BvA REBELLION

Posted on June 27, 2012 by asknod

As with all catastrophes, certain panaceas are regularly trotted out as the repair order. With the vA this isn’t so. They are, for the most part, hide-bound and stuck in the past. Witness their insane desire lo these last two decades to adhere to a paper file system. All the better to shred the C-files with, my pretty. Seriously. Can you think of one prominent reason to defend a paper file system?

We have had the dubious pleasure on our watch to witness a gradual meltdown in a system that all who are party to admit is dysfunctional. Nevertheless the vA Honchos at the top, in impeccable denial mode, continue to tout new reforms and innovations that will drastically change it. This isn’t a Thomas the Train moment of I think I can, I think I can. Daddy used to refer to this as talking through the top of your hat-as in holding your hat over your mouth and face so as to muffle the timbre and tone of the voice as well as to obscure the content of the statement.

We were greeted in the news last week of a meltdown of sorts finally boiling over amongst the employees of the Columbia, S.C. vARO. It seems they are disgruntled with the strictures being foisted upon them by management and an insane culture of perverse justice being served up for America’s Defenders (us).

What then to behold in my email this morning than yet another peasant uprising-this time at the Head Office down at Vermont Ave. Bill Preston, under the heading of Veterans w/HCV, sent me an advance copy of the letter sent out to all the usual suspects and witnesses to this travesty we call the vA judicial nightmare. It seems only fitting that the AFGE, a union some say is inconsequential and past its prime, should be the one to raise a hue and cry at the practices we all know are perpetrated against us. Veterans will note they (AFGE) were instrumental in the protest down in Columbia last weekend. That Mr. Preston would see fit to put this in our inbox too is an honor.

One of our sister sites ( Yuku’s VBN), when apprised of the Columbia vARO development, had an interesting observation. A moderator (who claims to be a former DRO) opined that this was much ado about nothing and that the AFGE is a toothless, inconsequential tiger at this point:

To be technically accurate we really don’t know how many rating personnel participated.  Folks here tend to erroneously refer to all Regional Office employees as “raters” and that isn’t accurate.

I read this article a couple of days ago and the first thing that struck me was that this event was organized by the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) labor union.   I can’t say for sure but I would bet that the union is trying to fan veteran indignation in an effort to secure some labor union goal.  I was a member of the AFGE for several years and don’t remember it ever concerning itself with the welfare of the veteran population.  The union was primarily concerned with obtaining employee benefits and promoting the political candidates it endorsed.

Most Regional Office employees aren’t even members of the AFGE and only  a few of those that are tend to pay any attention to union activities.  At my Regional Office a typical union meeting would have about 10-12 attendees out of 300 Regional Office employees.  http://vets.yuku.com/topic/79244/VA-Raters-up-in-Arms#.T-sx57UQvIM

That insightful comment was followed by another paternalistic ” Fortunately for you, I have the complete scoop.” Keep in mind that VBN’s stated goal is helping Vets.

It would be difficult to work 30 years at VA spending time in various offices, including Central Office in Washington, and not know a lot of people all over the Country.  I count among my friends VA folks from all walks from Central Office management and Regional Office Directors at the top to file clerks at the bottom, and everything in between.  More than a few of the young rookies that I trained down through the years have gone on to high positions at VA and it is with great pride that I can say that more than a few viewed me as their mentor during their formative years at VA.  These contacts often allow me to get the backstory behind what is put out for public consumption.

Apparently, former employees, including the one above, discount this as an aberration and  nothing more than a union spat for more wages/benefits. This head-in-the-sand defect is a hallmark of vA hierarchy.  Sadly, it appears it will be perpetuated by their retired minions as well. That philosophy seems embedded in many of the moderators there. It mirrors how we got into this situation closely. What does seem equally obvious is that some (current vA employees) are mad as hell and not going to take it anymore. I attach this which was posted today on an older, September 28th, 2011 blog. I was afraid it would never see the light of day if left there.

Veterans w/HCV says:

