Under current Social Security Administration rules, SSDI claimants that do not meet a listed impairment are evaluated by how their age, education and work experience affect the claimant’s ability to adjust to other work. Disability decisions are are based on “Grid Rules” that treat age as a key vocational factor. Older applicants (typically age 50 and up) receive more favorable consideration because SSA assumes that they have more difficulty making an occupational adjustment. For example, a 55 year old construction worker who only has worked a medium to heavy exertion job is not currently required to retrain for sedentary clerical work.
Recent reporting suggests that the current administration is considering a rule change that would eliminate age as a vocational factor or alternatively, move the beginning age threshold from 50 up to around 60. As a result, many older applicants will no longer qualify for SSDI benefits on the presumption that they are employable for some form of sedentary work, regardless of whether they can actually secure such employment.
The proposed change also would affect Medicare coverage because SSDI entitlement automatically triggers eligibility for Medicare after a 24-month waiting period. If fewer older claimants with severe medical impairments qualify for SSDI, a similar percentage of those individuals may have to forego health insurance coverage or take early retirement benefits to offset medical expenses, further depleting funds available for support in their actual retirement years.
While the grid rules admittedly were crafted during a different economy, the wholesale elimination of age as a factor in disability assessment disregards the practical impact of age as a vocational factor. A job that exists “on paper” does not always correlate to realistic job opportunities. Older workers with severe medical conditions may not have the time or opportunity to retrain for new occupations if their skills do not easily transfer to sedentary work. Moreover, older workers may struggle to obtain alternative positions if their medical conditions require additional disability accommodations or if they face age bias when considered against younger applicants.
In short, removing age as a consideration in SSDI determinations would not be a narrow technical adjustment or update of the system; it would be a substantive policy shift with direct implications for the scope of SSDI coverage, Medicare for disabled workers, and the redistribution responsibility of health-care expenses.
D. Scott Gordon, Virginia Disability Attorney
https://dsgordonlaw.com/social-security-disability/social-security-disability.html