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 »
OPM Disability Retirement: Focusing upon the Bridge
In preparing, formulating and filing a Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS or CSRS, the multitude of aspects in preparing the application will often lend itself to detracting and distracting from the primary elements of an effective application and presentation.
Thus, worries about what the Supervisor will or will not say; whether the Agency will mis-characterize a supposed “good deed” they performed by declaring it to be an “accommodation”, with the danger that such declaration and characterization will be accepted by the Clerk at the Office of Personnel Management as true, etc. — all of these take away from the essence of creating that important bridge between one’s medical conditions and the essential elements of one’s positional duties.
Because the vast majority of denials issued by the Office of Personnel Management are based upon “insufficient medical documentation”, an undue focus upon other elements of a Federal Disability Retirement application would not be an intelligent utilization of one’s time and effort.
While OPM will certainly argue that the Agency has “accommodated” the Federal or Postal employee (and use that term improperly 9 times out of 10); and while OPM will point to elements in a Supervisor’s Statement as a further basis for a denial; each such supplemental argument by the Office of Personnel Management is nevertheless based upon the centrality of a primary argument, in most cases: Insufficient Medical Documentation.
As such, it is prudent to focus one’s efforts upon the primary basis which provides the foundation for an effective Federal Disability Retirement application: The bridge between one’s medical conditions, and the essential elements of one’s job.
Sincerely,
Robert R. McGill, Esquire
Filed under: Theory and Practice: Tips and Strategies for a Successful Application | Tagged: accommodation issues in FERS disability retirement, all conditions listed in the application should explain the "nexus", attorney representing federal workers for disability throughout the united states, condition that prevents to perform the essential functions, conditions that prevent performing the essential elements of your fed job, explaining the "nexus" as one of the most important issues in the medical report, Federal Disability, federal disability retirement, fers disability application supervisor comments, FERS disability retirement, insufficient medical documentation for OPM disability, neutralizing negative statements from supervisor's statements in sf 3112b, Nexus between Medical Condition and Essential Elements, nexus between medical disability and job performance, OPM disability retirement, plenty of nexus or bridges examples in the sf 3112a, Postal disability, postal service disability retirement, primary elements of an effective fers disability application, representing federal employees from any us government agency, starting with generic information about the nexus, the ''insufficient medical documentation'' argument, the bridge that connects the two most important dots in an opm disability claim, the bridge you must build in your federal employee disability application, the federal disability bridge, USPS disability retirement, what is really important is the nexus of medical condition and job performance | Leave a comment »