It is amazing how a Supervisor’s Statement is completed. Normally, it is completed without much thought; sometimes, it is completed with too much thought (and self-protective, CYA language concerning how much effort the agency attempted in “accommodating” the employee, when in fact little or no effort was made); more often than not, there is a last, parting shot at the employee — some unnecessary “dig” which often contradicts other portions of the statement; and, finally, every now and then, the Supervisor’s Statement is completed in the proper manner, with forethought and truthfulness.
Fortunately, the Office of Personnel Management rarely puts much weight on a Supervisor’s Statement in making a determination on a Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS or CSRS — unless there is some glaring statement of a deliberate attempt to undermine the Application. This is rare, because it is a medical disability retirement, not a Supervisor’s disability retirement — meaning, that it is the medical opinion, not the opinion of a Supervisor, which is (and should be) most important.
Sincerely,
Robert R. McGill, Esquire
Filed under: OPM Disability Actors - The Supervisor, OPM Disability Application - SF 3112B Supervisor’s Statement for CSRS and FERS, OPM Disability Process - 1st Stage: OPM Disability Application | Tagged: assessment for postal disability retirement from supervisor, can the opm take seriously the integrity of federal supervisors?, cases where a federal employee is denied light duty, completing the sf 3112b with integrity, csrs disability benefits, cya philosophy in postal management, documentation in support of the disability retirement application - 3112b, don't always count with the support of an agency supervisor, ethical issues when filing the 3112b form, federal disability retirement, federal supervision bullying even in the opm disability application, federal supervisor response to employee work injury, fers disability application supervisor comments, FERS disability retirement, fers federal government disability retirement, filing a supervisor's opm statement with care and integrity, financial compensation for injured or ill federal workers, how much thought and effort put on the sf 3112b, how the sf 3112b should be filled out, if the supervisors tells lies in the opm disability application, injured light limited duty supervisor or 204b, injured postal workers at the mercy of their supervisors, more on the opm disability application supervisor's statements, neutralizing negative statements from supervisor's statements in sf 3112b, opm disability abuse of power adverse actions, opm disability and the supervisor who says everything's fine, opm disability annuity, OPM disability retirement, opm supervisor statement disability retirement, Postal management and supervisor positions, representing federal employees from any us government agency, responding to revengeful supervisors in the us postal service, SF 3112B Supervisor’s Statement, supervisor's statements and defamation, the 3112b should not be used as a means to get even with the employee, the challenge of ethical behavior in the federal workplace, the effortless sf 3112b, the injured federal worker and the unfair supervisor, the perception of accommodation among federal supervisors, the postal service supervisors and their claim of support, the revenge of a postal supervisor, the usual cya philosophy from the federal employment "leaders", unsympathetic federal supervisors and the plight of the injured federal worker, USPS disability retirement, usps supervisors and their impact on the postal employee's disability, usps workers who retire with a disability, when supervisors don't notice any medical condition in federal worker, when the supervisor files the form with fairness and balance, why the sf 3112b matters less than the doctor's statements, your supervisor and federal disability retirement | 1 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 »