AFGE Local 17
Fighting for Justice
here at VA Central Office

June 26, 2012
The Honorable Eric K. Shinseki
Secretary of Veterans Affairs
810 Vermont Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20420
Dear Mr. Secretary:
The Chairman’s front office staff at the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (the Board) is responsible for unnecessarily delaying appeals filed by Veterans and their families. Employees at the Board, many of whom are Veterans, are troubled by these delays and have urged me to notify your office of this matter in the hope that you can rectify this ongoing problem. I am therefore bringing this matter to your attention. This letter is also being faxed to U.S. Senators Murray and Burr, and to Representatives Miller and Filner, the chairs and ranking members, respectively, of the Senate and House Veterans’ Affairs Committees.
The Board’s mission is to adjudicate Veterans’ claims for disability benefits expeditiously. Attorneys are under immense pressure to review cases and write decisions as quickly as possible. In an effort ostensibly to achieve its goals, the Board recently issued a new policy that cases must not be held by judges or attorneys for more than 30 days, and that failure to adhere may result in disciplinary action, negative performance appraisal, or removal. AFGE Local 17 fully supports resolving appeals in a timely manner and is sensitive to the fact that Veterans anxiously await decisions that may significantly impact their lives. Because of this, we find it incumbent upon us to bring to your attention the fact that members of the Chairman’s front office not only violate this 30-day policy but are the worst offenders, sometimes even holding cases for over a year. Many cases have tentative decisions already prepared and are merely waiting to be signed by a front office staff member in their capacity as a Veterans Law Judge (VLJ) or Acting VLJ. However, instead of being timely signed and dispatched, these cases sit on shelves collecting dust while Veterans wait for resolution.
I have attached a redacted list dated May 10, 2012, which provides a snapshot illustrating some of these unconscionable delays. As the list reflects, Principal Deputy Vice Chairman Laura Eskenazi held five cases well in excess of 100 days (227 days, 198 days, 177 days, 156 days, and 120 days). Also, Chief Counsel for Operations Donnie Hachey is one of the worst offenders, holding one case for over a year, for 415 days, and other cases for 357 days, 349 days, 233 days, 224 days, etc. Other offenders in the Chairman’s front office include Counsel Marti Hyland (399 days, 399 days, 210 days, 210 days, etc.) and Executive Assistant Bethany Buck (360 days, 343 days, 302 days, 237 days, etc.). Notably, none of these individuals is a Veteran. In addition, the Chairman’s relatively small staff has had more cases beyond the 30-day deadline than the over 350 attorneys and judges on the four decision teams combined. The number and extent of these delays by the Chairman’s office is disrespectful to the men and women who have honorably served our country.
What is more troubling, we’ve learned, is that when the Chairman’s front office became aware that our union local might have obtained data implicating its own personnel, the Chairman’s staff was directed to remove old cases from their dockets by assigning them to other attorneys and judges. The Chairman’s front office, it appears from what we have gathered, attempted to hide the information in order to escape further scrutiny and responsibility, rather than adjudicating these old cases so they could be dispatched immediately.
Employees at the Board demand to know why members of the Chairman’s front office are allowed to disrespect our nation’s Veterans by needlessly delaying appeals. It is apparent that the Chairman’s front office staff is unfortunately incapable of adhering to the Board’s mission statement of resolving appeals in a timely matter. The consequence is that benefits for disabled Veterans are being needlessly delayed. On behalf of Veterans, employees request that you intervene in this matter to ensure that these old cases are adjudicated as soon as possible and that members of the Chairman’s office are not allowed to play by a different set of rules.

Sincerely,
Bill Preston
President
AFGE Local 17

It seems all is not well at 810 Vermont Ave. NW. in spite of what the VBN DRO/moderator    believes. It would be interesting to hear his explanation for this latest outbreak.  By virtue of sheer numbers alone, it’s quite possible that Eskinazi, Hatchey, Hyland and Buck may be some of those he mentored. Perhaps Preston is just another one of those inflated union types fomenting a rebellion for higher wages but I severely doubt it. Where there’s continual smoke, there’s a fire afoot. When smoke starts emanating from vAROs (and now the Central Office), its safe to assume their collective house is afire. How soon will we see smoke curling up from Oakland and Seattle?

I know some of you will say this is the last vestige of a conspiracy that is collapsing under its own weight. Rubbish. It’s simply the sound of daylight crashing into dark corners vA would prefer to keep cloistered and far from the public domain. This is also the fallout from the information age that vA has so desperately tried to hold at arm’s length for decades. I see no union employees clambering for more and better wages and working conditions. What I do see are vA employees (who just happen to be union-affiliated) protesting the nefarious schemes we’ve known for decades to exist. Don’t lose sight of the significance. We’re talking about a sea change of employee sentiment. This is unheard of in our lifetime. In the past it would be grounds for instant dismissal. Their timing is eerily impeccable.

vA has been on a bender for nigh on a century with no appreciable change for the better. As their methodology falls into disrepair, they continue to have their high tea and crumpets every afternoon. Senator Alan Cranston phrased it very succinctly in floor debates on the VJRA in 1988-vA has been in “splendid isolation” for far too long. I submit that they have fallen back into the same predicament yet again if they ever indeed truly reformed after the VJRA’s passage.

vA is at a nadir in their existence with no way to dig themselves out. Everything they touch   turns into something smelly and it isn’t gold. The last straw is now a peasant revolt among those formerly entrusted to screw us. When you hear the employees voice displeasure with how we are being treated, you know one thing is certain- even they have no more stomach to do the bidding of their masters.

My attorney mentioned a month or more ago that the BvA has been under the gun to crank out a decision per day per judge for some time now. Apparently, some of these cases need more nuanced denials that require additional ammo. I suspect those are the problem cases Mr. Preston mentions. What better way than to pidgeonhole them somewhere and shop the perfect VHA “expert” willing to say whatever 30 pieces of silver will buy.

HERE I COME TO SAVE THE DAY

OGC IS ON THE WAY

(SOON)

Posted in BvA Decisions, Complaints Department, VA BACKLOG | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

VA: Fixing Fiduciary problems too costly

Posted on June 27, 2012 by joeaveragevet

No, I didn’t  make this stuff up.    When congress wanted to know why the VA does not have more oversight on things like convicts and gamblers having control over Veterans finances, ultimately stealing their money, the VA responded they can’t afford it?

Huh?  One of us does not “get” this.    How much does it cost to keep fraud out of the VA?  I manage to keep it out of my house and the cost is pretty much zero.    If a suspicious character knocks on my door wanting in, I simply decline the invitation.

