Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2007 10:58 pm Post subject: Illiteracy is about reading/writing ENGLISH
Whether or not an individual is illiterate can be a critical factor for application of SSA’s medical-vocational guidelines, aka the grid rules. SSA policy is that illiteracy has to do with the inability to read and write English. Occasionally one encounters a hearing decision that takes literacy to mean the ability to read and write a language other than English. This is not a common error. It is nonetheless a hardy flower that springs up again with each new generation of ODAR adjudicators.
When it does spring up, how does one suppress it? There’s tons of internal material about English and literacy. But for the most part, ODAR adjudicators don’t read this material. What’s more, it’s not an accepted ODAR practice to cite to it. So what else is there?
We used to have HALLEX I-5-3-12 that explained this English/literacy stuff. But this was a “temporary instruction.” It got swept away with a bunch of other temporary instructions in the 9/05 HALLEX update—the reason being that all these TI’s had all exceeded their shelf life.
Without I-5-3-12, there’s not much. 20 CFR 404.964 isn’t sufficiently specific. Section 201.00(h) of the medical-vocational guidelines talks about a specific profile involving illiteracy in English. But to the obdurate, again this is not enough. Citing to 201.00(h) leaves open the possibility of a wrong-headed response that 202.00(h) is only about 201.00(h) and not about illiteracy in general.
There’s still AR 86-3(5) about how inability to communicate in English subsumes illiteracy. The inference that flows from this is IMHO very strong that illiteracy means the inability to read and write English. But for some members of the ODAR audience, it’s better to be brutally clear. So where to we find the desired clear statement about SSA policy on illiteracy?
The answer is at 65 FR 45163, from the final rule for the current version of 201.00(h). This gives the answer. It also explains why we don’t find the answer anywhere else (emphasis added):
Quote:
We restructured the words in the third sentence of section 201.00(h)(1) to make the sentence easier to read and to make it easier to cite to the four numbered clauses in the sentence. In clause (iii) of this sentence (clause (3) of the third sentence of prior section 201.00(h)), we are changing the phrases "relevant past work" and "vocationally relevant past work," to "past relevant work" to clarify our intended meaning and for consistency in our terminology. We are also clarifying in section 201.00(h)(1)(iv) (clause (4) of the third sentence of prior section 201.00(h)) that the term "illiterate" means that the individual is unable to read or write in English. This makes clearer our original intent that the fourth clause describes individuals who are either 1) unable to communicate in English or 2) able to speak and understand English but are unable to read or write in English. SSA intends to examine the use of the term "illiterate" throughout its regulations, and when appropriate, will clarify that it means the inability to read and write in English
. _________________ I've posted this in my private capacity. What I post might be wrong. Probably, it IS wrong. Any errors are my own. Please don't infer any SSA approval for what I post.
Joined: 13 May 2004 Posts: 1315 Location: Cincinnati OH
Posted: Tue Sep 18, 2007 07:04 pm Post subject:
I'm just providing a link to the rescinded HALLEX I-5-3-12 courtesy of the "wayback" machine. It's hard to even discuss a rescinded provision of an internal manual as authority for anything, but here it is, for what little it's worth:
Much of the grid is out-of-date, including the language provision. Many, many, many people in the United States are working in environments in which they do not speak and do not need to speak English. Spanish is the most common, but there are places with large enclaves where other languages are spoken: Chinese, Vietnamese, Farsi, etc., etc.
Much of the grid is out-of-date, including the language provision. Many, many, many people in the United States are working in environments in which they do not speak and do not need to speak English. Spanish is the most common, but there are places with large enclaves where other languages are spoken: Chinese, Vietnamese, Farsi, etc., etc.
The entire vocational framework used by SSA has never been valid. That includes the Grids. _________________ David Traver
Attorney
Traver & Traver, S.C.
P.O. Box 459
Eagle, WI 53119
262-594-2096 (work)
403[at]traverlaw.com
Joined: 18 May 2006 Posts: 48 Location: San Antonio
Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2007 02:54 pm Post subject:
- wrote:
Much of the grid is out-of-date, including the language provision. Many, many, many people in the United States are working in environments in which they do not speak and do not need to speak English. Spanish is the most common, but there are places with large enclaves where other languages are spoken: Chinese, Vietnamese, Farsi, etc., etc.
This is true. There several places in the country where entire towns speak languages other than English. Of course, you see this more predominantly in border towns (The Texas Rio Grande Valley, Laredo, etc.) but there are others. In this places, not knowing how to read and write in English is pretty much irrelevant to a person's ability to find employment.
I agree but to reach your full potential in this country you still need a working knowledge of the English language.
I wonder what "full potential" would look like? I seem to remember JFK said something reaching full potential is all about serving others the best. Perhaps that is what ethical icons such as Mother Theresa or Mahatma Gandhi would have said.
I suppose only a bilingual person could do that now in the USA. Literacy in French and English seems to be essential for "full potential" in Canada.
In any even, if it is true that in several regions of the country a knowledge of Spanish is necessary for employment in unskilled jobs, then the rule should require the adjudicator look with care at illiteracy in Spanish as a vocational limitation that triggers an adjustment in the grids for those who are sadly limited to only English.
_________________ David Traver
Attorney
Traver & Traver, S.C.
P.O. Box 459
Eagle, WI 53119
262-594-2096 (work)
403[at]traverlaw.com
Joined: 18 May 2006 Posts: 48 Location: San Antonio
Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2007 04:03 pm Post subject:
That sounds like the fair and just thing to do. However, from a more conservative and patriotic point of view it is sad that the country seems to have to adapt to the culture of so many different immigrants when I believe the immigrants should adapt to the culture (language included) of this country.
That sounds like the fair and just thing to do. However, from a more conservative and patriotic point of view it is sad that the country seems to have to adapt to the culture of so many different immigrants when I believe the immigrants should adapt to the culture (language included) of this country.
And which culture would that be? China town (pick a city), the Castro District, Little Italy, the Bayou, Appalachia, Amish Pennsylvania or Amish areas of Wisconsin, the Indian Nations and related reservations, the inner city of any northern city, Venice beach, the near south side of Milwaukee? I could increase that list quite a bit.
There is no one American culture. Those who say there is typically have not traveled very much, speak only English and watch too much Lou Dobbs. That they are usually "conservative" goes without saying. Such individuals are patriotic to an image of a nation that exists only in their narrow perceptions.
_________________ David Traver
Attorney
Traver & Traver, S.C.
P.O. Box 459
Eagle, WI 53119
262-594-2096 (work)
403[at]traverlaw.com
If we wanted “narrow perceptions,” it’d be hard to think of a better way to achieve our goal than to prevent different members of our society from talking to each other.
If on the other hand we favored broader perceptions, surely we would want to favor whatever measures are best suited to let use talk with each other.
Diversity is good. Balkanized parochialism is bad. Think for yourself how a common language might play for either outcome. Bear in mind that a common language need not be the only language. _________________ I've posted this in my private capacity. What I post might be wrong. Probably, it IS wrong. Any errors are my own. Please don't infer any SSA approval for what I post.
Last edited by JOA on Thu Sep 20, 2007 05:30 pm; edited 1 time in total
Joined: 18 May 2006 Posts: 48 Location: San Antonio
Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2007 04:39 pm Post subject:
I respectfully disagree. I believe there is an American culture. It is composed out of so many cultures (including, but not limited to of course, the ones you mentioned) that have shaped this country for centuries. While there are several differences in the sub-categories of this American Culture, we all share (or at least have accepted or learned to live with)common basic principles and rules here that do not exist in the same way in other countries. One of those common denominators, I believe, should be the English language. Personally, I cannot say that I have traveled a lot. On the other hand, I am Mexican and had to learn this American culture that I speak of when I came to this country. I can assure you, the true Mexican culture is NOT the same as the Mexican-American culture that exists here. Of course, this is just my very humble opinion and I am aware that there is a high probability that I'm wrong as I consider myself ignorant in world cultures.
It's nice to have this diversity of opinion. We need not agree. _________________ David Traver
Attorney
Traver & Traver, S.C.
P.O. Box 459
Eagle, WI 53119
262-594-2096 (work)
403[at]traverlaw.com
Joined: 17 May 2004 Posts: 1648 Location: Michigan
Posted: Tue Sep 25, 2007 02:25 am Post subject:
And in France - The home of Freedom Fries :lol:
"In a new measure expected to pass the French Assembly in 15 days or less, new family arrivals must speak French. Immigrant parents must guarantee their kids will behave. And breadwinners must show earnings of up to 1,600 euros a month."
You can post new topics in this forum You can reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Traverlaw, Traver Law, Traver Law Offices, S.C., Traver & Traver, S.C.,
Traverlaw.com, SSAConnect,
Attorneys for the disabled and disadvantaged in all areas of Social Security
disability law, http://traverlaw.com,
http://ssaconnect.com, Connect, SSA Connect, Think Bigger,
Social Security Advice Connect, Social Security Disability Advice Connect,
"Social Security Disability Advocacy, Debate, and Professional News,"
the yellow and orange swoosh image, and the square favicon.ico image,
are trademarks and service marks of Attorney David F. Traver.
For information the about use of our copyrighted and trademarked material please call
262-594-2096.
CONNECT
FAQ
Search
Register
Log in
