In Alumax Extrusions, Incorporated v. Wright, 737 So. 2d 416 (Miss. Ct. App. 1998), the Court addressed the question of whether the worker's injury so substantially impaired his ability to do the substantial acts of his usual employment that he was rendered totally disabled. In that case, Larry Wright, the injured worker, was twenty-seven years old, did not have a high school diploma, and had only worked in manual labor type jobs. While engaged in his work at Alumax, Wright fell from a ten foot platform and landed squarely on his right shoulder, seriously injuring his coinciding rotator cuff and collarbone. After medical treatment, Wright continued working, though not in the same capacity as he had before the accident. Id. Wright thereafter continued in physical therapy treatments and searched for a job, but found no work. Id. From the outset we must observe the distinction between the medical or functional impairment of a scheduled member, and an occupational impairment to the same. Our supreme court has recognized that the former represents actual physical infirmity while the latter is a function of such, affecting the claimant's ability to perform the duties of employment. Therefore a claimant having only a partial impairment to a scheduled member may, through other considerations, establish that, for purposes of his wage earning capacity, the impairment has rendered him or her totally occupationally disabled. In such event, the claimant is entitled to compensation for complete disability under 71-3-17(a). Similarly, a claimant seeking compensation for an occupational disability to a scheduled member which exceeds the assigned partial functional impairment and yet falls short of 100% must establish under 71-3-17(c) that the partial impairment has adversely impacted his or her wage earning capacity to an extent greater than the medical percentage of impairment. In Alumax, Wright was able to return to work after surgeries and physical therapy, but he was only able to perform light duty tasks, and he still suffered serious pain in doing so. Id. The Court found that Wright's shoulder injury did not so substantially impair his ability to work as to qualify as a total occupational disability. Though this fact differs from the present case in which Rogers indeed suffered a serious injury as to render him totally unable to return to his previous work, the Alumax court did reiterate the applicable rule that, "it is the effect upon one's occupational capabilities which is determinative." Id.