Exactly why would it cost money to prevent  people from stealing Veterans benefits?  That makes it sound like the VA is “on the take” in this fiduciary fraud, and can not afford to lose the income generated from fraud.      Isnt that the whole idea of the VA “fiduciary program” to prevent thieves from stealing Veterans benefits?   Or, is the idea of the VA fiduciary program to enable  thieves to steal Veterans money?

What if the rest of government operated this way?:    Gee we cant afford to keep fraud out of congress, that just costs too much money.  

The VA’s idea of implementing fraud prevention from the inside is the “look the other way program”.

Posted in All about Veterans, Guest authors, vA news | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

FACEBOOK VIGNETTES

Posted on June 26, 2012 by asknod

I love finding these gems and where else can you find a million?

Posted in Humor | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

WHAT’S IN A NAME?

Posted on June 25, 2012 by asknod

The military has finally decided that PTSD is misnamed. They think labeling it a disorder might drive away potential sufferers who are turned off by the term “disorder”. The newest idea seems to be PTSI as in “injury”. Well, there you go pilgrim. That’ll fix it. Trust those brain doctors to figure out what’s wrong and and get the process into counseling. What was wrong with battle fatigue or some of the other terms used in wars past? More importantly, who’s the Gomer who came up with  PTSD?

Now, how about some politically incorrect choices from the Peanut Gallery. I think I should be allowed to contribute. I’m unarguably one who escaped the magic suit all these years. My choices are

Bent Brain Syndrome– abbreviated as BBS.

Latent Stress Disease–”                       ” LSD

Loony Tunes Syndrome–”                   ” LTS

Stryker Traumatic Disease–”               ” STD

Brainf**ked (formerly used in Vietnam)

OEFD/OIFD-Operation Enduring Freedom Disease etc.

Afghanisbrain

OAFS– Operation Afghanistan Freedom Syndrome

IFTDS–Pronounced If-tids(I’m fixin’ to die syndrome) with apologies to Country Joe McDonald

Surely some of you readers have a contribution to this conversation worthy of being immortalized? Ideally, they should be pronounceable as in a trendy acronym. Feel free to throw your hat in the ring.

Posted in PTSD, vA news | Tagged , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

BVA–WEIGHT WATCHERS

Posted on June 25, 2012 by asknod

FROM THE CITY

OF RUST VARO

My home town vARO is a piece of work. I am 4/15 on claims there and 2/7 on appeals via D.C. Obviously I think my claims have merit or I wouldn’t bother pursuing them. Regardless of which vARO one uses, the M 21 adjudications manual predetermines the outcome. If A is greater than B and C is a multiple of 1 or indivisible by 2, then you’re screwed. When you file for increases, you evidence must support your contentions. Our Vet Bennie here is truth-challenged in this vignette. He probably is deserving for any number of reasons, but starts investigating what he’ll need to win rather late in the process.

Some have written me privately over the years asking what it will take to get to the next higher rating. I don’t think that’s cheating or gaming the system. Its common knowledge if you know where to look. Bennie didn’t or he might have padded the bill a little better or kept a diary that confirmed his contentions. What he ran afoul of ultimately was the weight codicil hidden in  38 CFR § 4.112. Weight determination has it’s own code and isn’t mentioned in DC 7354 other than to say minor versus major. It was up to Bennie to find that one and it appears he didn’t. Oddly, in the decision, you will see written that it is included in DC 7354, Note #2. It isn’t.

The Court has confirmed that you do not need a note from from your doctor prescribing bed rest for hep claims.  You are considered intelligent enough to observe this on your own. That phraseology is in the one on lower back ailments DCs specifically but not in the 7354 Diagnostic Code. This is a more recent interpretation by the Court. I went to look for it just now but as addled as my brain is, I didn’t find it. The decision held that a note from the doctor stating your symptoms of near-constant debilitating symptoms requiring bed rest must accompany the lower back diagnosis to support the rating (DC 5243– Note #1) see below:

Note (1): For purposes of evaluations under diagnostic code 5243, an incapacitating episode is a period of acute signs and symptoms due to intervertebral disc syndrome that requires bed rest prescribed by a physician and treatment by a physician.

DC 7354, on the other hand, says:

Note (2): For purposes of evaluating conditions under diagnostic code 7354, “incapacitating episode” means a period of acute signs and symptoms severe enough to require bed rest and treatment by a physician.

Tricky little devils aren’t they? I wager it won’t be long before we look that up and notice a discreet, unannounced change to the 5243 language.

Looking at Bennie’s decision, we see many things. First, let’s look at what he’s attempting. He is currently rated at 40% and is trying to scale Mt. Sixty. It’s an arduous climb:

40% says

daily fatigue, malaise, and anorexia, with minor weight loss and hepatomegaly, or; incapacitating episodes (with symptoms such as fatigue, malaise, nausea, vomiting, anorexia, arthralgia, and right upper quadrant pain) having a total duration of at least four weeks, but less than six weeks, during the past 12-month period warrants a 40 percent rating.

