dojN002527.xml
Title
dojN002527.xml
Source
born-digital
Media Type
email
Date Entered
2002-01-22
September 11 Email: Body
Tuesday, January 22, 2002 8:01 PM
Comment Re: Proposal in the Final VCF Rules
Dear Sirs:
Enclosed is a proposal from two former Presidents of the leading forensic
vocational expert associations requesting careful consideration of expected
earnings in the case of young professionals who perished on 9/11.
Specifically, numerous vocational experts are willing to offer pro bono
services for a proper vocational appraisal of expected earning capacity for
those under 35 years of age and whom were highly educated, e.g., post
baccelaurate education.
Bel Air, CA
Attachment 1
January 21, 2002
To:
Kenneth Feinberg
Deborah E. Greenspan
Office of the Special Master
RE: Comments on the Interim Rules of the 9/11 Victim Compensation Fund
From:
Certified Vocational Economist and Vocational Expert
Los Angeles, CA
Certified Vocational Economist and Vocational Expert
Hastings, NE
We have closely followed the legal and forensic economic debate regarding the special rules generated by your office for the compensation of victims families in the wake of September 11. Dr. and I attempt to offer unique insight into the proper, credible and equitable compensation of the victims families as dually certified vocational rehabilitation and forensic economic experts.
I attach my 17 page CV to this letter reflecting my significant experience, certifications, peer review and formal education in both disciplines. These speak most directly to expected earnings and pecuniary loss from the vocational perspective. Moreover, we are willing to meet in a group meeting setting with you and your experts along with the current Presidents of the American Board of Vocational Experts (ABVE) and the American Board of Rehabilitation Economics Association (AREA).
Much of the debate thus far has been focused on issues of lost household services (HHS), and work life expectancy. While senior members of the National Association of Forensic Economics have focused heavily on these issues in relation to the VCF in both the print and television media, these are relatively minor issues compared to expected earnings. It should nonetheless be stated that the male hourly data emanating from the "Dollar Value of a Day" study is inconsistent with eight previous HHS time use studies. These figures appear plaintiff oriented in our experience
In the case of HHS, the great majority of the decedents logically were full time workers rather than home makers. They otherwise would not have been at work at the Pentagon or WTC when the tragic events of September 11 took place. Consequently, the way the rules read these victims families are not entitled to this element of pecuniary loss. It is almost a moot issue.
Secondly, the total differences among the three primary work life expectancy tables are minor in the case of males. These include the 1986 BLS study, the 1996 Hunt, Pickersgill & Rutemiller Study, and the two studies by James Ciecka published in the 90s. Conversely, in the case of females, use of the aged BLS studies (1980 data) reflect a significant difference from the three more recent studies delineated above. Using the BLS studies in the case of female decedents would thus be inequitable as they do not reflect positive changes over the last 20 years.
It was our understanding that the VCF had recently decided to use the most recent 1998 study by Ciecka as a result of this forensic economic input. Nonetheless, both and are suggesting as of today that this in fact has not been accomplished and the inappropriate BLS (in the case of females) is still being advertised by the VCF.
Most importantly and irrespective of the preceding, the earnings issue brought up in the New York Times article, "The Damaged Spirit of the 9/11 Fund," by Fred Price and Mitch Kleinman dated January 16, 2002 suggests with great face validity that many of the WTC victims were young professionals in their 20s and 30s. In these cases, the decedents demonstrated earnings may not accurately reflect their long term expected earnings even with robust age earnings adjustments. Vocational issues to be addressed in this context are the individual specific human capital factors of formal education and work experience in addition to the potential for further career advancement.
While we understand that the VCF has provided for a generous age earnings wage growth factor, especially in the case of these younger workers, it still may not capture the earnings potential of the young professional decedents given the following assumptions: 1) these decedents were among the brightest and best educated Americans; 2) they were working for Fortune 500 companies in early career; and 3) their human capital educational expenditures were not nearly fully realized and would not have been until at least mid career when significant promotional opportunities would have arisen.
