that exists but in this case the commission into their credit listed five factors upon which they base their decision i don't think that either singularly nor collectively any one of those five factors supports the commission's decision and that's why i think it's against the manifest weight of the evidence they list the economy as a significant factor for them my research does not show the appellate court or the supreme court ever giving consideration possible things that could occur that could happen to help my client in his job search to make him a better candidate to try and find employment so he made definite recommendations that were forwarded to the insurance company those are not necessary follow  e recommendations are kind of common sense things let's work on this gentleman's typing skills let's do some practice interviewing some mock interview let's work on cold calling some of the basic fundamentals of trying to find employment my finding continues working with the vocational counselors hired by the insurance company for over an additional year complying with everything that they're asking at the our point we bring mr munson back in february two thousand and eleven and ask him to review the additional work that's been done in this the first case would be didn't look at the person's age their circumstances their background everything like that and that's when the vast majority of cases dealt with the second case of the second scenario would be to conduct the diligent but failing job search my conducted a job search under the respectful guidance of over nine vocational counselors hired by the insurance company submitted over twenty four hundred job was able to find but one job interview which did not lead to a job i would submit that a four year and seven month job search with those kind of numbers definitely constitute a failed and diligent job part of the commission's emphasis and the nine my point was the fact that he didn't follow up on the auto industry now the commission would say that he never did it is my is my read that pointed out that simply inaccurate he did they're emphasizing one of the things the commission emphasized was that he should been one of the auto industry will what's the physical appearance requirement for that the second point i would make the second point i would make is this through two thousand four hundred contacts that my client  made it was my only one job interview just one so the question is if i'm simply putting a resume in the in the mail and mailing off if i'm faxing that resume to a potential employer i'm not even sure that there was a demand put on him to get a per card surely it's a requirement for a security position the fact matters insurance he requested the rebore submit my review of the record indicates that he decided not to obtain a well i would submit that as a as a flat refusal to get one i think if you set aside get one well again one of my one of my big arguments in this case is this is the necessity that the insurance company should be paying for that that's not happening but taking a step back for a second with respect to this per card issue the question i would have is his or ever been a single job that was identified as you would have had that job but the fact that you didn't get the that occurred the fact of matter is i have a client who submitted who went through two thousand four hundred job leads job he's prepared both by himself as well as an insurance company these are the rules have been if you have all the restrictions and you can't go back to your job you can your employer can't take you back they put you in maintenance they put you know vocational rehabilitation program and you're supposed to cooperate with them and he did he did did it for four years and seven months you can talk about the economy but that the brilliance of earlier cases talking about i love her mental disability is you don't put a bright line test on you don't say you have to search for a job nine months or twelve months it allows flexibility for each and every standard for each and every situation for years and several months i think is sufficient is definitely sufficient i think the commission's decision at times because they did fault him for going out and looking for a graphic arts position they called him for wanting to get a job they said that's evidence of the fact that he's not unemployed  a vocation rehabilitation position should be i guarantee you every not in my case that would deal with something like this that attention had better be saying i think i can get a job because sure shouldn't if he's sad i'm going to do this but there's no way i'm getting a job insurance company wouldn't hesitate to cut my time off with that and certainly that the courts would agree with a position like that i don't think i would argue that the commissions the reasons why the tonight a model are permanent was because nobody thought that he was prospectively sorry about that  so he certainly applied to the for the automotive industry i think it be at the end of the day what the court has laid out is you have to be able to show that you've conducted a diligent drops or in this case my client worked for four mirrors on more may please the court house all by name is steve costolo and i'm here in behalf of certified installations and i'm here to argue that the only workers compensation commission did not care when it warded the plaintiff fifty percent loss of use meant as a whole instead of an odd lot permanent total award the plaintiff is here to argue that he was his client was rendered not allowed permanent total and as you know searched with the help of vocational counselors for foreign to four years and seven months and that in of itself proves that he can never find another job i don't think we would be here today if in the beginning when he was released by his functional capacity evaluation if he had actually contacted his union and was