bozobigtop

Treat the form like any other federal form in which if you lie and get caught it's a fine or jail or both. problem solved!

JohnBurke

When someone has a payout for a 90% disability, and they're not really 90% disabled...and yet go on to claim full health and draw a thick, juicy salary only possible as a healthy, whole aviator, and the taxpayer picks up the tab, there is a problem. A big, big problem.

I've worked for quite a few.

Of course, there's a great deal of what the military does, which is handled by contractors who will never see disability or for that matter, a flag on their coffins...

Oh hell yes, he should. And he probably will.

And if he decides to pursue an airline career, no doubt he'll be honest about it, too.

Most here aren't old enough to remember Dana Bowman, who lost his legs in a parachute mishap with the Golden Knights, and who kept jumping and remained in the service, and many have never heard of a personal hero, Douglas Bader.

Then again, with many of these, ask them if they're handicapped, and they'll tell you "no."

I have no issues with someone who is 90% disabled being paid for being 90% disabled, especially as they've lost it in service to their uniform, country, and flag. What I have a massive issue with is the schmuck who takes pay for 90% disability when he's not really disabled, and demonstrates it by doing a job that a 90% truly disabled person couldn't do.

I sat next to a young man, a staff sergeant, on a flight one night over Basrah, and as I was preparing to do a rapid descent, asked if he had any sinus or ear issues. He told me he had just one ear drum. I enquired as to why; it was an RPG in Baghdad, he said. I told him we'd save the rapid descent for another time. No problem sir, he said, "If the United States Army wants me to have another ear drum, they'll give me one."

I appreciated the kid's candor. It doesn't really work that way, of course, and while his guns-ho attitude is commendable, he had what's the most common disability in the military; hearing loss. With one ear drum blown out, significant hearing loss that would be with him for life. I have no issues with him receiving a diagnosis and a determination of disability, or the pay. I hope he gets it, and whatever he gets won't make up for the loss he'll live with the rest of his life. The same for someone who is truly 90% disabled.

That's not at all the same as what we're discussing, and for the person who is 90% disabled, but has no problem holding a free and clear medical and operating as if no disability exists, I ask, "which is it?"

Shall we have the cake and eat it too, or there a line in the sand there, somewhere?

Profane Kahuna

You appear to be confused as to the VA disability rating system. Probably because it is confusing to say the least.

A veteran whose wounds and injuries receive a 100% disability rating is not required to be a paraplegic and sit at home in their wheelchair collecting disability checks. That is a separate category called 100% Individual Unemployability (IU).

So back to your complaint, a person can leave the military and hold a job AND still receive compensation from the VA.

Their percentage is just a cumulative representation of all the wounds and injuries they received. For those with higher numbers it is usually a lot of little things that add up to the high number.

rickair7777

Pretty high up on your horse today. There's always the 1% who game the system, in any demographic.

You're confusing disability compensation with actual disability, they are NOT the same thing in this context.

VA disability ratings are more commonly for pain, suffering, and inconvenience than day-to-day functional disability. Maybe they called it "disability" to make it politically palatable to fund.

I have a small rating. I was seriously injured in the line of duty once (actual mission training, not playing hoops at lunch), spent six months in a cast, another six with limited daily mobility, another year before I could run, jump and swim (had to work pretty hard for that), ultimately re-qualified at my job. I still do daily stretches and regular strength training to address that injury and drop some coin on motrin and supplements. Doesn't cause me any limitations, as long as I make the effort but I do have to make an effort. Oh and if I do more than a couple pressure cycles in a day, it hurts... injured tissue aggravated by scuba diving back in the day. So I prefer one leg days.

Handicap plates OTH, IMO should be reserved for folks who really can't walk more than 20 feet under their own power.

Oh and contractors get PAID to be contractors. I have mixed feelings about the whole contracting thing (for reasons unrelated to their care and feeding), but high-end operators can make major airline CA pay or more doing that gig. And none of them are clueless 19 year old conscripts either.

Andy

Well, your buddies may be in deep kimchee if they get caught.

I didn't file for any disabilities when I retired but my wife is 80% disabled. She's considered going to 100% - she has some pretty heavy issues but she wouldn't be able to work full time with 100% disability.

You're saying 100% disabled's OK to work full time. My wife's saying it's not. On to the web and this website: https://www.veteranslaw.com/faq/

Quote:
Can a veteran work while receiving VA disability?
A veteran generally can still work when receiving VA disability. However, typically in order to receive individual unemployability or a 100 percent schedule rating for certain disabilities, a veteran cannot work full time or make over a certain amount of money per year (generally anything above the poverty line). This depends on each individual case and if you have questions about a claim for unemployability, or if you are not able to work due to a disability incurred in service.



So it may be possible to work full time with 100% disability, but it's definitely NOT a blanket statement.

Your friends may want to consider seeking legal advice on this issue, as it's now easy for the FAA to cross reference disability payments. They are also getting access to VA medical records since they were able to file charges against the airmen at the beginning of this thread.

Andy

Nothing personal, but your post glosses over what it takes to get a 100% disability rating. It's not just handed out.

Excargodog

Typically a 0% disability is a placeholder for something expected to deteriorate in the future. An example would be a serious knee joint injury. Right now the guy/gal has good strength and full range of motion, but them eventually getting degenerative arthritis is a virtual certainty and at some time in the future maybe even a knee joint replacement. A 0% establishes the service-connectedness of the condition, particularly important to those who separate before retirement and don't have access to Tricare or Uniformed Services care.

rickair7777

Yes, but again the questions all start with "have you ever...".

So if it was bad enough to get a residual, the original injury probably should have been disclosed.

Billy Baroo

It appears to me that none of the questions in block 18 of the 8500-8 pertain to a joint injury, as well as many other conditions that could drive a disability rating. An injury that is healed should not drive one to check "Yes" for box "x." which lists the condition as "Other illness, disability, or surgery." Nothing in any of the boxes asks about tinnitus or hearing loss, so there is a wide range of conditions that would garner a disability rating from the VA that are not even questions on the FAA form.

rickair7777

I think you could make a good case about joint issues....

All of the questions start with: HAVE YOU EVER IN YOUR LIFE BEEN DIAGNOSED WITH, HAD, OR DO YOU PRESENTLY HAVE ANY OF THE FOLLOWING?

So 18(u) and/or (x) would get you if surgery or hospitalization was required, but doesn't look like it would apply otherwise. Reasonable, as long as you don't fly until the swelling in your knee goes down.

But 18(y) will get you for ANY disability benefit, regardless of whether the condition is covered by any other questions. I suspect that means payments for a rating greater than 0%.

Also keep in mind, the standard for prosecution is "beyond reasonable doubt", and DA's and US Attorney's don't like to lose so they are not going to trial with anything that's not pretty open and shut. So grey areas help you there. But for the FAA the standards are much lower, they can pretty much revoke your tickets just for suspicion of falsification and then you can try to get them back by appealing all the way up to a real US federal court (all the FAA/NTSB steps in the process typically rubber-stamp whatever the FAA did originally). The kindler, gentler FAA seems to be very real so far, but it does not apply at all to fraud/falsification.