The MSPB denied restoration to a postal supervisor in part because he was drawing workers’ compensation. ECAB ruled he was entitled to draw workers’ compensation because the Postal Service wouldn’t restore him to duty in the local commuting area where he lived. The appellant had a psychological condition related to derogatory comments that Rochester P&DC employees had made about his fiancée. His only work restriction was that he must work in a congenial environment away from the Rochester P&DC.
Background:
The appellant was an EAS-17 Supervisor of Distribution Operations at the agency’s Rochester, New York Processing and Distribution Center (P&DC). On December 14, 2002, the appellant began suffering from a psychological condition related to derogatory comments that Rochester P&DC employees had made about his fiancée. The appellant absented himself from work, and the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP) ruled the condition compensable. The appellant moved to Fort Myers, Florida, in early 2004. It is undisputed that the appellant is capable of performing the full range of duties of his position in a location other than the Rochester P&DC; the only work restriction that the appellant has is that he must work in a congenial environment away from the Rochester P&DC.
On February 3, 2004, the agency offered the appellant an EAS-17 Supervisor of District Operations position at the Utica, New York P&DC. The appellant declined the job offer and OWCP terminated his benefits. The appellant appealed the decision to the Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board (ECAB), which reversed OWCP’s decision and reinstated the appellant’s benefits. The ECAB found that the agency was aware that the appellant was in the process of relocating to Fort Myers when it offered him the position in Utica, and that the agency was therefore obligated to find him suitable employment in the Fort Myers area, if possible.
We acknowledge a disparity between OPM’s restoration regulations at 5 C.F.R. § 353.301(d) and the Department of Labor’s (DOL) regulations at 20 C.F.R. § 10.508 regarding a compensably injured employee’s return to work. As explained above, 5 C.F.R. § 353.301(d) requires an agency only to attempt to restore a partially recovered individual within the former local commuting area. However, as the ECAB found in the appellant’s workers’ compensation appeal, 20 C.F.R. § 10.508 states that “[i]f possible, the employer should offer suitable reemployment in the location where the employee currently resides.”
Paul Dean vs US Postal ServiceRestoration MSPB vs OWCP2010 MSPB 187
You’re a PIG, maybe they were right!
“92” and “Stamp” Thanks, it’s good to know some people remember a little better than others. Good idea, put it in the suggestion box, dock pay and hold responsible parties accountable. Oops, the unions will never go for that.
……………………………………………………………..
“OhPlease!!!’ where are you?
Just staring at the screen with that vacancy in your eyes; dribbling baby food all over your chubby belly; playing with yourself and dwelling on that time your parents told you that you could really be something?
NEWS FLASH: you were destined to be the worthless garbage you turned out to be. (Well at least you lived up to that expectation.)
Mum and Dad would be really proud of you: willing to spout your holier than thou’ crap but unwilling to put your (their) name to it. I hope you haven’t been breeding.
Well, I’ll check back one last time in a couple of days hoping to have a laugh at your expense. Meanwhile, you just go on stealing from us taxpayers: screwing us with your extended breaks, lunches, washups and sub-par performance. A career thief is all you are.
What is it you believe in? Karma? You are screwed my friend!
Forever yours,
Paul
Got you too DEANO. Same scum still doing the same crap but you two TOOK A STAND. Good for you but nothing changed. My dues go to the bums who are going to get us all privatized NO PRIORITIES here just noise. Its been a long time I hope both of you are good. SAINT__ thats funny. No saints in this building but plenty of devils. Funny how people mix up smarts and arrogance. I remeber you as just smart. Screw the dummies who just won’t accept how stupid they are.
Go get em Paul, some of us remember what happened and how my own UNION left Sharon hanging and protected them assholes. I hope you sued all of them and got a million. And if the PO is still paying either of you then good. Take the money from the ones who started it to teach a lesson.I dont think theres gonna be a problem with karma for you too, just the ones here.Hope to see you around up here someday.
Why would I need to defend myself to you? You don’t even have the courage to label your imature and assinine interpretations of me, my life or anything else with your name. Let me guess… it’s Saint _______. (Moron the great?)
