when you look at the standard or the burden of proof it's on the employee in this situation to to show that they've done everything they could to find the suitable employment here in the situation there's been nothing the petitioner would have to fall into what's called the be advised category and in the not much out already the petitioner would have to show that she made at least a reasonable diligent attempt to look for work and there was no suitable employment incapable of any temple work when you look at the record in this and the situation here and i point to the deposition testimony which is part of the record of susan at more birth and she was asked whether or not michelle could return to work as a cashier and the answer to that was no could she return to work as a hostess and the answer to that was also no and these are clearly things that the medical doctors d activity there are his issues if this were the do not involve repetitive activity or overhead work such as a hostess such as a cashier that is the bottom line of her testimony but the problem with that testimony is that when you read to her testimony and berg is relying on her own personal observations as when she worked as a waitress years before and there is no say there's no testimony that says that suzanne it susan ever considered any other appointment she never said that she considered a cashier although that was yes by her it on cross examination troops or never said she's medically disabled well what about the arguments the function of the commission to resolve the credibility of the witnesses in the campus could the commission look at the commission i should say legitimately choose to believe it and their testimony of course they do and that's what they've done in this situation here however they have to make they have the following client a lawyer and the law it's been pretty clear for a number of years it when someone is in a category of men whom medically being disabled we rely on a medical doctors when someone  not medically disabled as is in the case here then you have to have something further to show that that out at least a reasonable time to look for work with me even does a little bit because the injured employee have to make a reasonable attempt to work a book ational we are consultants say that she's unsuitable because of her age or education the language barriers maybe or whatever other reasons and there's no stable labor market for a way to shift over for work that  i didn't have the opportunity but you're right that could have been done  old and she couldn't work as a waitress within the the treaters restrictions that she was an appropriate candidate for vocational rehabilitation and employees do is return back to their employer and ask for a position within the doctor's restrictions haven't done petitioner's work that's one of the things i always tell my clients go back to your your employer in this situation here hill testified that since she could even she didn't believe she could function as a cashier but there was no nothing medically to support it and she returned back to work as a kid she may have based upon and an od not situation where she needed a reasonable diligent attempt to look for work she hasn't done that either one of these situations and susan endured her report is it is just a pretty questions more question of burden shift once she interviews etan's berg's expert opinion that because of her age prior work experience her condition  pancake house and she could know why but there was one question my question didn't the burden shifts to the employer to come forward with evidence to show that regular work was available to her and in this particular case there is no such  well there was the you know when i look back at what the doctors have said in this situation this is an arm injury case it wasn't you know back surgery it wasn't something that was going to disable during the course of testifying but again maybe she wasn't eligible to work for other health issues right now because she didn't she made any reasonable village an attempt a look for  determined by the worker's compensation commission and that its determination will not be set aside on review unless it is contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence that same a b b c e case set forth three bases upon which a finding of permanent total disability could be made one of them is by a preponderance of the medical evidence the second is by a  unsuccessful job search or attempt to return to work and the third is by demonstrating that because of the age training experience education and physical limitations of the injured employee there is no stupid labor market it's not necessary to do all three it is on this third basis that the commissions define the commission's determination was based a certified in a licensed rotational rehabilitation counsellor susan anthony byrd testified that based upon jean hill's age st was sixty two years old education only eighth grade is on the employee employer you're to provide some kind of vocational assessment but in any event ms hill was represented by counsel so even if they were unable to to contact her to offer her some kind of an employment within her restrictions they could have contacted her through counsel and there is absolutely no evidence of any effort to contact her to make her an offer of employment or to convey an offer we have a conclusion that the employee is unable to return to any kind of informed point that there is no stable labor market worker that is supported by really there is no basis for arguing that the commission's decision is against the manifest weight of the evidence and under well established he thought the commission's decision should think about  clear and reset counters or tables these are just vague generalizations without anything specific against these if someone wants their opinion to be  obligation other than just presenting a generic report that says things that are basically not been established there's no susan numbers report doesn't have any clear and convincing evidence that she's done anything to really be supreme you know on other than her own or her own observations she doesn't make any effort to to tread this to say that she's