60% demands:

A 60 percent evaluation is indicative of daily fatigue, malaise, and anorexia, with substantial weight loss (or other indication of malnutrition), and hepatomegaly, or; incapacitating episodes (with symptoms such as fatigue, malaise, nausea, vomiting, anorexia, arthralgia, and right upper quadrant pain) having a total duration of at least six weeks during the past 12- month period, but not occurring constantly.

I highlighted the word “or” for a good reason. There are two sets of criteria. Either you qualify under one set or you rely on the subsequent assessment. In both cases, there is the clear requirement for a set number of days. Four weeks can be construed loosely to be 28-31 days. Six weeks will be viewed as 42-45 days.

Bennie said (under oath):

He related incapacitating episodes as often as three times per month, lasting for one day. Over the last year, he had 36 incidents of incapacitation for a total of 36 days. 

Bummer, Bennie. You stepped on your necktie. But that isn’t all…

In this regard, although there is a showing of weight loss, the more probative evidence is against a finding of substantial weight loss. Note (2) under Diagnostic Code 7354 defines “substantial weight loss” as a loss of greater than 20 percent of the individual’s baseline weight, sustained for three months or longer. The appellant weighed 125 lbs during his pre-induction examination in December 1967. He weighed 140 lbs at his May 1969 separation examination.

This is untrue. Note 2 says nothing of the sort. Its stated in § 4.112 as I mentioned above.

§ 4.112 Weight loss.

For purposes of evaluating conditions in § 4.114, the term “substantial weight loss” means a loss of greater than 20 percent of the individual’s baseline weight, sustained for three months or longer; and the term “minor weight loss” means a weight loss of 10 to 20 percent of the individual’s baseline weight, sustained for three months or longer. The term “inability to gain weight” means that there has been substantial weight loss with inability to regain it despite appropriate therapy. “Baseline weight” means the average weight for the two-year-period preceding onset of the disease.

Regardless of where it is, you can see they are dredging up every one of Bennie’s weight measurement they can find to support their denial.

A weight of 145 lbs was recorded in August 1985.

 He weighed 158 lbs in October 1999.

The appellant weighed 151 lbs in January 2004 and 148.8 lbs in May 2004.

In an August 2005 examination, it was noted that he was diagnosed with Hepatitis C in 1968 and that there was a weight change from 175 lbs to 145 lbs in a 12 month duration. He weighed 150 lbs at that time.

 A weight of 159 was recorded in April 2008

 In the August 2009 examination conducted by Dr. B, it noted that the appellant’s weight was down from 155 lbs to 150.5 lbs with boots.

He weighed 147 lbs during the August 2009 VA examination. During that examination, he reported that he had lost 30 lbs over the past two years. 

Bennie, what were you thinking? You’re a guy!. You don’t have to lie about your weight. What you do have to be careful of is not to give the bozos ammunition to deny.

The Board has considered the appellant’s reports of weight loss. However, we find him to be an inaccurate historian and not credible. In this regard, we note that in the August 2009 VA compensation and pension examination, a 30 lb weight loss over a two year period was reported. However, when examined by Dr. B later that month, he did not report such weight loss but rather a 5 lbs weight loss. As such, we find that the appellant has been an inconsistent historian when reporting his weight loss. 

Clearly, the appellant is competent to weigh himself and report his weight…  However, we find it telling that when he reported his weight to Dr. B he reported a 5 lb weight loss rather than the 30 lbs weight loss that was reported to the VA examiner earlier that month. We find it wholly incredible that he would have not reported an accurate weight loss to his treating physician. Such histories reported by the appellant for treatment purposes are of more probative value than the more recent assertions and histories given for VA disability compensation purposes.

VLJ H. N. Schwartz pounds the final nail into the coffin on the less than 6 weeks of incapacitation but still gets it wrong on requiring that he bring a note from Dr. Dude saying he’s on bed rest.

Furthermore, we note that while the appellant has reported having incapacitating episodes, his episodes fall short of the duration requirement and there is no indication that they require bed rest and treatment by a physician. In the August 2010 examination, the appellant related having had 36 incidents of incapacitation for a total of 36 days within the year. To meet the criteria for a higher rating six weeks of incapacitating episodes which require bed rest and treatment by a physician must be shown. At most, the record shows that the appellant has related having five weeks of incapacitating episodes within a 12 month period which is short of the six week requirement. More importantly, there is no showing that these episodes require bedrest and treatment by a physician. As such, the above does not meet the criteria set forth for a higher evaluation.

Bennie will, if he’s intelligent, go lick his wounds and fight another day. There’s no money in taking this up to the Big House. If DAV is true to form, they’ll counsel him to go home anyway. It’s too bad the service officer didn’t peruse the fine points of § 4.112 and the specific requirements of DC 7354 on 60%. Since he testified that he only had 36 bad hair days, he’s doomed. The SO should have dialed in on that one even if he overlooked the weight loss discrepancy.

Profit from this. Analyze your claim from the standpoint of the rater who is looking for the smoking gun to deny you. He didn’t have to look far here and chances are the denial language on the RO SOC was identical. Absent any clarifying testimony to the contrary, the bVA decision was a given. And if you use a VSO? Well, make sure they’re conversant in 38CFRspeak. Bennie’s certainly wasn’t. As an aside which has no relation to this, many Vets are unaware that Elton John wrote a really cool song called Bennie and the Vets. I’m not sure if this was the Bennie he was referring to though. There’s a lot of Vets named Bennie out there.