One more round of your idiocy and I’m signing off. So go ahead, take your best shot and then we’ll say goodbye for now (Karma will bring us happily together again I’m sure.) Damn, I hope you’ve been a perfect little @#%^ ’cause I’d hate to see you burning (and me standing there with a bucket of water).
Your friend and admirer.
Paul
Dear Paul,
Obviously the only thing you found to object to in my statement was my punctuation. It is a shame that you didn’t find the need to defend your obvious warping of the system. It is nice to see that your “High and Mighty” attitude has yet to change because that will be your downfall! Karma is a wonderful thing.
(nosferatu) FYI: full-time and part-time job and I bet my attendance and performance outshines yours.
Either give up on the past or do a bit of fact finding before you rush to judgement: foolishness just doesn’t become you.
(ohplease!!!) Air is a finite resource and you’re wasting it. Nobody will miss you (you know that in your heart don’t you?) Obviously exclamation points aren’t finite though: you are a well-funded public education outcome for sure.
Paul, I am very sorry that you are in such distress! It was such a shame to watch how you became a shell of a man after your wife finally threw you out after you stepped out on her a few times. I was so happy that you were able to find someone that you had so much in common with and I thought you could get on with your life! I guess you two really did have a lot in common…scamming the system! You do know that when the money runs out, so will your fiancee, don’t you?!!! Best of luck, you will need it!!!!
Hey Paul, I don’t care what happened, or was said. Go back to work like a man. I have been at Rochester for 16 years. I have put up with a lot of disgusting stuff, mostly from management, and I take my ass to work every day still. Before PO I spent 8 years in Marine Corps. I have walked over decomposing bodies and had the nightmares for 20 years. I still take my ass to work every day, because that is what a man does. Not sucking off the Comp tit.
You do not know “the individual in question.”
I am the individual in question.
I have never served in the Army reserves.
40++ is an irresponsible exaggeration. I had 2 [informal] EEO complaints filed against me. Both were dismissed because they were simply last ditch efforts of your ilk.
But thank you for letting us know that you are the true arbiter of “suffering real pain.” Maybe you could put your skills to work helping those who “can not get their claim approved” within a system that you sound well acquainted with.
Later la hoooo serrr!
PD
What a croc!!! I know the individual in question. Cogenial environment indeed! Someone told me he had 40+ EEO complaints against him.
His fiance was a slut. To give you a few examples: once after Halloween, I brought in some Snickers snack size candy. She remarked to me, ‘Snickers satisfies. Do you satisfy also?’ Another time she asked about why I have not worn some special shirts in a while. I replied that I did not have enough clothes that required cold water wash. So she suggested I bring them over to her house and wash them with her panties. She had been called a cocksucker to her face and responded that she was the best there was. You get the picture.
To get Compensation because he can not handle disparaging remarks about his girlfriend makes a travesty of the whole OWCP system for those who are suffering real pain and can not get their claim approved. He should not have left his wife to live with a slut.
The individual in question was also in the Army reserves. So tough ‘Mr. Hoo-Ha’ could not handle the comments made about his girlfriend. By her mannner of speaking and her behavior, she created the comments made about her.
jim says maria is stupid…my god you like to type and not one work about the Post office…you must be in management because most get paid to NOT work there either.
Importance of client’s perspective. A clinician places primary importance on understanding the client’s unique point of view, while the forensic psychologist is interested in accuracy, and the client’s viewpoint is secondary.
Voluntariness. Usually in a clinical setting a psychologist is dealing with a voluntary client. A forensic psychologist evaluates clients by order of a judge or at the behest of an attorney. The objectives of a forensic examination are confined by the applicable statutes or common law elements that pertain to the legal issue in question. Forensic psychologists perform a wide range of tasks within the criminal justice system. By far the largest is that of preparing for and providing testimony in the court room. Evaluating the client, preparing for testimony, and the testimony itself require the forensic psychologist to have a firm grasp of the law and the legal situation at issue in the courtroom, using the Crime Classification Manual and other sources.[11][12] This knowledge must be integrated with the psychological information obtained from testing, psychological and mental status exams, and appropriate assessment of background materials, such as police reports, prior psychiatric or psychological evaluations, medical records and other available pertinent information.[5] Forensic psychologists are frequently asked to make an assessment of an individual’s dangerousness or risk of re-offending. They may provide information and recommendations necessary for sentencing purposes, grants of probation, and the formulation of conditions of parole, which often involves an assessment of the offender’s ability to be rehabilitated. They are also asked questions of witness credibility and malingering.[13] Occasionally, they may also provide criminal profiles to law enforcement.
