How to Use Job Descriptions, Earnings History, and Vocational Opinions in an LTD Appeal

A long-term disability appeal often turns on a deceptively simple question: what work can the claimant actually do, in the real world, with the limits documented in the file? That is where vocational evidence comes in.

In many LTD cases, insurers do not deny benefits only because they disagree about a diagnosis. They also argue that the claimant can still perform their own occupation, or later, any occupation, based on a description of job duties, wage information, and a paper review from a vocational consultant. Under ERISA-governed disability plans, claimants generally have the right to a full and fair review, access to relevant documents, and an opportunity to respond to new evidence or rationales before a final appeal decision is made, which can make the appeal stage especially important (U.S. Department of Labor, EBSA fact sheet, Filing a Claim for Your Health or Disability Benefits).

In this post you’ll learn how job descriptions, earnings history, and vocational opinions are used in LTD appeals, where insurers often get those materials wrong, and how a carefully developed record may help clarify the true demands of the work at issue. If you want a broader foundation on how these disputes develop, this overview of how vocational proof shapes disability work-capacity disputes gives helpful context.

<aside> 💡 Scroll to the bottom for every post in this series.

</aside>

Why Vocational Evidence Matters In An LTD Appeal

Medical records address diagnosis, symptoms, restrictions, and functional loss. Vocational evidence connects those limits to work demands.

That connection matters because many group disability plans ask questions like:

• Can the claimant perform the material duties of their own occupation?
• If the definition changes after 24 months, can the claimant perform any occupation for which they are fitted by education, training, or experience?
• If another occupation is identified, does it exist at a wage level consistent with the plan language?

Those are vocational questions as much as medical ones. The insurer may rely on occupational databases, employer paperwork, internal job analyses, labor market tools, and outside vocational reviewers. The Department of Labor’s claims-procedure rules also specifically recognize the role of medical or vocational experts in disability benefit decisions and require plans to identify those experts when requested after an adverse determination (DOL claims regulation guidance).

Step 1: Start With The Right Job Description

The first question in many LTD appeals is not “Can you work?” It is “What job are we talking about?”

That sounds obvious, but insurers often analyze the wrong occupation in one of three ways:

1. They use a generic national occupation that does not match the claimant’s actual work.
2. They rely on an employer form that lists only a title, not the real duties.
3. They reduce a complex job to sedentary desk work because the title sounds managerial or administrative.

Actual Duties Often Matter More Than The Job Title

A title like “project manager,” “field case manager,” “regional sales executive,” or “office administrator” can hide significant physical, cognitive, travel, pace, attendance, and interpersonal demands. Some jobs involve prolonged sitting; others require constant driving, deadline pressure, public interaction, production quotas, keyboarding, on-call work, or frequent task switching.