Posted in BvA HCV decisions, Veterans Law | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

THE UNDERWEAR GNOMES

Posted on June 24, 2012 by asknod

After a suitable amount of time to accumulate a body of emails that discussed their impressions of the brouhaha at the House hearing last Tuesday, I can say that it is apparent there is general consensus among Veterans at this site that all is not well in Hickeyville despite vA’s storied press releases to the contrary. This is not a personal attack on the Undersecretary, per se, but what she represents, says and who she represents.

Representative Bob Filner (D-CA.) is neither a Veteran nor a warhawk. Quite the contrary. He’s a liberal, level-headed fellow who believes the government should put its vA money where its mouth is. I applaud his candid assesment however pointed. I agree with one poster that he’d make a fine VASEC. After untold years of promising to fix a decidedly broken system, after several VASECs who promised they were “on it” and after hiring 12,000 new employees and boosting their budget from $95 Billion to $126 Billion, the problem has now metastasized into an even larger backlog that promises to delay Veterans’ claims for years. vA’s take on this (a la Honorable, Brig. General (ret.), Undersecretary for Veterans Benefits Allison A Hickey) was a decidedly rosier prognosis than what we have been reading about.

Ms. (Mrs.?) Hickey insists the problem is not of the vA’s making. vA apparently has been hit with, depending on what you believe, a) the perfect storm of claims; b) two completely unforeseen wars with their attendant casualties; c) an uncompromising Congress who heaped up 200,000 more Agent Orange claims on an already overburdened system and d) new initiatives that require retraining and revamping of vA adjudication procedures-including new gazillion-page DBQs for simplicity and speed.

In her labored testimony, continually interrupted by Rep. Filner, she appeared tempted to climb up on the table and demonstrate her prowess at moonwalking while giving her answers. Steadfastly clinging to the 125 days/2015 mantra which has become her trademark, she admirably resisted letting the dark side take over and say what was poised on her lips. You can generally see that wrinkle in the corner of woman’s mouth that presages a snarl. I commend her for her aplomb in the face of adversity attained from years in the military.

It is apparent that the culture of denial, both of our claims and their refusal to accept responsibility for this state of affairs, is getting us nowhere. Promising that success is just over the hill, around the next bend in the road or within sight is getting redundant. Much like the young man who cried wolf again and again, so too has Ms. Hickey exhausted her vast storehouse of excuses. This is sad on the one hand as it diminishes her credibility any time she opens her mouth and opines on matters vA.. Its sad from a personal perspective in that she has taken her thirty pieces of silver from VASEC and been his shill for the vA. Now, with egg on her face and 500-day claims becoming the norm, they send her up to Capitol Hill and expect her to assuage Filner and his merry krewe. Not. Some of those congressmen might have been born at night but their memory is longer than the proverbial elephant’s. They said as much and wanted new answers. They got none. I was hoping Allison would take Bob up on his bet that if she came back in a year to testify on this, that vA would still be up Paddle Creek with no water under the keel.

Most of the emails I received on this concluded that Ms. Hickey needs a new excuse book. She’s using the 2009 version which contains phrases which are no longer operable. Let’s look at some of the “new” repair orders she touted. STAR teams, vAOIG reports and two-year studies are good. Stakeholder input with positive, proven improvements designed to streamline the system-check.. Co-partnerships with VSOs to identify problem areas and facilitate Kumbaya-okay, I’ll buy. Polysyllabic word designed to smother and coat inefficiency or inertia and a professed desire to cope with the inability to change with the mission requirements-Whoa. Back the boat back up to the dock, Gilligan.

Do any of you remember an episode of the animated TV show called South Park? I refer to the one where two of the boys were theorizing on the underwear gnomes. Underwear was disappearing and there was no explanation for it. A side trip to the underwear gnomes’ warehouse revealed the complexity of the enterprise.  The three-step process was simple. On a grossly simplified flow chart it was no more than:

1) Steal underwear

2) ?

3) Get rich and take cash to bank.

Much like the underwear gnomes, UnderHickey advocates that we :

1) Sit tight and allow the new, paperless reforms to work their way through the system

2) ?

3) Enjoy the new 125-day, 98% accurate claims by 2015

The big problem the Honorable Mr. Filner pointed out was that there are only about ten pilot paperless VARO programs in place. Ruh oh, Rorge.

