USDOL ASSISTANT DEPUTY SECRETARY SHELBY HALLMARK ACCUSED OF SCHEMING TO LIMIT COMPENSATION FOR SICK AND DYING FEDERAL NUCLEAR WEAPONS WORKERS

Time may be quickly running out for the terms of Shelby Hallmark the USDOL Assistant Deputy Secretary of Labor and fellow constituents. The US DOL oversees the federal workers compensation program to compensate federal workers whose illnesses and deaths are tied to radioactive and toxic materials at federal nuclear weapons plants such as the Rocky Flats plant outside Denver. In an article dated March 10, 2007 the Rocky Mountain News reports that internal e-mails from Hallmark show that federal officials secretly schemed to limit payouts for those sick and dying weapons workers including thousands of workers from the Rocky Flats plant.

In internal e-mails Hallmark worries about compensation costs soaring in "an arms race among members (of Congress) jockeying to demonstrate their ability to bring home "special" benefits to their constituents". Hallmark's boss, Assistant Secretary of Labor Victoria Lipnic complains "There is not a fiscal conservative left anywhere."

Hallmark, in other memos, wrote in 2005 that it would be unfair to pay claims to "undeserving" workers. In a response memo the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) agreed with Hallmark and said the White House would work to recommend ways to "contain growth and the costs" of the compensation to those sick and dying workers.

In October 2005 Labor Department officials expressed concern about approving compensation for whole groups of workers, called "special exposure cohorts." Congress ordered these special cohorts if records on workers' radiation exposure were so incomplete, missing or destroyed that scientists could not reconstruct the radiation doses to link them to workers' illness.

In a January 31, 2005 e-mail Hallmark worries that NIOSH was about to make it easier for sites such as the Rocky Flats plant to get special exposure cohorts status. NIOSH had already received written notice granting the status when Hallmark wrote: "We have revised the attached version of the notice . . . to require that NIOSH DENY (the petition)."

In 2006, Hallmark complained in an e-mail to OMB that he was "uncomfortable with even an unofficial sharing of my briefing piece for today's meeting with my second-floor people (the US secretary of labor's office) since I am not at all convinced they will be willing to argue directly for any or all the actions it proposes.... But if you promise not to spread it, and if you don't use the language in your document such that NIOSH will know where the verbiage came from, I'll share it."

Subsequently Hallmark denied to the U.S. Congress any allegations of a covert cost containment effort and also denied to Congress that the Labor Department was trying to prevent approvals of compensation.

Rep. Mark Udall, D-Colo., said, "Clearly, the administration put dollars above honoring the nation's promise to the Cold War veterans." He added this is "almost worse" than the bad conditions at Walter Reed Army Medical Center. That was negligence, Udall said, where "this seems to be a pretty callous plan that the administration knew could harm sick veterans." Udall, of Colorado, said the documents "confirm what many of us suspected was under way, which was the administration tried to override science to cut costs at the expense of sick workers. And it might have succeeded if the plan hadn't been exposed."

UNITED STATES ARGUES THAT THE SSA JUDGE WAS SIMPLY MISUNDERSTOOD: BUT FEDERAL COURT RECOMMENDS REVERSAL OF SOCIAL SECURITY JUDGE’S DENIAL OF BENEFITS

Once again I'm pleased to announce another federal court recommendation to reverse the decision of the Social Security Administrative Law Judge who had denied benefits to a disabled person.

In this federal appeal a Social Security Administrative Law Judge had hired a vocational expert to appear at the hearing. At the hearing the Social Security Administrative Law Judge asked a vocational expert whether the claimant could perform other jobs with his disability. In response the vocational expert listed four jobs that he believed the disabled claimant could still perform. However, neither the vocational expert nor the Social Security Administrative Law Judge identified on the record the Dictionary of Occupational Titles numerical listings for these jobs. The Dictionary of Occupational Titles is a government listing of most generally all jobs in the United States with each job assigned a specific numerical listing. On appeal we argued that the jobs identified by the vocational expert did not apparently exist in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles and thus could not be considered as valid.

The United States in turn actually argued that the vocational expert and the Social Security Administrative Law Judge were simply misunderstood on the record when they each identified other jobs. For example, the United States actually argued to the Court that when the Social Security Administrative Law Judge and Vocational Expert said the claimant could be a “machine operator” the Judge and expert must have meant to say “picking-belt operator”: when the Social Security Administrative Law Judge and Vocational Expert said the claimant could be a “machine packager” they actually meant to say the words “tobacco packing machine operator”.

The Federal Court agreed with our arguments and refused to buy into the United States argument that the SSA Judge and vocational expert were simply misunderstood and unable to speak clearly or properly on the record. The Federal Court agreed that the United States arguments were reversible post-hoc theories attempting to reconcile the Socials Security Judge and Vocational Expert on the record inconsistencies, and recommended that this Claimant be given another hearing on his disability benefits.

HAVING TROUBLE CONNECTING TO OR FINDING YOUR FEDERAL AGENCY CONTACT?

One of the most common complaints I receive and hear of daily is that common people, employees, disabled persons, etc., are unable to reach or contact responsible persons within federal agencies, and even if contacted, the federal agency personnel are unable to understand or comprehend their problem.

This is not an isolated or rare event. In fact as recently reported by CNN news on March 19, 2007, one-third of the people living in Washington, DC (the home base of most if not all federal agencies) are functionally illiterate. This compares to about one-fifth nationally. Adults are considered functionally illiterate if they have trouble doing such things as comprehending bus schedules, reading maps or filling out simple job applications. Based on these actual statistics any person who contacts federal agencies located in Washington, DC should be aware that one out of every three people they deal with will very likely be unable to comprehend or understand their questions and problems. I myself have come across personnel working for the United States Department of Labor who for all intents and purposes could not read nor understand simple e-mail correspondence. Yet those same personnel are responsible for the payment of hundreds of thousands if not millions of dollars in federal benefits to hundreds if not thousands of disabled and injured American workers.

If you are attempting to deal with, or are actually dealing with, federal agency personnel who appear to be unable to understand and comprehend your situation you should without reservation inquire as to that person’s capacity to read and write. It would not be unusual at all to find that person as functionally illiterate. If that is the case you should move up the line and contact other superiors who can handle your case properly.

Additionally when dealing with federal agencies, it is the norm for the federal agencies to send out notices that require a immediate response within a day or two; much too short of time to respond by regular US mail. The fastest response will thus be by email, but how do you email a federal agency? For your benefit then in order to contact a public servant employee by e-mail it really is very simple.

If you're dealing with the United States Department of Labor is very common for claims examiners to refuse to provide their contact information, such as their e-mail address. However, most often the claims examiner e-mail is in the following format:
lastname.firstname@dol.gov As an example, the current director of the US Department of Labor is Mr. Shelby Hallmark whose direct e-mail is hallmark.shelby@dol.gov.

For those of you who are dealing with the Social Security Administration (a federal agency which strongly loathes any attempt by "outsiders" to contact them by e-mail) most SSA claims examiners e-mail addresses are set up the same way: e.g., lastname.firstname@ssa.gov

Finally when dealing with the Office of Personnel Management (OPM: a federal agency that vigorously hides itself against any and all attempts by common people to contact them) their email addresses are slightly different. Their email addresses tend to be in the format of firstnameinitiallastname@opm.gov. For example John Doe would be jdoe@opm.gov

One should note that sometimes the federal agencies will make unannounced slight changes to throw off or deter attempts to contact them by email. The agencies will change the email syntax and switch the name order, etc. If you fail on the first attempt, try flipping the name order, you will eventually come across the proper email address and find your proper federal agency contact person.