Vocationally, without additional formal education in most cases, ones earnings are unlikely to increase beyond the age earnings cycle and/or standard wage growth after the age of 35 or 40. There is a methodology that can assist the VCF in determining expected earnings. Specifically, the input of a vocational expert or vocational economist can establish ones promotability based on age, education, and work experience. Wage rate data from Economic Research Institute (ERI) can then peg the expected earnings based on occupation and experience should these differ from the actual earnings as depicted in previous W-2 statements. Perhaps a particular age cut off period could be implemented wherein those under the age of 35 would be entitled to an independent vocational assessment of expected earnings (earning capacity).
ERI is a Redmond, WA. based research company that provides executive compensation and salary wage data. It is primarily an instrument used by human resource professionals. An increasing number of vocational experts and forensic economists are utilizing this statistically validated wage data. It covers most occupations in cities exceeding populations of 50,000.
and I are currently completing a closely related paper for a special Spring 2002 employment law edition of the Journal of Legal Economics in addition to presenting this paper at the 76th annual meeting of the Western Economics Association this summer at Seattle. The three of us would also be pleased to discuss this proposed methodology with the VCF, and any other interested parties.
Many members of the professional vocational community certified by ABVE and/or AREA have extended reliable offers to us to perform pro bono work on behalf of the VCF. These commitments have transpired just in the last two days following our spreading the news of the dire need for vocational appraisals in many of these cases your office has been charged to evaluate for pecuniary damages. Scores more will follow this preliminary listing should you concur that the need arises. If you do not concur, many of these experts will undoubtedly be called to represent the decedents families in civil trials bypassing the fund. These include the following colleagues:
We fear that failure to professionally address this far more critical issue of pecuniary loss will result in seriously under-funding in the case of young professionals just starting their careers. These men and women did not have the opportunity to advance their careers due to the tragedy of September 11th. A second injustice would befall the victims surviving family if this essential factor remains a secondary issue and unresolved.
We remain,
Sincerely Yours
Individual Comment
Los Angeles, CA
Individual Comment
Hastings, NE
Comment Re: Proposal in the Final VCF Rules
Dear Sirs:
Enclosed is a proposal from two former Presidents of the leading forensic
vocational expert associations requesting careful consideration of expected
earnings in the case of young professionals who perished on 9/11.
Specifically, numerous vocational experts are willing to offer pro bono
services for a proper vocational appraisal of expected earning capacity for
those under 35 years of age and whom were highly educated, e.g., post
baccelaurate education.
Bel Air, CA
Attachment 1
January 21, 2002
To:
Kenneth Feinberg
Deborah E. Greenspan
Office of the Special Master
RE: Comments on the Interim Rules of the 9/11 Victim Compensation Fund
From:
Certified Vocational Economist and Vocational Expert
Los Angeles, CA
Certified Vocational Economist and Vocational Expert
Hastings, NE
We have closely followed the legal and forensic economic debate regarding the special rules generated by your office for the compensation of victims families in the wake of September 11. Dr. and I attempt to offer unique insight into the proper, credible and equitable compensation of the victims families as dually certified vocational rehabilitation and forensic economic experts.
I attach my 17 page CV to this letter reflecting my significant experience, certifications, peer review and formal education in both disciplines. These speak most directly to expected earnings and pecuniary loss from the vocational perspective. Moreover, we are willing to meet in a group meeting setting with you and your experts along with the current Presidents of the American Board of Vocational Experts (ABVE) and the American Board of Rehabilitation Economics Association (AREA).
Much of the debate thus far has been focused on issues of lost household services (HHS), and work life expectancy. While senior members of the National Association of Forensic Economics have focused heavily on these issues in relation to the VCF in both the print and television media, these are relatively minor issues compared to expected earnings. It should nonetheless be stated that the male hourly data emanating from the "Dollar Value of a Day" study is inconsistent with eight previous HHS time use studies. These figures appear plaintiff oriented in our experience
In the case of HHS, the great majority of the decedents logically were full time workers rather than home makers. They otherwise would not have been at work at the Pentagon or WTC when the tragic events of September 11 took place. Consequently, the way the rules read these victims families are not entitled to this element of pecuniary loss. It is almost a moot issue.
