Many Federal and Postal employees call an attorney for an initial legal consultation because of the “daunting process” involved in filing for Federal Disability Retirement. And, indeed, the complex administrative process involved in preparing, formulating and filing a Federal Disability Retirement application is a confounding, confusing and complicated process.
From the “how” of responding to the multiple questions on SF 3112A, Applicant’s Statement of Disability, to the quantity, volume and substance of “what” to include; to the issues surrounding what constitutes a viable and legal “accommodation” that may determine the truthfulness of a Supervisor’s Statement (SF 3112B) and Agency’s Efforts for Reassignment and Accommodation (SF 3112D); as well as peripheral issues that often intersect but may not necessarily impact or influence a Federal Disability Retirement application, to include (but not be limited to) EEO filings, a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) implementation, “Fitness for Duty” evaluations, OWCP/Department of Labor filings that may be concurrently initiated, as well as the reason, rationale and impact of a Social Security Disability filing, etc. — they are all relevant, significant and consequential issues that, in their aggregate compendium of concerns involved, both ancillary and some central to the primary concern of Federal Disability Retirement, should be analyzed, evaluated and considered carefully.
For any Federal employee or U.S. Postal worker who is considering preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, to be submitted (ultimately) to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, the question of what to do with this “daunting process” can be allayed by first consulting with an attorney who is experienced in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and allowing the “daunting” part of the process to become nothing more than the squeaky mouse hidden in the corner that, before discovering the facts, once sounded like a burglar attempting to break in.
Robert R. McGill, Esquire