The ethical standards for a forensic psychologist differ from those of a clinical psychologist or other practicing psychologist because the forensic psychologist is not an advocate for the patient and nothing the patient says is guaranteed to be kept confidential. This makes evaluation of the patient difficult, as the forensic psychologist needs and wants to obtain certain information while it is often not in the patient’s best interest to provide it. The patient has no control over how that information is used.[26] Despite the signing of a waiver of confidentiality, most clients do not realize the nature of the evaluative situation.[7] Furthermore, the interview techniques differ from those typical of a clinical psychologist and require an understanding of the criminal mind and criminal and violent behavior.[27]
The typical grounds for malpractice suits also apply to the forensic psychologist, such as wrongful commitment, inadequate informed consent, duty and breach of duty, and standards of care issues. Some situations are clearer cut for the forensic psychologist. The duty to warn, which is mandated by many states, is generally not a problem because the client or defendant has already signed a release of information, unless the victim is not clearly identified and the issue of the identifiability of the victim arises. The forensic psychologist does have some additional professional liability issues. As mentioned above, confidentiality in a forensic setting is more complicated that in a clinical setting as the client or defendant is apt to misinterpret the limits of confidentiality despite being warned and signing a release.[16]
In her book titled, Whores of the Court: The Fraud of Psychiatric Testimony and the Rape of American Justice, Margaret Hagen, an experimental psychologist and professor, contends that mental health professionals testifying in court are “witchdoctors” and “psychoexperts’ who mislead judges and juries while chasing the “almighty dollar.” Experts who misrepresent the facts, for whatever reason, may face ethical and legal sanctions.
Ethical violations in forensic practice can occur for a variety of reasons, only one of which is the fact the psychologists are functioning in a profession with a different cultural ethic. Weissman and DeBow (2003) provide a comprehensive list of impediments to the ethical practice of psychology. This list includes the following obstacles:
• Not appreciating the different levels for the burden of proof between the disciplines and within the legal system.
• Failure to understand the unique issues associated with confidentiality and privilege communications in forensic work.
• Advocacy for a client or advocacy for a particular agenda as opposed to remaining neutral and objective.
• Failure to appreciate the unique role assessment plays in forensic settings and using inappropriate tests.
• Inadequate documentation and failing to recognize the need for meticulous notes.
Forensic psychology, From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Forensic psychology is the intersection between psychology and the criminal justice system. It involves understanding criminal law in the relevant jurisdictions in order to be able to interact appropriately with judges, attorneys and other legal professionals. An important aspect of forensic psychology is the ability to testify in court, reformulating psychological findings into the legal language of the courtroom, providing information to legal personnel in a way that can be understood.[1] Further, in order to be a credible witness, for example in the United States, the forensic psychologist must understand the philosophy, rules and standards of the American judicial system. Primary is an understanding of the adversarial system. There are also rules about hearsay evidence and most importantly, the exclusionary rule. Lack of a firm grasp of these procedures will result in the forensic psychologist losing credibility in the courtroom.[2] Questions asked by the court of a forensic psychologist are generally not questions regarding psychology but are legal questions and the response must be in language the court understands.
Forensic psychologists provide sentencing recommendations, treatment recommendations, and any other information the judge requests, such as information regarding mitigating factors, assessment of future risk, and evaluation of witness credibility. Forensic psychology also involves training and evaluating police or other law enforcement personnel, providing law enforcement with criminal profiles and in other ways working with police departments. Forensic psychologists work both with the Public Defender, the States Attorney, and private attorneys.