Secondly, the total differences among the three primary work life expectancy tables are minor in the case of males. These include the 1986 BLS study, the 1996 Hunt, Pickersgill & Rutemiller Study, and the two studies by James Ciecka published in the 90s. Conversely, in the case of females, use of the aged BLS studies (1980 data) reflect a significant difference from the three more recent studies delineated above. Using the BLS studies in the case of female decedents would thus be inequitable as they do not reflect positive changes over the last 20 years.
It was our understanding that the VCF had recently decided to use the most recent 1998 study by Ciecka as a result of this forensic economic input. Nonetheless, both and are suggesting as of today that this in fact has not been accomplished and the inappropriate BLS (in the case of females) is still being advertised by the VCF.
Most importantly and irrespective of the preceding, the earnings issue brought up in the New York Times article, "The Damaged Spirit of the 9/11 Fund," by Fred Price and Mitch Kleinman dated January 16, 2002 suggests with great face validity that many of the WTC victims were young professionals in their 20s and 30s. In these cases, the decedents demonstrated earnings may not accurately reflect their long term expected earnings even with robust age earnings adjustments. Vocational issues to be addressed in this context are the individual specific human capital factors of formal education and work experience in addition to the potential for further career advancement.
While we understand that the VCF has provided for a generous age earnings wage growth factor, especially in the case of these younger workers, it still may not capture the earnings potential of the young professional decedents given the following assumptions: 1) these decedents were among the brightest and best educated Americans; 2) they were working for Fortune 500 companies in early career; and 3) their human capital educational expenditures were not nearly fully realized and would not have been until at least mid career when significant promotional opportunities would have arisen.
Vocationally, without additional formal education in most cases, ones earnings are unlikely to increase beyond the age earnings cycle and/or standard wage growth after the age of 35 or 40. There is a methodology that can assist the VCF in determining expected earnings. Specifically, the input of a vocational expert or vocational economist can establish ones promotability based on age, education, and work experience. Wage rate data from Economic Research Institute (ERI) can then peg the expected earnings based on occupation and experience should these differ from the actual earnings as depicted in previous W-2 statements. Perhaps a particular age cut off period could be implemented wherein those under the age of 35 would be entitled to an independent vocational assessment of expected earnings (earning capacity).
ERI is a Redmond, WA. based research company that provides executive compensation and salary wage data. It is primarily an instrument used by human resource professionals. An increasing number of vocational experts and forensic economists are utilizing this statistically validated wage data. It covers most occupations in cities exceeding populations of 50,000.
and I are currently completing a closely related paper for a special Spring 2002 employment law edition of the Journal of Legal Economics in addition to presenting this paper at the 76th annual meeting of the Western Economics Association this summer at Seattle. The three of us would also be pleased to discuss this proposed methodology with the VCF, and any other interested parties.
Many members of the professional vocational community certified by ABVE and/or AREA have extended reliable offers to us to perform pro bono work on behalf of the VCF. These commitments have transpired just in the last two days following our spreading the news of the dire need for vocational appraisals in many of these cases your office has been charged to evaluate for pecuniary damages. Scores more will follow this preliminary listing should you concur that the need arises. If you do not concur, many of these experts will undoubtedly be called to represent the decedents families in civil trials bypassing the fund. These include the following colleagues:
We fear that failure to professionally address this far more critical issue of pecuniary loss will result in seriously under-funding in the case of young professionals just starting their careers. These men and women did not have the opportunity to advance their careers due to the tragedy of September 11th. A second injustice would befall the victims surviving family if this essential factor remains a secondary issue and unresolved.
We remain,
Sincerely Yours
Individual Comment
Los Angeles, CA
Individual Comment
Hastings, NE
September 11 Email: Date
2002-01-22
Collection
Citation
“dojN002527.xml,” September 11 Digital Archive, accessed October 12, 2024, https://911digitalarchive.org/items/show/22627.