Just glancing at the approval statistics will confirm that!

Only you and your family can decide how best to deal with the SSDI process. I'm really sorry the rule change has limited your options! It seems quite unfair to me.

the definition of being disabled according to social security's website is that your disabling condition must be severe enough to the point where you can't do any job and last atleast 1 year or to result in your death.social security uses "work" as a factor when deciding if benefits should be awarded and while some one is already collecting ssdi.if a person demonstrates that they can work for even the shortest amount of time social security can and will use it against you.it's happened to several people i know includeing myself.

And some people here jumped all over Gilbert when he dared complain that he lost his benefits after a CDR, even though he was doing nothing unethical whatsoever.

I just realized the SSDI site was updated as of 1/11....

To qualify for benefits, you must first have worked in jobs covered by Social Security. Then you must have a medical condition that meets Social Security's definition of disability. In general, we pay monthly cash benefits to people who are unable to work for a year or more because of a disability.

Benefits usually continue until you are able to work again on a regular basis. There are also a number of special rules, called "work incentives," that provide continued benefits and health care coverage to help you make the transition back to work.
http://www.ssa.gov/dibplan/dqualify.htm

-----

What We Mean By Disability
The definition of disability under Social Security is different than other programs. Social Security pays only for total disability. No benefits are payable for partial disability or for short-term disability.

"Disability" under Social Security is based on your inability to work. We consider you disabled under Social Security rules if:

You cannot do work that you did before;
We decide that you cannot adjust to other work because of your medical condition(s); and
Your disability has lasted or is expected to last for at least one year or to result in death.

This is a strict definition of disability. Social Security program rules assume that working families have access to other resources to provide support during periods of short-term disabilities, including workers' compensation, insurance, savings and investments.
http://www.ssa.gov/dibplan/dqualify4.htm

----

How We Decide If You Are Disabled
To decide whether you are disabled, we use a step-by-step process involving five questions. They are:

1-Are you working?

If you are working in 2011 and your earnings average more than $1,000 a month, you generally cannot be considered disabled.

If you are not working, we go to Step 2.

2-Is your condition "severe"?

Your condition must interfere with basic work-related activities for your claim to be considered. If it does not, we will find that you are not disabled. If your condition does interfere with basic work-related activities, we go to Step 3.

3-Is your condition found in the list of disabling conditions?

For each of the major body systems, we maintain a list of medical conditions that are so severe they automatically mean that you are disabled. If your condition is not on the list, we have to decide if it is of equal severity to a medical condition that is on the list. If it is, we will find that you are disabled. If it is not, we then go to Step 4.

Note: We have two initiatives designed to expedite our processing of new disability claims:

Compassionate Allowances: Certain cases that usually qualify for disability can be allowed as soon as the diagnosis is confirmed. Examples include acute leukemia, Lou Gehrig’s disease (ALS) and pancreatic cancer.

Quick Disability Determinations: We use sophisticated computer screening to identify cases with a high probability of allowance

For more information about changes to our disability claims process, visit our Disability Service Improvement website.

4-Can you do the work you did previously?

If your condition is severe but not at the same or equal level of severity as a medical condition on the list, then we must determine if it interferes with your ability to do the work you did previously. If it does not, your claim will be denied. If it does, we proceed to Step 5.

Additional information about Step 4.

5-Can you do any other type of work?

If you cannot do the work you did in the past, we see if you are able to adjust to other work. We consider your medical conditions and your age, education, past work experience and any transferable skills you may have. If you cannot adjust to other work, your claim will be approved. If you can adjust to other work, your claim will be denied.
http://www.ssa.gov/dibplan/dqualify6.htm



More detailed information at all of the above listed links.

SSA is one of biased system i ever known,they dont care if you put into the system.They set the rules and then go against them.what a joke.

