disability had recurring crease diminished and the claim itself was an occupational it's a wage differential was originally made this case of when i looked at it i couldn't hel your honor is where it all the way here and of rule twenty three order was issued in that case and i don't recall the day off the time when our little i know showed it was they chose to define it differently in the work comp as you know that occupational disease tax the civically defines the term disablement disability in sect one and that definition includes economic disability the award in this case was for economic disability because of that my argument to petri if this court were to say now that it controls in this case you would be a doctor in doing so a definition of disability that is be a job change the job required him to drive approximately an hour to the site to work he did not want to do that he also at that time had a job where he testified he testified that he felt he could not or did not want to do the blocking and did not want to drive from his home in the pursuant to heat the award in this case justice hudson lives i'd wage differential based upon the diagnosis of black lung not based upon any functional hair he is giving up working at age sixty two there is no home that's where the economic the same come in but there's no evidence that it this time this gentleman has a wage law but for the fact that he ultimately decided first from the practical application of the law the commission raises this question if you don't have to have a job you know wage differential in the first place how could give your card to have a job to keep away differential that disease along now prevent him from doing his new job duties to it doesn't make much sense but i think that's what it amounts to it would seem that if the health reasons i gave you that were where you mention the first place are now getting so bad you also have to which is clearly what they have said by denying the night no fish that there has been no material change in this gentleman's physical or mental  read that they should have limited their analysis to whether there was a material change in this gentleman his physical or mental condition but they did commission they've already made that determination they need to be instructed now to look at whether there's been a change in his economic that's for you as we know from the other cases that come down this was the most recent graphs and talk about this case these wage differentials were never intended to be for life they were intended to last for the duration of there was sufficient factual evidence from which the commission could reason for the queen would suffer if partial impairment of the function of the body so you're not talking about the word peacefully or economic you say we're talking about physical there was evidence in the record record that would have supported such a hole and indeed if my recollection is that the award originally made this case by the arbitrator was a small sample of a man that was then changed to an award for a wage differential which this court affirmed in a rule twenty three order the disability being because of his occupational zi he was prevented from returning to that environment where that hazardous exposure was present when you look at the commission's final decision i think it was a correct  economic disability they defined it as or either a functional or an economic disability there is no issue that remains other than do we have to look at the economic disability if you will as the term is the time in this case and apply because that's the way the term is defined  yours i completely agree with the appropriateness of wage differentials because that act is from maine and it's intended to make people whole and you should do that but they should not be given a when