october twenty eighth two thousand and eight and permit total disability benefits and such decisions are against that is correct that is correct and so that's my first argument and i certainly can see that it is a question of that when the commission makes that decision they must comply with the law and i was clear that in order to work temporary told this building benefits are not awarded all once a claim its condition has stabilized and we speak the stability generally speak t by the commission's baby misstated it and said it was maintenance benefits i think that and then my speaks to a medical condition and that is something that is generally determined by a physician and we're talking about her injury and her stability and i don't think that and i carry as a temporary so this ability but it's not can we argue it's maybe it's due during that period of time i guess if there is a question as to whether or not those benefits could be qualified as maintenance benefits and you know what she doing in villages but on a claim it i don't want to show a diligent but unsuccessful job search or to demonstrate because of her age training education experience skills coupled with her medical treatment that no stable market exists so the first problem we agree first period that i spoke about she looked at no context and in her area of expertise health care except for one i mean she went to the impact and i'm sorry that the army she went to the cosco i think she into the wal mart she didn't use any of her skills or her expertise in making a job surgeon and i would submit to you it's more than just calling you know calling up every employer writing it down on a piece of paper that's not that's not what it means to do a diligent job search you really have to look at the quality and the duration of the job search and this was for a point two and a half month period and once a day she called up like cosco rbs i'm sorry the rest not come my time but none of them other than whine it was in the health care field  she made a second attempt from february ninth two thousand and nineteen march sixteenth of two thousand mine can during that period of time she did contact i believe it was forty two employers but again only three of those with  were within her skills or expertise and of those three that she contacted medical providers the other one is really said she all winter person she did go to person to her job box but for the three how care providers she just called them on the  admittedly restrictions but those restrictions coupled with her inability to access computer skills computer skills took her out of the labor market i mean that was the specifics of protest really she stated anything that could possibly require some type of computer skills computer skills and because she doesn't have to computer skills she did not believe she had to fill it access to a stable labor market but i would submit to you today it's more than just looking at the computer skills aspect of nursing she did all sorts of numerous x messengers she went from a foreigner's she was also an assistant director of nursing she possessed managerial expensive experience she worked in a psychiatric unit she also had a cashier experience she worked performed a diligent unsuccessful attempt to find work and to assume that because of her age skills training and work history she will not be regularly employed in a well known racial labor market now in chicago versus was correct i mean had she had a chance to speak with mr fox the petitioner she would have noticed that in her own description of the restrictions placed by dr robson she stated that the petitioner needed to change positions as needed which was competing for the jobs and also even maintain is it because of her need to change position to twenty minutes and i also apologize forgot the petitioner performed her first job search the slate based her perfidy and on on hypothesis is just incorrect i mean she had all the facts in front of her and i think it was very reasonable for the commission to favor her opinion over some white labor board unsuccessful job the responded continues to be upset with finding so all peeing book ational experts offered by the employee and the employer the employees expert considered some improper job functions in that case in making this determination but the commission still favor the employee's vocational expert witness even in light of the stakes of the employees the that is a big difference i mean if she wants to claim that her position her surveys are more reliable than our vocational expert opinion i would expect her to have to pull from the correct information and you know it's obvious  her education the factors that you have to really look at as to determine whether or not here is an unstable labor market and that's what i'm saying is that the slates opinion is not grounded in the appropriate underlying was let's the fact she could not possess computer skills turned her out of the labor market when that's her opinion that's what she said the basis of her opinion once was because she didn't have computer skills that is what made her an employer coupled with the restrictions i'm  computer skills because she wouldn't be able to sit in class i think that's that's that's speculation and then she said and she can't get a job she's not going to be able to sit still long enough again i mean her opinion is all speculative it's not grounded in what