I cannot even tell you how much I appreciate all of your responses. There are so many variables with my situation and I know my husband is about done listening to me project different scenarios!! I do have a sister who is a tremendous support but she has a life of her own. It is helping me being able to talk with others who are in similar situations as myself.
LIT Love, thanks for all the info. Actually, I am located in ME; not sure if that makes a difference.
A part of me is saying to myself "just start a new application", and another part of me is saying, "no, my lawyer is right and if the right person reads the appeal then I will get a remand hearing". I got a copy of my lawyer's appeal briefing yesterday. She cites 5 errors that the ALJ made, according to law, and with that she quotes the laws and points out the judge's errors. She notes in the appeal that since I made under the SGA "gainful amount" then the judge was suppose to at the very least contact my employer or an agency to determine if my work is comparable to that of unimpaired individuals to come to a determination that it was substantial. She also notes and quotes physicians about the severity of my condition and says the medical evidence supports a fully favorable decision at step 3 and at step 5; and she mentions this several times in the letter. She basically cites each of the errors by the judge in bold and then gives evidence and reference to evidence/exhibits under each heading.
At this point I honestly don't know what to do. The work I have been doing in my eyes is very sheltered and getting up every 5 or 10 minutes for a 5 to 10 minute break would never be tolerated in an office setting and now I'm even finding this more and more difficult but I see now that hiding it from my employer has done me no good. When I look back to when I took this job, I could easily say I shouldn't have but I also know that I did what I thought was best at the time; that being, trying to contribute somewhat to support my family.
There is no changing it now and I am just looking for advice on what people think my chances for a remand are. Put aside the fact that the judge saw my work as substantial, the issue up for debate is whether she followed the proper laws to come to that conclusion. It would appear to me that she did not. She did not have a vocational expert. she did not contact my employer or another agency to make a comparison to unimpaired individuals, so is that good enough reason to send it back to establish actual evidence to support her finding? Is the judge at liberty to just make that conclusion herself with no explanation or evidence to back it up? If the judge has the discretion to make that decision based on just her own opinion and does not need evidence then no I don't think I would get a remand. My lawyer tells me that she must follow the steps of law to come to that conclusion. It is all so complicated and boggles my mind. In my appeal letter my lawyer sites about 5 errors my judge made and quotes the laws supporting that they were errors. What does that mean? Does that mean I have a good chance at a remand?
I would never in my right mind chose SSDI over working.... who would. Not only is opting to do that going to produce financial struggles for the years to come but also I think it can be devastating emotionally to lose that sense of purpose.

LIT Love, or any of you, do you think I have a chance at getting a remand from the appeal council?? I figure if I can get back for a 2nd hearing and I am not working any hours at that point then the judge will have to move past step 1 and look at my medical issues at hand. Any thoughts?

An just one more thing I can't remember which one of you mentioned the $720 per month, but what is up with that figure? I do not qualify for SSI so I'm not sure if that is what you are referring to. Also my earnings have averaged around $800 per month with fluctuations slightly above but more slightly below that.
The following are a list of errors that were bolded in the letter:
1. Erred in determination that the claimant had engaged in SGA since the alleged onset date.
2. The claimant's work activity in July 2010 and August 2010 was an unsuccessful work attempt, as described in SSR 05-02.
3. SSA policy clearly dictates that earnings should be averaged seperately when there is a significant change in work patterns or earnings.
4. The claimant's work activity fails to meet the exceptions and her post onset work was not SGA under the "test of worth".
5. ALJ erred in failing to follow the steps outlined in SSR83-33 for determining whether work is SGA. The ALJ did not apply the "test of comparability" or "test of worth" as required in SSR83-33.
6. The claimant's work activity fails to meet the exceptions and her post onset work was not SGA under the "test of comparability".
7. The ALJ erred in finding that there has been no continuous 12-month period which the claimant has not engaged in SGA.

Anyone please give advice. Do these errors by the ALJ constitute reason for a remand in your opinion?

Thanks again for any input. I just want someone to be entirely honest about this. what there gut instinct is when they see some of the facts, even if it's not what I want to hear because I am not thinking rationally anymore and am driving myself crazy with "what ifs".

Please READ BOTH LINKS:
http://www.ssdanswers.com/have-you-w...ty-disability/

$720 is the amount that counts towards a Trial Work Period.
http://www.ssdanswers.com/have-you-w...-collect-ssdi/

I must be numb because I seriously do not get all this information. If according to the SSA rules/laws they consider under $1000 a month as not gainful income then what is the $720 trigger for a TWP?? Are they looking at it because a person is able to do work on a consistent basis, which would thus disqualify them? I think I need to make an appointment to go in and talk with my lawyer, just so I have a true understanding and knowledge of all this confusing information. This is just crazy.

In the middle of my case, when I tried to work full time and was not able to and my doctor cut me down to part time and then down again further, I called my lawyer's office on numerous occasions to check that it was not going to disqualify me. I was told repeatedly that if what I was earning was under what is consider SGA ($1000/mo) then it would not ruin my chances, that judges are human and realize that sometimes people need to make some money just to survive and that does not mean that it is easy for them and it does not mean that they are capable of sustained, full time employed on a regular basis. I was also told that some/most judges look at the efforts in a positive way, that a person is trying the best they can. What the heck. I just don't get it. If someone wants to explain it in a simplified fashion, I would be very appreciative. Thanks all.