In preparing, formulating and filing a Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS or CSRS, a considerable amount of effort goes into anticipating any objections which may be encountered by the Office of Personnel Management, and to “preempt” such anticipatory objections by addressing them at the outset.
A proper balance must be maintained in engaging in such preemptive accounting, because one does not want to address the issues which would unnecessarily create a “red flag”, yet at the same time, discussing and explaining reasonable areas of potential concern should be a part of any Federal Disability Retirement application.
The problems always arise because it is the Federal or Postal employee who is filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits who has the affirmative burden of proving one’s eligibility for Federal Disability Retirement benefits. The Federal or Postal employee must, by a preponderance of the evidence, prove his or her “burden of proof” affirmatively.
Conversely, the Office of Personnel Management has the authority to review, criticize, analyze, and ultimately approve or deny a Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS or CSRS. They can merely sit back and take pot shots at an application, point out that this particular legal criteria was not “sufficiently met”, or simply make a generic statement that the medical evidence did not present a “compelling enough” case (what in the world could such a generalized non-statement possible mean?).
Yet, one must play the language game, and play it well, and the best way to play it is to attempt to preempt and anticipate OPM’s potential objections, and to meet one’s burden of proof by jumping ahead, and predicting how an OPM Representative might view the Federal Disability Retirement application that is being prepared. Predicting the future is always a tenuous endeavor; nevertheless, one must engage the potential pitfalls, and anticipate the actions of the Office of Personnel Management, if one is going to be successful.
Sincerely,
Robert R. McGill, Esquire
Filed under: Burden of Proof | Tagged: addressing some potential issues in advance without waving the red flag, anticipatory planning in the csrs disability process, attorney representing federal workers for disability throughout the united states, being eligible versus proving eligibility in opm disability retirement law and practice, Burden of Production, Burden of Proof, CSRS disability retirement federal attorney, FERS disability retirement, fers disability retirement and the burden of proof concept, giving the opm red flags to deny your disability claim, how to anticipate possible problems in your postal disability application, identifying and preempting only real potential problems in the 3112a form, making an effort to preempt opm's future legal arguments, meeting the burden of eligibility requirements for medical retirement under fers, nationwide representation of federal employees, opm disability -- it's all about proving you are too disabled for your federal job, OPM disability retirement, owcp disability retirement, postal service disability retirement, preempting future problems with your federal disability application, representing federal employees from any us government agency, USPS disability retirement, what's the burden of proof under fers disability retirement law?, when to preempt opm's future arguments at the mspb level, why should I anticipate opm's future excuses to deny my disability claim? | 1 Comment »