One thing we here at Asknod have been raising a ruckus about was the new batch of DBQs. Disability Benefits Questionnaires were supposed to be the panacea for speedy, accurate claims resolution. They were going to give wings to a broken system. Veterans could take these to their private physicians (or VHA PCPs) and have them filled out to take some of the evidentiary burden off the overworked vBA and the vAROs. One important consideration- the nexus-was completely ignored. The sine qua none of your claim-the most bedrock anchor to success-was glaringly absent. After eighteen years of insistence that Veterans supply three components (disease in service, current disease and nexus) following Caluza, suddenly our protectors provide us with a form that pointedly omits what we need to win. vA must think we’re mushrooms. Absent this nexus, vA can (and will) step into the void and provide their own for us. They do this anyway when we arrive without one, but this just formalizes the unfair practice. Mr. Richard Dumancas (from AMLEG) noted this discrepancy for the first time to the committee. We noted it about 30 seconds after the new website for the forms showed up. When cornered, Ms. Hickey allowed as that was an unfortunate side effect of an effort to get the document out there promptly to speed up adjudications. That’s akin to rolling out a new F-35 fighter with no engine and saying that you’re aware of it and working to improve it but that the important thing was to get the aircraft out of the hanger for all to see. Whether it flies or not is immaterial. This proves you’re hard at work and recognize the need for a new approach. It also proves you have no grasp of what you’re doing, too. A new concept complete with obvious flaws is not something your roll out half-baked. What of this talk of Stakeholder input? What, pray tell is a stakeholder? If VFW and its ilk are the stakeholders in question, why is it that they are now on record, in Washington, D.C. at least,  wondering why the DBQs are lacking a dialogue box for the nexus?  Gee. The next question to me is how come it took months for the VSOs to see this.

In summary, its obvious no one over at 810 Vermont Ave. NW is on the same page with the VSOs and vice versa. So much for Stakeholders. What’s more, Mr. Filner pointed out the obvious that we have been harping on for years. If there is no collusion between the vA and the 46 major VSOs, why does everyone smell like they’re wearing the same perfume/cologne and sharing quarters cheek and jowl with each other? Why is Hickey’s lipstick on  the VSOs’ collar? So many questions and so few cogent answers. If you really wanted to impress the committee with you independence and demonstrate that a wall exists between you and the vA, why is it that all the VSO arguments seemed to mirror Hickey’s chapter and verse?

My dad once said there were no conspiracies in America. What there were, though, were a shit ton of unexplained coincidences. I’d advance that one space on the Monopoly Board and say contrived coincidences or remarkable aberrations of what one might expect after all the effort and alphabet commissions enacted to solve this conundrum.

Amazing, isn’t it? Hand a claim to Allstate and presto- 3 weeks to a conclusion and check mailed out. Hand the same thing to a vARO and be mildly surprised if you see a  correct resolution in 16 months with the codicil that “the check’s in the mail”. I certainly do not fault vA employees. As one wrote us, when the raters can finally see the light at the end of the tunnel, their hierarchy adds two more miles to it. Their hands are tied and more than half of them are Veterans just like you and me. The fact is they’re down in Charleston, S.C pitching a collective bitch in front of their VARO this weekend.

We have spoken as well of producing a correct decision. The vA poohbahs who dictate the process are no longer consumed (if they ever were) in getting it right. Two things impede this. First is most obvious. The culture, as long as I’ve been dealing with them , is pure denial that eventually works its way back to a grant after a long process that inevitably entails an appeal or two. Second, in the inevitable rush to churn out decisions in volume, error is endemic and immaterial. The number of claims completed is a measure of production output. If every car coming off the line in Detroit was missing a steering wheel, they’d have to send them back to the station where it was omitted and install it. The auto manufacturer wouldn’t then count it rolling off a second time as another new car. It’s quite simply a “reaccomplished ” car and does not swell the ranks of automobiles headed out to dealerships for sale. vA, in their own inimitable way, would consider this a whole new claim and chalk it up as a production figure. Every remanded appeal is given the same treatment, too. Only a government entity can get away with this sleight of hand. Mr. Filner does not share their enthusiasm or interpretation. Apparently, neither do the majority of you.

It is my not so considered opinion that Ms. Hickey lie low for several months and get a designated hitter out there for press and committee appearances. With her credibility in tatters, she needs a makeover. I say go back to the red hair. That blonde thing just provokes endless jokes which she can ill afford at this juncture. It’s just a polite suggestion. I’m not a sexist pig in spite of what many may be thinking.

Posted in VA BACKLOG, vA news | Tagged , , , , , | 2 Comments

SLEEPLESS IN PUEBLO

Posted on June 23, 2012 by asknod

Member Randy sent me this today and it burns me up for any number of reasons. We live in the greatest country on the planet and we cannot provide for our own. We ship boatloads of money overseas to Muslim countries like Egypt and Pakistan who are noticeably hostile to our endeavours. Let’s set that aside for a moment and dig deeper.

The article mentions “affordable ” housing for Vets but misses the mark. Is that a description for marginal housing-a toilet and a hot plate? Affordable to me implies the Veteran will be paying for it out of his or her pocket. The article mentions that the Pueblo Housing Authority reclaimed these boarded up buildings and fashioned 16 units specifically for homeless Vets. This begs many questions. Did they do a census of homeless Vets and arrive at the magic figure of sixteen individuals county-wide who would benefit from this largesse? What happens if the numbers are far higher? Do they have provisions for a lottery in place in the event the numbers of Vets exceeds the available units? Is the prognostication of eventual usage predicated on single occupancy or are they planning on packing them in dormitory-style six deep to a unit? While I admire the munificence of what they are doing in Pueblo, Colorado, I question the implementation.

