CSRS: The “Other” Civil Service System

Information concerning Federal Disability Retirement benefits will often refer to the universe of “FERS” employees (acronym for Federal Employees Retirement System), which was enacted by Congress in 1986 and became effective the following year), with little to no information concerning its replacement system, the Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS).

There are, additionally, some hybrid systems, sometimes referred to as CSRS-Offset; but FERS & CSRS constitute the crux of employment systems of retirement for all Federal employees and Postal workers. The reason for the unfairly-weighted balance in favor of FERS employees is that, because the system has been in place for almost 30 years, now, and most CSRS employees have either already retired, died in office, or are otherwise catatonic in the catacombs of bureaucracies, there is a basic assumption in place that any references to FERS employees and the benefit of Federal Disability Retirement, necessarily includes CSRS employees and is indirectly applicable to the surviving few remaining.

References to FERS thus necessarily assumes an inclusion of CSRS employees, and this is true in Federal Disability Retirement applications, and for any FERS or CSRS employees seeking to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits.  The primary differences between the two is merely one of completing standard forms.  Thus, for FERS disability retirement applicants, one must complete the SF 3107 series, as well as the series of SF 3112 forms; and for CSRS employees, the SF 2801 series is completed in place of SF 3107, but both systems must complete the SF 3112 series of forms.

Of course, when FERS was first introduced, enacted and presented to the entirety of the Federal public sector, the numbers of CSRS employees clearly outnumbered the number of FERS employees. Furthermore, when previously-separated CSRS employees (for whatever reasons) re-entered the Federal workforce, many were given the option of re-establishing inclusion and participation in the previously-abandoned system of CSRS. But, over time, and especially in the last decade, the number of FERS Government employees has outpaced CSRS employees, and the last and dying breed of CSRS employees will be like those Civil War veterans of yore, pictured in grainy photographs of faded daguerreotype plates, of antique images of a time past, and passing by today.

The “other” system has now become the new; and as time fades the faces of antiquity, those images of an age long past have replaced the reality of the present; sort of like computer-enhanced graphics which make us all look the age we desire.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Employee Medical Retirement: The Importance of Logical Sequence

In preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether under FERS or CSRS, it is important to recognize the logical “sequencing” of the Standard government forms to be submitted.

While the SF 3107 series (including Schedules A, B & C) and SF 2801 series (for CSRS employees, and also including Schedules A, B & C) may generally request personal and professional information of a rather innocuous nature (of course, one may argue that no amount or substantive form of information provided to the Federal government should be considered as such, but that is another issue altogether), the Federal/Postal Standard Forms which both FERS and CSRS must complete — the SF 3112A, SF 3112B, SF 3112C, and SF 3112D (yes, I know, there is a SF 3112E, but that is merely a checklist for the Agency to fill out; although, on SF 3112E is the very justification that proves that SF 3112C is not a necessary form, but rather to be used as an intermediate vehicle in order to obtain the necessary medical documentation for a Federal Disability Retirement application) — should be done so in a proper, logical sequence.  

Obviously, if one is going to utilize the “Physician’s Statement” (SF 3112C) in order to have the doctor provide the justifying foundation for a Federal Disability Retirement application (which, incidentally, the undersigned attorney would advise against), then that should probably be the first and primary Standard government Form to begin with.  It will likely intimidate the treating doctor, and perhaps even confuse the issue; but from a logical standpoint, that would be the one to begin with.  But then, logic and sequence is not of paramount importance in the Federal government; just take a look at the fiscal mess we are in to understand such a sentiment.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire