The vocational expert opines on what work a person can do and what it pays; the economist converts the resulting earnings gap into a present value figure.
The expert who converts a loss into dollars over time: the but-for earnings, the post-event earnings, fringe benefits, household services, the worklife horizon, and the present value of the difference.
An evaluator of employability and earning capacity: which occupations a person can perform after an injury, what those jobs pay in the local labor market, and how long it takes to reach them. The economist relies on this opinion when the record does not fix the post-injury earnings directly.
| Dimension | Forensic Economist | Vocational Expert |
|---|---|---|
| Core question | How much is the loss worth, in present dollars | What work the person can do and what it pays |
| Inputs | Earnings records, benefit records, published wage and time-use data, discount rates | Medical restrictions, work history, skills, local job market data |
| Output | Present value damages report with schedules | Employability and earning capacity opinion |
| Typical retention | Any matter with a lost earnings, household services, death, or business claim | Injury, disability, and employment matters where post-injury work capacity is disputed |
| Testimony | Numbers, assumptions, and sensitivity | Capacity, placeability, and wage findings |
Retain the economist whenever a loss must be expressed as a dollar figure over time: lost earnings, benefits, household services, support to survivors, the present value of a care plan, or lost profits. The economist can proceed on the record alone when post-event earnings are documented or agreed.
Retain the vocational expert when the post-injury capacity to work is contested and the record does not settle it: what jobs remain open, what they pay, and whether retraining is realistic. The opinion supplies the post-event side of the earnings comparison.
Both experts address earning capacity, from different directions. The vocational opinion establishes what the person can earn; the economist converts the difference between that figure and the but-for earnings into a present value. In many injury matters both are retained and the reports reconcile: the economist adopts the vocational findings as inputs and states that reliance. Where only one is retained, the economist can present the loss under alternative post-event earnings assumptions drawn from the medical record, and the report says so. The lost earnings versus lost earning capacity comparison explains when the capacity question arises.
No. That is a vocational question outside the economist's field. The economist presents the loss under the post-event earnings scenarios the record supports and identifies which expert or document supports each scenario.
Not always. Where the person has returned to work at a documented wage, or the parties agree on post-event earnings, the economist can proceed without a separate vocational opinion. Where capacity is contested, the economist's post-event assumption needs a foundation, and that is usually the vocational expert.
Ideally both early, and the vocational opinion before the economist finalizes the report, since the post-event earnings figure flows from it. A short interval between the two reports keeps the assumptions consistent.
Request a consultation on Forensic Economist vs. Vocational Expert or call (201) 343-0700. Plaintiff and defense counsel.