As most of us know, these things metastasize over time. Eventually the administrators’ paychecks overwhelm the fund set aside for this purpose. One homeless person ends up being supervised by three or four $80,000+ per year salaried “homelessness facilitators”. I see many similarities with the vA’s system. They begin by arriving at some magic number of souls who need saving. Next, they formulate a snappy sounding acronym to “brand” it and launch it to great fanfare. How about STARME? Special Team to Assess Recent Military Employees. Instead of hiring more raters to reduce the backlog, they hire Senator Snakebite’s son fresh out of college with a degree in Humanomics and give him a desk at the Central Office. Naturally, he has enormous debts from all his Pell grants so he must be remunerated at “the going rate” of $80+K/year or more. He’ll need assistants, office space and a large budget to flit from city to city to ascertain the depth and breadth of the problem first hand. By the time they get around to apportioning monies out for the Vet who is home-challenged, there is little or none left that can be tapped. More’s the pity. They tried.

Remember Star Wars V when Yoda admonished young Skywalker the padewan after his failure to raise his X-wing out of the swamp? “To try implies defeat. Do. Or do not.” A very simple concept and one the vA is sadly unable to fathom. Congressman Filner aptly stated this to the Hon. Allison Hickey when he defined the definition of insanity as “someone who tries the same thing over and over in hopes of seeing a different outcome.” I think that sums it up.

Oddly the article mentions neither the contributions of our veterans Administration nor the those of the Colorado Department of Veterans Affairs (assuming there is one). After parsing Posada Inc. all over the internet, I found a reference to an outfit that specializes in Bed and Breakfasts in Vermont! I assume it’s the same one that Pueblo’s finest partnered with. How fitting. Who better than a trendy Bed and Breakfast consulting firm with twenty employees to design and supervise the conversion of 16 units into affordable housing for those who shall have borne the battle? Well, let’s see. Did anyone check to find a Veteran-owned construction company who might be interested? Volunteers? Funding from the very Administration tasked with this responsibility?

Once again, we see the Good Ol’ Boy Network hard at work making money for the 1% and paying lip service to the 99%. However in this case its the grand poohbahs of Pueblo who go to Vermont to find a cure for Veteran homelessness in their own front yard. I’m sure the Pueblo folks meant well and I am heartened that some effort was expended towards this worthy goal. I am also reminded of the treatment I and my brothers received after coming home after the war. I ended up on food stamps and Medicaid  in the winter of 1973 after a hepatitis relapse. My story isn’t one of desperation akin to the travails of the Afghan/Iraqi Vets today. They will have it far, far worse than us. Their numbers are swelling daily like the vA backlog and guess who doesn’t have a STARME plan formulated or even a clue of the brewing storm? Remember-they are still myopically engrossed in the present homelessness imbroglio and fail to acknowledge this new threat building. Woe is vA. You can never rest on your laurels in this business.

P.S. Mark my words. When funding for this initiative dries up, Pueblo’s Veterans will be homeless again. This is often the case. A grand gesture is made with no supportive follow through.

Posted in All about Veterans, HOMELESS VETERANS | Tagged , , , , , | 5 Comments

LAST REQUESTS

Posted on June 22, 2012 by asknod

Member Bob is not getting much work done today but he is emailing an incredibly large number of good jokes out.

The Lone Ranger’s Last Request

The Lone Ranger was ambushed and captured

by a hostile Indian War Party.

The Indian Chief proclaimed,

“So, YOU are the great Lone Ranger”…

“In honour of the Buffalo Hunt,

YOU will be sacrificed in three days.”

“Before we kill you, I grant you three requests”

“What is your FIRST request?’

The Lone Ranger said,

“I’d like to speak to my horse.”

The Chief nodded and Silver was brought

before the Lone Ranger who whispered in

Silver’s ear, and the horse galloped away.

Later that evening, Silver returned with

a beautiful blonde woman on his back.

As the Indian Chief watched,

the blonde entered the Lone Ranger’s tent

and spent the night.

(Picture redacted for obvious reasons)

The next morning the Indian Chief admitted

that he was impressed.

“You have a very fine and loyal horse,”

but we will still kill you in two days.”

“What is your SECOND request?”

The Lone Ranger again asked to speak

to his horse.

Silver came to him,

and he again whispered in the horse’s ear.

As before, Silver took off and disappeared

over the horizon.

Later that evening, to the Chief’s surprise,

Silver again returned,

this time with a voluptuous brunette,

even more attractive than the blonde.

(this picture redacted for same rationale)

She entered the Lone Ranger’s tent

and spent the night.

The following morning the Indian Chief

said:

“You are indeed a man of many talents,”

“But we will still kill you tomorrow.”

“What is your LAST request?”

The Lone Ranger responded,

“I’d like to speak to my horse – alone this time.”

The Chief was curious, but he agreed,

and Silver was brought to

the Lone Ranger’s tent.

Once they were alone,

the Lone Ranger grabbed Silver by both ears,

looked him square in the eye and said,

Listen Very Carefully! FOR…THE…LAST…TIME…

“BRING POSSE!”

Posted in Humor | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

AIR CAV FOREVER

Posted on June 22, 2012 by asknod

A SHORT DISSERTATION

ON THE THEORY OF FLIGHT

Back in the early 70s when I took my summer vacations in sunny Southeast Asia, we were constantly taken aback by fanatics of rotary wing aircraft. Being Air Force and sane, we couldn’t comprehend how anyone would trust their life to something that defied the laws of common sense. If it didn’t require parachutes, it had no business being in the air.

