Individuals can and do tell untruths (an euphemism for a “lie”); organizations, as a collective congregation of multiple individuals, can therefore also convey negations of truthful statements (a further euphemism, stated diplomatically to avoid the unpleasantry of a direct statement). Of course, the justification for such factually incorrect statements is that there is a “difference of perspective” or of an opinion which is not in agreement with another’s.
In preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, the portion of a Federal Disability Retirement application which the Agency must complete — most notably the Supervisor’s Statement (SF 3112B) and the Agency’s Certification of Reassignment and Accommodation Efforts (SF 3112D) can and most often do contain misstatements, differing perspectives and negations of untruthful statements.
They are not like the other forms which must be completed by the Agency — i.e., the checklist, the Certified Summary of Federal Service, etc., where the information provided can be compared to factually verifiable documents, statements, etc., and therefore will be constrained by objective and ascertainable facts.
Unfortunately, there is “wiggle room” on both the SF 3112B and the SF 3112D, and agencies tend to utilize the wide expansiveness of such roominess to move about. That is why, what the agency says or might say, must be preempted as much as possible by the medical report and other documentation. By providing as much of an airtight case prior to submission of the disability retirement packet to the agency, one increases the odds that the impact of what the agency says, will be minimal, and minimized.
Of course, there is then the further problem of the inaccuracies engaged in by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management itself — but that is another story to tell, and one which must be categorized in a department beyond “fiction”, but more akin to the genre of “fantasy” or “science fiction”.
Sincerely,
Robert R. McGill, Esquire
Filed under: Agency’s and/or Supervisor’s Actions | Tagged: 3112b supervisor's narrative and its inaccuracies, agency's extraordinary top assessment in fers disability applications, agency's influence in disability retirement, civil service disability retirement, considering the fact that agencies and supervisors don't always tell the truth during a postal service disability retirement claim, ethical issues when filing the 3112b form, federal agencies inaccurate statements about their disabled employees, Federal Disability, FERS disability retirement, law firm representing clients in opm disability law all across america, legal services for federal and postal workers all across america, misstatements as basis for denial, more on the opm disability application supervisor's statements, negative responses from the agency and supervisors, negative statements made by supervisors to undermine a federal disability retirement application, neutralizing negative statements from supervisor's statements in sf 3112b, opm disability forms, opm disability retirement standard forms, postal service disability retirement, postal supervisors and managers, preempting what an agency may say in the federal disability retirement forms, questions the agency will answer for you in the 3112d, representing federal employees in and outside the country, sf standard forms disability compensation federal employment, Standard Form 3112b, the forms that the agency must fill out in a federal disability retirement case, the process of frustration: federal disability retirement, USPS disability retirement, usps disability retirement forms, what the agency may say in the 3112d may not be very accurate, why federal agencies don't always tell the truth in cases of disability retirement | Leave a comment »
FERS & CSRS Disability Retirement for Federal and USPS Workers: The Limitation of Agency Actions
Often, in the process of filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS or CSRS, the client will ask the question, “Well, doesn’t that prove that I can’t do the job?” Such a question invariably points to some action by the Agency — a letter or a memorandum; a statement which the Supervisor made, etc. While it may be true that the Agency believes that a Federal or Postal employee is unable to perform, or is not performing, all of the essential elements of the job, remember that actions of the Agency can never replace the affirmative burden of proof that one is unable, medically, to perform the essential elements of one’s job.
One must keep in mind that the Office of Personnel Management is a separate Agency which is not necessarily in communication with the Agency which employs the Federal or Postal employee. The “mindset” of the Agency is not being considered by the Office of Personnel Management. Whatever the motivations of the Agency in doing what it is or will do, is to a great extent irrelevant to OPM. What the Agency is doing may well indicate “proof” as to other issues — i.e., inability to accommodate; acknowledgment that certain essential elements of one’s job is not being performed, etc. — but it does not prove that an individual is unable, as a result of a medical condition, to perform all of the essential elements of the job. Only a doctor can do that.
Sincerely,
Robert R. McGill, Esquire
Filed under: Agency’s and/or Supervisor’s Actions | Tagged: about the opm disability support claim from the us agency, accepting opm disability clients all across america, agency's influence in disability retirement, agency's influence on the opm disability claim is limited, agency's influence versus power to grant opm disability, attorney representing federal workers for disability throughout the united states, building a strong disability claim in the federal workplace, communication among federal agencies, disability retirement at the USPS, disability retirement for federal employees, federal disability is not determined by agency that employs you, federal disability lawyer, federal employee disability, federal supervisor response to employee work injury, fers disability and communication issues among federal agencies, fers disability application supervisor comments, FERS disability lawyer, FERS medical retirement, how much can a fed employer influence the fers disability application?, how to prove a federal employee disability claim, injured federal employee: don't wait for the agency to do things right, law firm representing clients in opm disability law all across america, legal services for federal and postal workers all across america, opm disability and the stated support from your agency, OPM disability attorney, owcp disability retirement, personal injury in a federal agency, proving you are eligible to medically retire from the federal government, representing federal employees from any us government agency, representing federal employees in and outside the country, statutory requirements in OPM disability law, the applicant's and the agency's legal arguments over opm disability, the influence of the agency in an fers disability claim is minimal, the lack of communication among the opm and your federal employer, the limited power of a supervisor in the fers disability retirement process, the most influential person in the fers disability retirement the, the perception of accommodation among federal supervisors, the real power of the agency in cases of opm disability, USPS disability retirement benefits, usps supervisors and their impact on the postal employee's disability, when the agency seeks non-adversarial removal | Leave a comment »