dojN001931.xml

dojN001931.xml

born-digital

email

yes

no

2002-01-17

Thursday, January 17, 2002 10:40 AM
Calculation of earnings



Attachment 1:

January 16, 2001

Kenneth L. Zwick
Director, Office of Management Programs
Civil Division
U.S. Department of Justice
Main Building
Room 3140
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530

Re: Comments to the Interim Final Rule

Dear Mr. Zwick

Under the interim rules, for purposes of determining economic losses a victim's base compensation appears to be his or her pre-tax earnings for the three-year period 1998-2000, including salary and bonus plus certain employer benefits. I understand that the rational behind this is to come up with a reasonable compensation figure t o use as a starting point. Using the average of three years would likely iron out any aberrations caused by large increases or decreases in a particular year. I agree with the goal, but I see two major problems its application under the interim rules:

1. In the case of some workers, there have been major promotions and additional job responsibilities taken on that render the earlier years much less applicable. For example, if a young worker was an inexperienced employee in 1998 paid at a salary of say $45,000 per year. Yet, he spends the next three years learning job skills and attaining confidence of his employer and increases in responsibility and compensation and his salary moves to $60,000 in 1999, $80,000 in 2000 and $100,000 in 2001. How is the 1998 compensation figure relevant? Would this person every go back to his state of inexperience during his projected work life? Are the large increases in pay an aberration or does the $100,000 level constitute a base for which future increases will be added? It would seem to me that in a situation like this the 2001 compensation level should be given the most weight, yet under the interim rules it is not even considered.

2. Even if you do (wrongly) decide to use the three years 1998 through 2000 as a starting place, that figure gives a snapshot of an average compensation figure for the victim for mid-year 1999. Since death occurred in September of 2001 this figure should at least receive an adjustment to get it to September 2001. Using your figures this would be one and a half years at 6.6 percent for those under 30, 5.1 percent for those aged 31-50, and 4.2 percent for those over 50. To do otherwise would be to have a starting place that doesn't even reflect keeping up with inflation.

Thank you for considering the above.

Very truly yours,

Individual Comment
Concord, MA

2002-01-17