OPM Medical Retirement: Beyond Forms

Providing evidence and proving your case

Some of Plato’s works elucidate concerns which belie clarity of thought, where conceptual confusions become enmeshed with absurd abstractions and unnecessary complications beyond the parameters of linguistic capacity to provide technical comprehension; in a word, he was complicating matters.

The Republic embraced a bold insight into human nature and the political apparatus of power; some of his later works provide fodder for those who allege esotericism; for, even Aristotle quipped with ironic sarcasm the plenitude of conceptual confusions inherent in the system of Forms having an “objective” reality apart from the physical universe.  But even today, we must contend with forms — forms in the form of bureaucratic mandates.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who finds themselves in a state of necessity because of a medical condition, following the requirements of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, is something which must be embraced.

Filing for Federal Disability Retirement is not simply a matter of filling out forms, however; it is the combination of gathering sufficient evidence such that it meets the burden of proof; of coordinating the evidence with formulating persuasive argumentation such that the law supports the evidence compiled; then, to present the whole as a coherent pathway to a successful outcome — an approval of one’s Disability Retirement claim issued by OPM.

Just as within the dusty notebooks of Plato’s lectures, the linguistic concepts of Forms can be confused with the physical manifestation of appearances within the perceived world, so the Federal and Postal employee can become confounded and confused by the modern day requirement of forms within the Leviathan of a bureaucracy; but all forms required, whether the SF 2801 series for CSRS employees, the SF 3107 forms for FERS employees, and the SF 3112 series for both CSRS and FERS employees — all merely constitute the minimal requirements.

Preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits is not merely a matter of forms; it must go beyond such standard forms; and as Plato’s Republic is not merely a form of government, but a blueprint for the elite to take power, so the proper preparation and presentation on OPM’s Disability Retirement forms must follow the dictates of totalitarianism, lest one is left in the shadows of that proverbial Cave in the allegory of appearances.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

FERS & CSRS Disability Standard Forms and the Proverbial Blank Slate

The paradigm of a tabula rasa is a frightening one.  It implies a complete negation of historical context, of evolutionary influence, and therefore denies instinct, nature, and pre-conditional implications.  But clearly there are confines and parameters of behaviors, and different species of animals will act in specific ways peculiar to the individuality of the entity, while taking on certain imprinting models if surrounded by members of other species.

To assume, however, that no context exists, either in prefix or suffix form, is to deny a fundamental truth at one’s hazard in doing so.  For Federal employees and Postal workers who begin to complete the required forms for a Federal Disability Retirement application — whether the informational requirements queried in SF 3107 (or SF 2801 for CSRS individuals); or the series of SF 3112 forms which inquire into the foundational questions of one’s medical conditions, their impact upon the essential elements of the job, etc. — it is important to approach any and all such standard forms with a view towards denying the existence of a tabula rasa, or the concept of a blank slate.

Such pristine states of being do not exist, neither in nature, nor in the complex world of administrative bureaucracies.  The history of the forms, of SF 3107, SF 2801, or SF 3112A, SF 3112B, SF 3112C, SF 3112D or SF 3112E, all have a history preceding and superseding the date of the formulation and printing of such forms.  Statutory underpinnings, U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board rulings, Federal Circuit Court of Appeals opinions, and expansive legal opinions, all provide a context for each question queried, and each piece of information requested.

Thus, to approach any such OPM Disability Retirement standard form as if it is merely a blank slate, is to proceed down a dark and curving road with ignorance and fail to realize that it is not a quiet, rural road with nary a car, but the Autobahn busy with high-powered vehicles testing the limits of speed.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

Informational OPM Forms (SF 3107) versus Specific Content OPM Forms (SF 3112)

Categories are important in order to properly bifurcate, distinguish, identify and comprehend for effective satisfaction and completion. If such differentiated distinctions are not clearly understood, one can easily be lulled into responding to a specific-content question as if it is merely “informational” in nature.

Thus, for the Postal and Federal employee who is formulating responses to Standard Forms for purposes of filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, whether the Federal employee or Postal worker is under FERS or CSRS, the sequence of preparing for completion in providing satisfactory answers is important.

OPM form SF 3107 (the “SF” stands for “standard form”) requests basic, factual information data, such as the applicant’s name, address, agency information, marital status, whether and to what extent one wants to elect survivor’s benefits, etc. The accompanying form, Schedules A, B & C, requests further information regarding military service, whether time in the military was bought back, as well as any OWCP claims previously or currently submitted or received, etc.

Then, in preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, again whether one is under FERS or CSRS, the accompanying SF 3112 series must be completed and filed. One’s mental status and intellectual antenna, however, should immediately be placed on high alert when encountering and engaging the SF 3112 series of OPM forms. For, in this series of Standard Forms (SF 3112A, SF 3112B, SF 3112C, SF 3112D & SF 3112E), the distinguishing features should become immediately self-evident by the very nature of the questions queried. No longer are the forms merely requesting basic information; rather, interpretive considerations must be thoughtfully engaged.

Questions concerning one’s medical conditions; what medical conditions will be considered; whether one can later supplement the listing of medical conditions if further medical developments arise; whether there is room on the form itself for a full description and, if not, can a continuation of the form be attached; the impact upon the essential elements of one’s positional duties; what those essential elements are; and multiple other similar conundrums suddenly become presented, necessitating the switch from mere “information” to one of “specific content” directed by the change in the series of OPM forms from SF 3107 to SF 3112.