There are two schools of thought on flight. The dominant, sane one was founded on the Wright Brothers’ concept. The other, flat earth society concept was dreamed up by several and popularized by Igor Sikorsky. Most understand the theory of flight(normal) but are unsure of the other. Simply put, it’s referred to as rotary wing. Yes, Virginia. They took the wing and attached an engine to it. Silly, huh? Sillier still, they decided to trust their lives to it. That’s the Army for you.

After Col. George Custer’s (brevet Maj. Gen.) debacle with the Sioux up in Montana, the Army started investigating new ways to get the cavalry into battle (and out) more rapidly. Voilà! The chopper concept was born. The Army claimed exclusive rights to own and operate this abortion and  got no argument from higher ups. The Air Force, for the most part, had no desire to own and operate rotary wing aircraft and politely acquiesced when given the chance. This was a valuable consideration and gave us more leverage to bargain with them on Forward Air Control later on down the road. Besides, who needs to land in the middle of nowhere? It’s uncivilized. They rarely serve Tanqueray, the tonic water is flat and ice is scarce.  Add in the deficit that good-looking women don’t tend to congregate in these locales and the reason for being there gets murky. Besides, Army types tend to cheat on the tonic water and grind up their quinine pills as a substitute. This may cut down on malaria but is simply not done in civilized circles-even in war.

Most importantly, what everyone in the Army seems to ignore is the obvious aerodynamic deficiency associated with a rotary wing concept. I speak, of course, of the proclivity of a chopper to either spiral down or drop precipitously when power is no longer transferred to the wing overhead. This phenomenon is known to occur when the power plant or its hydraulics ingest pieces of metal-perchance small arms fire. Fixed wing aircraft, when faced with this predicament, tend to glide when power is interrupted. This permits the introduction of parachutes to the formula, an orderly egress and a safe descent back to earth.

Army types have developed all manner of techniques to counter this problem. The most frequent is the auto-rotation ploy. Disengaging the drive for a suitable time until altitude has been lost, they engage the rotor just before impact and arrest the free fall of the aircraft. This has also been describes as a controlled accident. Some actually walk away from it unscathed. Most choppers don’t fare well and the extraordinary number of bent skids on Hueys were testimony to the fact that this technique was dicey. Army types think you can buy anything but gravity is not on that list. Army types are also loathe to point out that this is not always feasible when the tail rotor has been shot away. Their desire to own and operate Edsels is legend. Perhaps rotary wing is just an extension of that mental defect.

Nevertheless, there are a select group of groundpounders cum wannabe airmen who will always choose to ride into battle astride a workhorse. With the demise of the traditional cavalry and the advent of Air Cavalry, they got their wish. Once bitten, there was and is no cure.

To emphasize my point, witness this aberation on the ceiling of what is undoubtedly the home of a former 173rd Airborne member…

We in the Air Force were fond of our Army brethren back in those days and undoubtedly still are. They were adept at capturing enemy airpatches and allowing us an opportunity to bring in the finer things of life like fine Scotch and Cuban cigars to barter with them after the hostilities were concluded. Hell, that’s what comrades in arms do for one another.

I can’t wait to see where the next step in rotary wing (the Osprey) will lead us but if gravity is a portent, their days are numbered too. The Osprey is a classic example of trying to cross an Edsel with a Pinto and put recalled ATV retreads on it. Why not a venerable, proven workhorse like the old PC-6 Porter VSTOL?  They’re virtually indestructible unless you stall out at 300 feet. Even then, you can still walk away from it. I’m living proof.

What isn’t mentioned is that if Jack hadn’t had a hangover and had been watching his airspeed, said tree would not have reached out and hit him. From my perspective and that altimeter in my stomach called the sinking sensation, it was my considered opinion that the airframe contacted the tree moments before it’s inexorable descent into the forest (and the rest of the trees adjacent to it). But that is just conjecture as I didn’t have a rating.

Giving credit where credit is due, member Bob emailed the ceiling artwork to me. Being one of those lovers of all things rotary wing , I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s on the ceiling of his man cave. He probably has a lifetime supply of quinine pills and an Edsel, too.

Posted in Food for the soul, Humor | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

HOUSE VA D&P SHOW

Posted on June 21, 2012 by asknod

Here’s the latest on the vA’s attempt to explain their myriad problems in vAspeak. I admire retired Brig. Gen. Hickey’s vain attempts to convince all that an elephant can indeed disappear up it’s own ass.

P.S. One thing I took away from this is that blondes are living proof that Hydrogen  Peroxide causes brain damage. 98 metrics for bonus awards indeed. Perhaps there should be bonuses for exceptionally disabled Vets?

P.P.S. OMG! 23 million Vets? Our numbers shrank. The census said it was 26 million. If they can’t find 3 million Vets, does this mean they shredded them? Misplaced them? Maybe they’re homeless and don’t count them.

P.P.P.S. They finally realized there’s a problem with DBQs (no place for the nexus). Princess Allison says she put defective DBQs out there that way just to get things rolling. Now we have to reprint the damn things as soon as vA “sees” the problem and fixes them. “We’re working on it” solved everything here. At least the VFW reads this website and noticed the nexus area was absent.

Posted in VA BACKLOG | Tagged , , , , | 12 Comments