The burden is undertaken by those have little choice in the matter, but who willingly submit to the responsibility and obligation. Traditionally, the “beast of burden” (other than being a Rolling Stone song) refers to a somewhat-domesticated animal, perhaps a donkey or an ox, who must bear the weight of man’s work.
In law, the “burden” is one of proof — of the affirmative obligation to present one’s facts, persuasive argumentation based upon such facts, and the application of the relevant law which supports both the facts and the arguments. The “other side” in the litigation has no burden at all, and can simply sit and do nothing, if he or she so chooses, and see whether or not the plaintiff, the appellant or the Federal Disability Retirement applicant has submitted sufficient proof such that he or she has met his/her burden of proof.
As the weight placed upon a beast of burden is often heavy and demanding, so in a similar vein the litigant who has the burden of proof should always expect to exceed what is “necessary” in any given case. For the Federal or Postal employee who is filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether under FERS or CSRS, it is indeed a heavy burden to bear in order to meet the legal criteria of a Federal bureaucracy who has the unmitigated power and authority to approve or deny.
The burden of proof — it is as heavy as that which we place upon a beast of burden, and the weight of such responsibility can overwhelm us, lest we have the reserve of strength to plod onward.
Sincerely,
Robert R. McGill, Esquire
Filed under: Burden of Proof | Tagged: a process that requires proof and documentation, applicant preponderance of evidence burden in federal employees, attorney representing federal workers for disability throughout the united states, being eligible versus proving eligibility in opm disability retirement law and practice, burden of medical documentation to support a federal disability retirement case, Burden of Production, Burden of Proof, connecting legal standards and sufficiency tests, consistency of argumentation principles key to success, CSRS disability retirement federal attorney, disability retirement for federal employees, documentation proof during the federal disability retirement process, expecting unrepresented claimants to bear the burden of presenting a compelling case, federal disability attorney, fers disability retirement and the burden of proof concept, higher legal standards used by the opm to deny disability retirement, how injured federal employees can be freed from carrying that heavy burden on their backs, how to prove a federal employee disability claim, if mentioning facts alone will prove the truth about your medical condition, improving chances of getting federal disability retirement, law firm representing clients in opm disability law all across america, legal argumentation and facts on the federal disability retirement application, legal arguments in the federal disability application, legal representation for injured federal workers, legal standards in opm disability retirement law, limited burden of proof shift over to OPM, logical argumentation to support key facts in your fers disability application, making rational arguments along with sound medical evidence, meeting all of the critical elements and the opm's legal burden of proof, meeting the basic requirements or actually proving my fers disability claim, meeting the burden of eligibility requirements for medical retirement under fers, opm disability retirement is a proof-based process, opm's own ''beyond reasonable doubt'' standard application, owcp disability retirement, persuasive argument in federal disability retirement claims, postal service disability retirement, proof of eligibility in federal postal disability, proving fers disability, proving you are eligible to medically retire from the federal government, proving your fers disability claim to meet the criteria, relevant facts and arguing a federal disability case, representing federal employees from any us government agency, the burden of proof concept in opm disability, the federal employee and the burden of living with a medical condition, the legal and medical persuasive impact of your opm disability claim, the not-so-obvious principle of a good opm disability application, the responsibility of proving your fers disability claim, the right approach to a possible long term federal disability process, the standard of proof, what's the burden of proof under fers disability retirement law?, writing a persuasively descriptive narrative for opm disability | 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 »