Category: U.S. Economy

What is the innovation sector? Thoughts on Moretti’s book ‘The New Geography of Jobs’

Enrico Moretti’s book “‘The New Geography of Jobs” discusses how certain jobs, which he refers to innovation jobs, and where they are located are important factors for economic development.  Using data and economic research as support, he provides numerous arguments that suggest that these types of jobs are big economic drivers and dictate the economic fate of many communities.

So what are innovation jobs?  Moretti defines innovation jobs as jobs that make intensive use of human capital and human ingenuity. These jobs includes the obvious like high tech software jobs but also less obvious like jobs in the movie industry that make use of high tech and personal creativity.

Throughout the book Moretti argues that the typical innovation job is worth more substantially more than traditional jobs. That is one reason why he believes we should not be concerned about the loss in the traditional types of jobs.

Useful data in analyzing FLSA and wage and hour cases involving truck drivers

Useful data for analyzing FLSA and wage and hour allegations in cases involving truck drivers. (Continued from previous post)
1. Waiting Time.  The Bill of Lading (BOL) for a particular load.  The BOL typically shows the time the driver arrived at the site and what time he/she started loading or unloading.
2. Pre- and Post-Trip Work.   Driver’s Logs typically show the time of arrival at a truck yard and the time the driver left the yard to head to the first job site as well as the time left and returning from subsequent jobs.
3. Pay records

Allegations in a truck driver FLSA and wage and hour case

(Continued from previous blog post)
1. Waiting Time.  The drivers are seeking to be paid for all time spent waiting at a load or delivery site.
2. Pre- and Post-Trip Work. Time spent time at the beginning and end of each shift doing pre- and post-trip inspections and other duties in the yard was allegedly not paid.
3. Driving Empty.  The drivers were allegedly not paid hourly for driving empty trucks to and from job sites.

FLSA and wage and hour case involving truck drivers and per-load pay

Overview

In this case, several truck driver plaintiffs filed a FLSA and wage and hour lawsuit against a petroleum transport company that provides crude oil transportation services.  Its drivers pick up crude oil from well sites and deliver that oil to refineries, pipelines and storage facilities, etc.  The driver’s compensation plan for its drivers included: a) pay per load for transporting the oil;  and b) hourly pay for certain other activities.  

Pay Per Load.  For transporting a load of oil, the company paid the drivers a certain percentage of the price it received from its customer for transporting that load.

Hourly Pay.  Drivers received hourly pay for: i) washing a truck; ii) time spent waiting with a disabled truck; iii) time spent at a load or delivery site after a certain point; d) training & meetings

 

FLSA and wage and hour case involving truck drivers and per-load pay

Overview

In this case, several truck driver plaintiffs filed a FLSA and wage and hour lawsuit against a petroleum transport company that provides crude oil transportation services.  Its drivers pick up crude oil from well sites and deliver that oil to refineries, pipelines and storage facilities, etc.  The driver’s compensation plan for its drivers included: a) pay per load for transporting the oil;  and b) hourly pay for certain other activities.  

Pay Per Load.  For transporting a load of oil, the company paid the drivers a certain percentage of the price it received from its customer for transporting that load.

Hourly Pay.  Drivers received hourly pay for: i) washing a truck; ii) time spent waiting with a disabled truck; iii) time spent at a load or delivery site after a certain point; d) training & meetings

 

Details on GM Compensation Plan for Death and Physical Recall Injury Claims

In a recent document and interview, GM has laid out its plan to compensate people injuried or those with familiy members who were killed due to product defects.  The full plan can be found here.  Some highlights are below.

Types of claims covered by plan:

1. Individual Death Claims
2. Category One Physical Injury Claims: claims involving quadriplegic injury,
paraplegic injury, double amputation, permanent brain damage requiring
continuous home medical assistance, or pervasive burns encompassing a
substantial part of the body.
3. Category Two Physical Injury Claims: claims, other than Category One
Physical Injury Claims, that, within 48 hours of the accident, require either
overnight hospitalization of one or more nights or, in extraordinary
circumstances as determined on a case by case basis by the Administrator,
outpatient medical treatment

METHODOLOGIES FOR CALCULATING COMPENSATION

1. Track A – Presumptive Compensation
The Track A presumed methodology relies upon a combination of the decedent’s
historical earnings and personal details with assumptions of likely future events based
upon multiple sources of publicly available national data including the Bureau of Labor
Statistics and the Internal Revenue Service. Eligible Claimants need not present detailed
computations or analyses

This Track A presumed methodology ensures consistent economic loss calculations for
similarly situated victims (i.e., same age, number of dependents and income level)

2. Track B – Complete Economic Analysis

Track B entails a complete, comprehensive economic loss analysis of the decedent’s past,
present and assumed future income. The Facility will consider the financial history of the
decedent through incorporation of submitted individual income data, including past,
present and future earnings, wage growth, work life expectancy, etc., as well as other
case-specific information and circumstances of the decedent that the claimant believes
the Facility should consider in determining the total value of the claim. I

Non-economic losses will also be determined as follows.

• $1,000,000 for the death of the decedent, and
• $ 300,000 for the surviving spouse, and
• $ 300,000 for each surviving dependent of the decedent.

In addition, life care plans to cover future medicals will also funded for injured individuals needing future care.

Details on GM Compensation Plan for Death and Physical Recall Injury Claims

In a recent document and interview, GM has laid out its plan to compensate people injuried or those with familiy members who were killed due to product defects.  The full plan can be found here.  Some highlights are below.

