Facts
The insured person [A.] (appellant), born in 1967, worked as a truck driver in his former occupation. By decision of 17 November 2017, the IV-Stelle of the Canton of Zurich (respondent) granted him a half disability pension from 1 April 2015.
The Social Insurance Court of the Canton of Zurich (lower court) partially upheld the appeal of the insured person, who had requested a full pension, by judgment of 11 February 2019 (IV.2018.00002), and granted him a three-quarter pension based on a degree of disability of 60%.
The insured person lodged an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court, requesting a full disability pension or, alternatively, a three-quarter pension based on a degree of disability of 68%.
Undisputed was that the insured person is completely unable to work in his former occupation, but could pursue an adapted gainful activity at a full-time workload with a capacity of 50% (interdisciplinary expert report of MEDAS Bern of 6 September 2016). Also undisputed were the valid income of CHF 83,988.30 and the disability income of CHF 33,316.35, determined on the basis of the table wages of the Swiss Wage Structure Survey (LSE) 2014 (competence level 1).
The subject matter of the dispute was solely whether a deduction from the table wage for the disability income (degree of employment, physically very light work, alternating stress) is to be made. The appellant requested the maximum deduction of 25%.
Considerations
Whether a deduction from the table wage, caused by the disability or otherwise justified, within the meaning of BGE 126 V 75 E. 5b is to be made is a legal question subject to free review (BGE 137 V 71 E. 5.1).
A deduction under the heading of degree of employment is only recognised for men who, due to their disability, can only still work part-time. For insured persons who are in principle able to work full-time but who, for health reasons, have only reduced capacity, such a deduction does not apply. The appellant did not raise any reasons for departing from this case law.
The restrictions named in the MEDAS report (avoiding bending, lifting and carrying, ladders, stairs, overhead work, shift work, stress management, flexibility, time pressure) are the counterpart to the positive performance profile of physically light activity and were already taken into account in the lower court's assessment of incapacity to work, so they are not relevant for a deduction. On a balanced labour market, despite these conditions, there is a sufficiently broad spectrum of reasonably achievable substitute activities.
Following a fall on stairs in November 2016, knee complaints remained which exclude activities to be performed exclusively while seated (report of Dr. [B.] of…