Paradigm shifts were made famous by Thomas Kuhn in his historically important work, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. It is no less important to recognize that a paradigm shift is equally important in completing OPM Disability Retirement forms. While there is no book which guides the Federal or Postal employee, such as, “The Structure of Form-Filling Revolutions”, the identification and recognition that filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits requires an acuity of mind in filling out OPM forms, is an important step in reaching a successful outcome.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

SF 3112

Standard Forms are a necessary part of life. Bureaucracies streamline for efficiency of services; the question of whether such efficiency is for the benefit of an applicant to a Federal agency, or to ease the workload of the agency and its employees, is ultimately a fatuous question: as common parlance would sigh with resignation, “it is what it is”.

For the Federal and Postal employee who suffers from a medical condition, such that the medical condition impacts and ultimately prevents one from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s positional duties, filing an application for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, whether the Federal or Postal worker is under FERS or CSRS, will be a requirement which will include completing OPM application forms. There will be the SF 3107 series of forms, as well as the SF 3112 forms. Such forms request a tremendous amount of information, both personal and of a very confidential nature.

The justification for requesting such information by the agency which will review such forms (the U.S. Office of Personnel Management in the later stages of a Federal Disability Retirement application, but initially through one’s own agency, including the Human Resource Office of the agency for which the Federal or Postal employee works, as well as the Supervisor of the applicant who is applying for Federal Disability benefits), is based upon a two-folded approach: The applicant who voluntarily applies for Federal Disability benefits is required to provide such information in order to prove eligibility, and such voluntariness justifies the request itself; and, secondly, there is a “need to know” such information in order to properly assess such information, based upon a preponderance of the evidence.

Beyond the SF 3107 forms, the SF 3112 forms will ask for detailed information on the most personal of issues: One’s medical conditions and the impact upon employment capabilities and daily living issues; request of the Supervisor information concerning work performance; ask of the agency to assess and evaluate any capability for accommodating a medical condition; and a similar multitude of onerous, prying questions.

Filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits will require much of the Federal and Postal employee seeking a medical retirement annuity, in the very forms which allegedly “streamline” the process, and these will necessarily include SF 3107 forms and SF 3112 forms. In the end, however, when weighed comparatively against one’s health and the need to move on to a less stressful environment, the price one must pay is relatively cheap when considering the high cost of continuing in the same vein.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

CSRS & FERS Medical Disability Retirement: Platonic and Other Forms

Forms are interesting conceptual constructs:  They are created for ease of use; yet, concurrently, they contain, restrict, and by all appearances, limit the ability to go beyond the “form”.  Thus it is with Plato’s philosophical proposition of Forms — they represent the “essence” of what a thing is, as it is; and, like government forms, one is presumable unable to violate the essence in their particularized representative appearances.

The difference, however, between Platonic Forms and government-issued forms, is quite obvious:  Plato’s Forms represent the highest and best of any individual construct in the physical world; government forms rarely represent anything but a bureaucratic decision to force conformity upon anyone and everyone contemplating filing for a benefit.

In preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether under FERS or CSRS, the potential applicant must understand that he/she will be confronted with multiple and complex forms to complete.  How one completes each form; what one states on any given form; whether one answers the questions posed in an adequate or sufficient manner — each of these will have a direct and often irreparable impact upon the success or failure of a Federal Disability Retirement packet.

The forms themselves may appear simplistic in appearance and content (i.e., SF 3107 series for those under FERS; SF 2801 for those under CSRS; SF 3112 series for both FERS & CSRS); what they represent, however, constitute unstated complexities which can only be understood within the full context of the evolution of statues, regulations and case-law handed down throughout the years, which make up the entirety of the compendium of Federal Disability Retirement practice.

One would never have thought that government-issued forms would be as complicated to understand as Platonic Forms; but then, Plato never encountered the U.S. Office of Personnel Management — otherwise, he may never have proposed that there is indeed the existence of the Form of Beauty and Goodness.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

Early Medical Retirement for Disabled Federal Workers: The Bad Question

As children, we were encouraged to “ask questions“, and often with such niceties as, “Now, remember, there is no such thing as a ‘dumb question'” (despite all of us, even in tender years, knowing the untruth of such an assertion as we witnessed the facial expressions of horrified teachers, parents and neighbors — and of course, the smug, sidelong glances of those older siblings).

But the problem with taking such childhood experiences long into adulthood, is that it ignores the obvious:  the character and essence of a question determines the outcome of the answer.  Sometimes, a bad question leads to a bad answer.  In such an event, one must consider reformulating the question, or ignoring it altogether.

In preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether under FERS or CSRS, the Federal and Postal employee encounters multiple ‘bad questions’ — first in the form of the Standard government forms (SF 3107, with Schedules A, B & C for the FERS employee; SF 2801, with Schedules A, B & C for the CSRS employee; and SF 3112 series for both FERS and CSRS employees) and the questions posed in such forms — especially on SF 3112A (Applicant’s Statement of Disability); then, in a denial at the Reconsideration Stage of the process (for, in such a denial are contained inherent questions of what allegedly one ‘must’ do in order to meet the standards of OPM); then, finally, the questions which must be answered in order to satisfy an Administrative Judge at the MSPB.

But questions are funny vehicles of communication; often, it reflects more upon the questioner rather than upon the one who answers, and in the case of an OPM Case Worker, and of certain particular persons, this is all the more so.  Lest we forget another adage we learned in grade school (more on the playground among bullies, tough guys and the ‘cool’ set):  Don’t ask a question you don’t already know the answer to.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire