Issues
Challenges to VEI methodology and data have come in two forms: case-specific challenges to block VEI expert testimony and articles critical of the underlying data. This page identifies the key issues in the challenges and provides links that provide more detail, rebut the issues, and link to related cases or articles. The issues are categorized as follows:
- Current Population Survey - discusses issues related to the validity or use of Census Bureau's CPS data
- Disability Status - discusses general issues related to the effect of disability on employment
- Earning Capacity discusses issues related to the assessment of earning capacity
- Other - discusses other issues related to the assessment of lost earnings
- Worklife Expectancy - discusses issues related to the use of worklife expectancy in tort cases involving the assessment of lost earnings
Current Population Survey
- Census Bureau caveat - responds to the contention that the presence on the Census website of a document discussing possible limitations of the CPS work disability data precludes their use
- Chronic disability - responds to the contention that the presence in the CPS data of people with a chronic disability, rather than a disability caused by a tort, invalidates the data for studying the effects of work disability on employment
- Definition of work disability - responds to the contentions that VEI created and controls the definition of work disability used in the CPS and that CPS data are useless since the CPS does not measure disability as defined in the Americans with Disabilities Act
- Hale article - discusses the article by Thomas Hale published in the Monthly Labor Review, which some believe proves that the CPS is inappropriate for studying the employment experiences of persons with work disability
- Hamel letter - discusses the letter written in 1994 by Harvey Hamel, a senior supervisory economist at the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which some believe offers evidence that the CPS is invalid for the purposes of worklife expectancy computation
- Heterogeneity - responds to the contention that the population of those with a disability is so diverse that application to a particular individual is difficult to impossible.
- Multi-year data averaging - addresses the appropriateness of averaging multiple years of CPS data to derive statistics regarding people with a work disability
- Sample selection bias - responds to the contention that, since the CPS does not randomly and independently sample people with a work disability, the data derived from it are invalid.
- Self-reported disability (lack of exogeneity) - responds to the contention that the CPS data are unreliable since the disabilities in the CPS are self-reported and without independent, medical verification
- Temporary disability - responds to the contention that the presence in the CPS data of people with a temporary disability invalidates the data for studying the effects of permanent disability on employment
- Use by other economists/researchers - discusses the validation of CPS data by government and other nonforensic researchers, who use the data to study the effects of work disability on employment
- Validity of the data - responds to the contentions that the CPS data are not valid for studying the earnings and employment experiences of people with a disability or that they were not intended to identify people with a work disability
- Validity of the first disability question - discusses the validity of the first work disability question used in the CPS (prevented from working or limited in terms of the amount or kind of work)
- Veteran's disability - discusses the presence in the CPS of those with a veteran's disability
Disability Status
- Broad support - provides broad support for the negative effect of disability on employment, regardless of the definition of disability used
- Residual Capacity - responds to the contention that there is no loss of lifetime earnings if a person has returned to work or if he or she is expected to attain the same educational level as they would have absent injury
Earning Capacity
- Actual earnings use - responds to the contention that actual earnings are the only appropriate measure of an individuals' earning capacity
Worklife Expectancy
- Daubert/Kumho standards - discusses the ability of The New Worklife Expectancy Tables to meet the Daubert/Kumho standards for expert testimony
- Possibility of Future Disability - responds to the contention that worklife expectancy statistics are invalid because they do not factor in the possibility of future disability
- Skoog & Toppino article - introduces the areas of contention discussed in the article and links to responses
Other
- Basic analysis methodology - responds to the contention that the basic methodology employed in VEI assessments of lost earnings is not valid because it is not performed outside litigation or because it was created by VEI
- "Employment, Earnings, and Disability" - responds to the contention that the article states that the Current Population Survey is inappropriate for studying the employment experiences of persons with disability
- Expert qualifications - links to a page addressing the expertise of VEI experts for providing vocational and/or economic testimony
- Use of statistical averages - addresses the belief by some that use of statistical averages for specific plaintiffs is inappropriate
- VALE Software - responds to the contention that the labor market access software used in many VEI analyses develops the experts' opinions