Types of claims covered by plan:

1. Individual Death Claims
2. Category One Physical Injury Claims: claims involving quadriplegic injury,
paraplegic injury, double amputation, permanent brain damage requiring
continuous home medical assistance, or pervasive burns encompassing a
substantial part of the body.
3. Category Two Physical Injury Claims: claims, other than Category One
Physical Injury Claims, that, within 48 hours of the accident, require either
overnight hospitalization of one or more nights or, in extraordinary
circumstances as determined on a case by case basis by the Administrator,
outpatient medical treatment

METHODOLOGIES FOR CALCULATING COMPENSATION

1. Track A – Presumptive Compensation
The Track A presumed methodology relies upon a combination of the decedent’s
historical earnings and personal details with assumptions of likely future events based
upon multiple sources of publicly available national data including the Bureau of Labor
Statistics and the Internal Revenue Service. Eligible Claimants need not present detailed
computations or analyses

This Track A presumed methodology ensures consistent economic loss calculations for
similarly situated victims (i.e., same age, number of dependents and income level)

2. Track B – Complete Economic Analysis

Track B entails a complete, comprehensive economic loss analysis of the decedent’s past,
present and assumed future income. The Facility will consider the financial history of the
decedent through incorporation of submitted individual income data, including past,
present and future earnings, wage growth, work life expectancy, etc., as well as other
case-specific information and circumstances of the decedent that the claimant believes
the Facility should consider in determining the total value of the claim. I

Non-economic losses will also be determined as follows.

• $1,000,000 for the death of the decedent, and
• $ 300,000 for the surviving spouse, and
• $ 300,000 for each surviving dependent of the decedent.

In addition, life care plans to cover future medicals will also funded for injured individuals needing future care.

Accounting for kids and marriage in the calculation of a person’s worklife expectancy

Abstract (From Millimet et. al)

Measuring an individual’s human capital at a point in time as the present actuarial value of expected net lifetime earnings has a lengthy history. Calculating such measures requires accurate estimates of worklife expectancy. Here, worklife estimates for men and women in the USA categorized by educational attainment, race, marital status, parental status and current labour force status are presented. Race has a much larger impact on the worklife expectancy of men than women. Education is associated with larger worklife differentials for women. The association between marriage and worklife expectancy is significant, but of opposite sign, for men and women: married women (men) have a lower (higher) worklife expectancy than single women (men). Parenthood is associated with a reduction in the worklife expectancy of women; the association is smaller and varies from positive for some education/marital status groups to negative for others for men.

From:

DETAILED ESTIMATION OF WORKLIFE EXPECTANCY FOR THE MEASUREMENT OF HUMAN CAPITAL: ACCOUNTING FOR MARRIAGE AND CHILDREN
Daniel L. Millimet
Southern Methodist University
Michael Nieswiadomy
University of North Texas
Daniel Slottje
Southern Methodist University:

 

A closer look at the recent VA wait time audit

In May 2014, VA launched the Accelerating Access to Care Initiative, a nation-wide program to ensure timely access to care. As part of the Initiative, the VHA identified Veterans across the system experiencing long waits.  The VA also published a 50 page report on the delays experienced by VA patients.  Among the findings, they found:

1. The VA scheduling system  resulted in confusion among
scheduling clerks and front-line supervisors.

2. Meeting a 14-day wait-time performance target for new appointments was simply
not attainable

3. The concept of “desired date” is a scheduling practice unique to VA, and difficult
to reconcile against more accepted practices such as negotiating a specific
appointment date based on provider availability, or using a “return to clinic”
interval requested by providers.

4. . Overall, 13 percent of scheduling staff interviewed indicated they received
instruction (from supervisors or others) to enter in the “desired date” field a date
different from the date the Veteran had requested. At least one instance of such
practices was identified in 76 percent of VA facilities. In certain instances this
may be appropriate (e.g., a provider-directed date can, under VA policy, override
a date specified by a patient), but the survey did not distinguish this, nor did it
determine whether this was done through lack of understanding or malintent
unless it was clearly apparent.

5. Eight percent of scheduling staff indicated they used alternatives to the Electronic
Wait List (EWL) or Veterans Health Information Systems and Technology
Architecture (VistA) package. At least one of such instance was identified in 70
percent of facilities. As with desired date practices, we did not probe the extent
to which some of these alternatives might have been justified under VA policy.
The questionnaire employed did not isolate appropriate uses of external lists.

6. Findings indicate that in some cases, pressures were placed on schedulers to
utilize inappropriate practices in order to make waiting times (based on desired
date, and the waiting lists), appear more favorable. Such practices are
sufficiently pervasive to require VA re-examine its entire performance
management system and, in particular, whether current measures and targets for
access are realistic or sufficient.

7. Staffing challenges were identified in small CBOCs, especially where there were
small counts of providers or administrative support.

Are Internally Generated Patents Assets?

Here is the situation. Two divorcing individuals are disputing the value of a company that the two built. After, reviewing the books, one of the parties argues that the other party’s books does not reflect the value of a patent for a medical product they the two individuals developed and held.

The charged party argues that the patent was never recorded as an asset but was instead expensed. That is, the cost of developing the patent was expensed therefore the cost was never capitalized.  So the question is:

Q: Is this a common practice for patents?

A: According to some accountants, this is a standard practice for some types if patents.

Specifically, according to some accountants, internally generated intangibles are never capitalized, their cost to develop is expensed. According to FASB ASC 350, 805, only acquired intangibles are on the balance sheet.