honest in advising them pay release now do you have work within the heavy duty work release i can work up to fifty eight pounds when i asked my process emanation did you can take your union his response was i called someone i spoke with the receptionist and i said oh i really saw my duty do you have anything no by right then and there i can't force someone to be honest a follow through with their union so then we start vocational rehabilitation process counsel has mentioned that his client sent out twenty four hundred job patients to try to find another job and the case of alexander versus industrial commission the district court here mentioned that it's would contact the union to inquire about possible positions that he would be able to do so wouldn't that be adequate that i think when you're looking for a job the best person to find yourself a job is you and if your contacts in the union are not being truthful or following up it's it's better that he as a union card carrying member and take the union in follow through with that would be better might be a more direct but it was the evidence such that the claimant was aware that the vocational counselor was going to be making that contact i do not recall at all i do recall is that he did testify that he himself contacted the receptionist at the union he also goes on  state in the provide brief that one of the vocational counselors told him you might as well not keep your union card you can't go back to work is is that accurate in terms of what the testimony was there was no testimony on the part of any vocational counselor i did answer incidents all the locational records and i can't specifically remember which which records that information which record contain it from ation house also mentions the fact that he did apply for different automotive work positions when i went through his republican reply brief i counted up those positions and dividing by the twenty four hundred he basically applied for i think was like one point two five percent of his job search entailed lookin fer autobody work you're talking about a man who was working twenty two years in a union as a pipe on not a pipe fitter but a tile fitter and before that had twelve years of experience unlike the auto body field so i think it's he was lax in his attempts to pretty exhaustive so you're saying that notwithstanding that to sort of paraphrase an expression he was looking for jabs in all the wrong places what's would you make of this you can take twenty four hundred applications and throw them out south street but that does not mean you can call that a job search but if you're not looking for areas where you have no prior job experience you're being honest in your job search your cleaning yourself up so that when you do apply for  as far as like the appearance goes i think that was one of many issues that some of occasional councillors had with with the plaintiff it wasn't just you know the only reason why i can find another job when you also look at the fact that  the restriction in and of itself is fifty eight pounds to his left hand his left arm he sustained an injury which required seventeen stitches this is not someone like in the alexander case who had commission's decision as a fact that he was someone that was returned to work with a fifty pound fifty pound with your assertion he failed to cooperate the bus that he could with regard to finding a job when he was working with rehab position those factors and the fact that in the beginning he did not in my opinion do a good enough search to try to get back into a union he has not during his time off spending time volunteering to it's easy for someone to sit down and work with counselors for four years and seven months and say you know let them find me you know it's the onus is on i'm going to sit back now and i'll do what i want to do and there were different comments in the vocational reports where he's like i don't feel i can go back to the tile fitter position on the field i can do that i can't hold the forget the the tool he's talking about i can't i can't do that so it's like self limiting yet you find in the record that he was interested in graphic our society and he does spend thirty five hundred dollars of his own money to try to get into that so he's not so affected by this in treats where he cannot go back to work is not so downtrodden as a result i think all of those factors basically argue that the arbitrator the commission the circuit court were all right in the awarding fifty percent loss of use man as a whole and not an odd lot permanent total years and seven months to the tune of two thousand four hundred contacts you want to know where the way out there in here each and every one of them would bill money say your own house what did he say about absolutely so would not be illogical for that concert to say that ok that i'm not i'm not here to argue that i'm in a certain point in the process my client wasn't employable if he wasn't point moved on then why would he be define a field job search but they did they found evidently this guy didn't do enough or in the alternative he refused to accept jobs within an industry or refused to get what he needed to get jobs w what i would what i would submit is that there are still nobody who has shown that there was a job in the security industry form it was a first step it was a first step that saw nobody show that there was that there was actually a security job nobody was he ever offered a job interview never once was you offered a job position in the one point i do wish to make about mr monti again amidst two separate reports the first report he says there's still a possibility for the sky but you know they got potentially employable as a security guard so now you've got a potential employee ability within the security industry he won't pay the money for the per card so we can get a job within the security industry and you come in and say ah he has no