See Lovett v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. Admin., No. 5:21-CV-00038-WCM, 2022 WL 4007274, at *4 (W.D. N.C. Sept. 1, 2022) (“An ALJ's failure to discuss a plaintiff's work history specifically as part of a ‘credibility' analysis does not require remand when the ALJ relies on other permissible factors.”); Pope v. Colvin, Civ. No. 2:15-cv-00001, 2016 WL 1211807, at *12, report and recommendation adopted, 2016 WL 1226972 (W.D. Va. Mar. 28, 2016) (explaining ALJ's failure to explicitly address the correlation between Pope's work history and her credibility was not reversible error when the ALJ personally developed the evidence of such with both Pope and the vocational expert during the hearing.”).
Courts in the Fourth Circuit have confirmed that "the ALJ's mere failure to mention . . . work history explicitly does not warrant remand or reversal in the face of [the] otherwise supported findings." Terrell v. Colvin, 2015 WL 966256, at *13 (E.D. Va. Mar. 4, 2015); see also Pope v. Colvin, 2016 WL 1211807, at *12 (W.D. Va. Mar. 8, 2016), R. & R. adopted, 2016 WL 1226972 (W.D. Va. Mar. 28, 2016) ("[E]ven though the ALJ did not explicitly address the correlation between [the claimant's] work history and her credibility, the ALJ was well aware of her work history, as he developed the evidence of such . . . during the hearing."); Cooper v. Astrue, 2011 WL 6742500, at *7 (E.D. Va. Nov. 8, 2011), R. & R. adopted, 2011 WL 6749018 (E.D. Va. Dec. 22, 2011) (finding that work history alone does not contravene an ALJ's credibility finding where substantial objective medical evidence in the record does not support a plaintiff's subjective complaints).
Courts in the Fourth Circuit have confirmed that "the ALJ's mere failure to mention [a claimant's] work history explicitly does not warrant remand or reversal in the face of otherwise supported findings." Terrell v. Colvin, 2015 WL 966256 (E.D. Va. Mar. 4, 2015); see also Pope v. Colvin, 2016 WL 1211807, at *12 (W.D. Va. Mar. 8, 2016), R. & R. adopted, 2016 WL 1226972 (W.D. Va. Mar. 28, 2016) ("[E]ven though the ALJ did not explicitly address the correlation between [the claimant's] work history and her credibility, the ALJ was well aware of her work history, as he developed the evidence of such . . . during the hearing."); Cooper v. Astrue, 2011 WL 6742500, at *7 (E.D. Va. Nov. 8, 2011), R. & R. adopted, 2011 WL 6749018 (E.D. Va. Dec. 22, 2011) (finding that work history alone does not contravene an ALJ's credibility finding where substantial objective medical evidence in the record does not support a plaintiff's subjective complaints). Thus, when the ALJ appropriately considers all relevant factors, hears the claimant's testimony and observes her demeanor, the ALJ's credibility determination deserves deference.
"An ALJ's mere failure to mention a claimant's work history explicitly does not warrant remand or reversal in the face of his otherwise supported findings." Pope v. Colvin, No. 2:15CV00001, 2016 WL 1211807, at *12 (W.D. Va. Mar. 8, 2016); see Cooper v. Astrue, 2011 WL 6742500, at *7 (E.D.Va. Nov. 8, 2011); see also Nathans v. Colvin, No. 5:14-CV-03859-RBH, 2016 WL 403059, at *5 (D.S.C. Feb. 3, 2016). In this case, substantial evidence supports the ALJ's credibility determination, as discussed above.