It is sometimes asked whether or not other issues which are concurrently and concomitantly filed can, and to what extent, impact the viability of a Federal Disability Retirement application submitted for approval to the Office of Personnel Management.
In order to comprehend such a question, it is important to view the answer from the various perspective of the parties. First, from the viewpoint of the Office of Personnel Management — unless they are specifically made aware of such collateral issues — such peripheral “other issues” would have no bearing upon a Federal Disability Retirement application unless it concerned the potential offset questions of Social Security Disability.
Whether a court filing which concerns a discrimination issue; or an EEOC filing, or perhaps a grievance procedure; all such collateral issues, from the viewpoint of the Office of Personnel Management, would have no relevance. Then, of course, there is the perspective of the “other” forum — perhaps there is an ongoing case at the Merit Systems Protection Board, or with the EEOC, or even a Federal Court case.
Whether, from the “other” forum, there may be an interest as to whether the Federal or Postal employee has filed for Federal Disability Retirement benefits with the Office of Personnel Management, is a question which only the other forum can answer.
If a claim is made in the alternate forum where the requested relief involves getting one’s job back, and at the same time, one has declared by the mere filing of a Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS or CSRS with the Office of Personnel Management, that one is no longer able to perform all of the essential elements of one’s job, then from the “other” perspective, what has been filed with the Office of Personnel Management may be of some interest to the other forum. However, remember that seemingly contradictory concurrent filings are not necessarily negatively viewed, especially if such actions are engaged in order to preserve one’s right to assert a legal standing.
Ultimately, however, it is a rare case indeed that an alternate, concurrent, concomitant filing with another forum has any relevance or impact upon a Federal Disability Retirement application.
Sincerely,
Robert R. McGill, Esquire
Filed under: Clarifications of Laws or Rules | Tagged: accepting opm disability clients all across america, applying for federal disability, collateral issues while on the federal disability retirement application process, CSRS disability retirement federal attorney, disability retirement at the USPS, discerning important from peripheral issues in the opm denial letter, distinguish core from collateral issues in a federal disability application, distractions that peripheral issues can cause to your federal disability retirement application, Federal Disability, federal disability attorney, federal disability retirement, FERS disability retirement, important and peripheral medical issues in the fers csrs disability application, interaction between an eeo complaint and an opm case, issues that may affect my fers disability application, mentioning other lawsuits or complaints in the opm disability application, mixing discrimination complaints and medical issues in the usps disability retirement application, nationwide representation of federal employees, offset between social security and opm disability, opm disability and federal discrimination cases, OPM disability retirement, owcp disability retirement, Postal disability, postal service disability retirement, pursuing collateral issues besides csrs disability retirement, representing federal employees from any us government agency, sometimes you may use collateral issues for your fers disability claim, statutory requirements in OPM disability law, USPS disability retirement benefits, when the opm disability client insists on using peripheral issues | Leave a comment »
Federal Employee Medical Retirement: The Potential Drawback
One of the potential drawbacks in pursuing collateral employment issues concomitantly with a Federal Disability Retirement application is that, as such employment issues are active and clearly in the collective consciousness of the Agency, the Supervisor, and all involved, the issue itself often gets sneaked into a Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS or CSRS via the back door.
This is not necessarily a negative thing, but can be a potential drawback if the Supervisor insists upon inserting the details of the collateral action in the Supervisor’s Statement. Whether such insertion and accompaniment with a Federal Disability Retirement application is “proper” or not, is a separate matter. From the perspective of the applicant who is awaiting a decision from the Office of Personnel Management, it matters not as to the proper actions of the Agency. What such actions by the rogue supervisor does, is to deflect the focus away from the medical issue, and redirects the reviewing official/representative at OPM that the “reason” for one’s early retirement is not one based upon a medical issue, but rather, is because of stresses or other factors caused by a hostile work environment, harassment issues, etc. This is normally a proposition which can be easily sidestepped, by arguing to OPM that whether or not such workplace issues have any basis or not, the treating doctor has nevertheless stated X, Y & Z. However, it can still be problematic, and that is why collateral workplace issues should be avoided, if at all possible.
Sincerely, Robert R. McGill, Esquire
Filed under: OPM Disability Actors, Theory and Practice: Tips and Strategies for a Successful Application | Tagged: avoiding using the "hostile environment" term in your opm disability claim, cases where the opm claims situational disability, collateral issues while on the federal disability retirement application process, CSRS disability retirement federal attorney, dealing with an harassment issue and the usps disability application, disability eeoc cases against federal agencies, discrimination against disabled federal workers and eeoc, eeo complaints and workers comp, federal disability attorney, fers disability application supervisor comments, FERS disability retirement, harassment in the Postal Service, harassment is not a medical issue, hostile work environment federal government, law firm representing clients in opm disability law all across america, many federal disability retirement cases are situational at the beginning, mixing discrimination complaints and medical issues in the usps disability retirement application, mixing your federal disability retirement claim with other lawsuits, nationwide representation of federal employees, neutralizing negative statements from supervisor's statements in sf 3112b, OPM disability retirement, owcp disability retirement, postal service disability retirement, potential problems with your fers disability application, psychiatric disorder caused by a hostile work environment, pursuing collateral issues besides csrs disability retirement, remembering that opm disability retirement is primarily a medical issue, representing federal employees in and outside the country, situational disability and the hostile environment claim, Standard Form 3112b, supervisors' revenge against Postal workers, the dangers of getting your opm claim situational, the injured federal worker and the unfair supervisor, the limited power of a supervisor in the fers disability retirement process, the unfair postal supervisor, the venom of the supervisor, unequal treatment issues in the federal workplace, USPS disability retirement, why the sf 3112b matters less than the doctor's statements, your supervisor and federal disability retirement | Leave a comment »