Case-law from the U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board, as well as judicial opinions rendered by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, maintain the standard of acceptable proof for a Federal Disability Retirement case submitted to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, for Federal and Postal employees under either FERS or CSRS.
The primary basis for a Federal Disability Retirement application is clear: A medical condition which exists, which prevents the Federal or Postal employee from performing at least one, if not more, of the essential elements of one’s job; that a legally viable accommodation is not possible; that reassignment to another position at the same pay or grade is not reasonably feasible; that the medical condition will last a minimum of 12 months; and that the Federal or Postal employee must file for such benefits during the tenure of one’s employment as a Federal or Postal Employee, or within 1 year of being separated from Federal employment.
The core of one’s proof is generally based upon the treatment and opinion of one’s treating doctor.
Every now and again, however, there are “collateral” sources of proof which should be considered, and for various reasons, which must be relied upon for establishment of one’s eligibility for Federal Disability Retirement benefits. Such proof may include: opinions rendered by Second-opinion or “referee” doctors in an OWCP case; percentage ratings provided by the Department of Veterans Affairs; SSDI approval determinations; separation from the Agency based upon one’s medical inability to perform the essential elements of one’s job; medical notes for FMLA; and even (sometimes, but rarely) a decision granting disability benefits by a private insurer; and other such collateral sources of proof.
Such proof, of course, should never replace the centrality of one’s own treating doctor, and further, should always be targeted and submitted with discretionary judgment. Sometimes, it can be the “other evidence” which makes the difference in a case; other times, if used indiscriminately, can be an indicator of the weakness of one’s case.
Be careful; be targeted; use discretion.
Sincerely,
Robert R. McGill, Esquire
Filed under: Theory and Practice: Tips and Strategies for a Successful Application | Tagged: additional evidence to sustain your fers disability claim, attorney representing federal workers for disability throughout the united states, collateral issues while on the federal disability retirement application process, coordinating collateral issues with the advice of a federal disability retirement attorney, CSRS disability retirement federal attorney, dealing with collateral issues before submitting the federal disability retirement application to the opm, disabled federal employees and collateral legal determinations, discretionary decisions based on experience and knowledge of opm disability law, discretionary decisions to submit a good opm disability claim, discretionary proprieties during the federal disability process, federal disability retirement and learning from experiences, FERS disability retirement, how to use collateral medical determinations from the owcp, making the best of a long situation: filing additional evidence, Medical Documentation for OPM Disability Retirement, opm disability and discretionary decision making, OPM disability retirement, owcp disability retirement, preventive actions in the federal disability retirement application to make sure collateral issues won't be a problem in the future, questions about discretionary decision-making, sometimes you may use collateral issues for your fers disability claim, submitting mandatory forms and discretionary documents to the opm, the core of each federal disability application, the experience of a federal disability retirement attorney, the most basic requirements for a federal disability claim and the use of collateral issues, the most important thing about a fers disability application, the support of a doctor as the most important issue in opm disability, USPS disability retirement, when to mention a collateral issue during the sf 3112 preparation |
Leave a Reply