Federal Disability Retirement Benefits for the Postal Worker: The Decision is Always a Personal One to Make
The following is an editorial written for PostalReporter.com by Federal Disability Attorney Robert R. McGill
The distinction between a principle and a personal choice is tantamount to a starving man eyeing a delicious red apple; the apple itself may represent the perfection of all apples, and the very beauty of the fruit may be one of a kind; but the enjoyment of its very beauty is superseded by the base desire of man. Beauty and the appreciation of art, while great in principle, can only exist once the fundamental appetites are satisfied. — From The Lost Taoist
For a Postal worker, filing of grievances, EEO Complaints, being the pincushion for harassing supervisors, and working in constant pain have all become a commonplace part of a patchwork of a long and difficult career. Often, a decision must be made: should principle prevail, or should one remain quiet in a Postal career without making waves? Is the adversarial nature and confrontational requirements of filing a grievance, or a formal EEO Complaint, or an appeal to the Merit Systems Protection Board, or even becoming involved in a class-action lawsuit – is it worth the aggravation, or should one quietly “move on”?
Sadly, this has been a haunting question which has plagued Postal Workers for the past decade or more. The workplace culture has become an altered landscape. There has not been a craft which has been left untouched. From the Letter Carrier (Rural or City) who once had the time and pleasure of greeting the neighbors; to the Mail Handler, Distribution Clerks, Mail Processing Clerks; from Sales and Service Associates to Electronic Technicians; from Custodians to Window Clerks – the culture of the workplace has changed. Whether as a result of increasing competition from private delivery companies, or because of the yearly deficit and chronic loss of revenue from email, technology, and top-heavy upper and middle management salaries, it is always the Craft Employee at the Postal Service who suffers from the trickle-down reality of a decaying system.
The National Reassessment Program (NRP) is merely the culminating movement of all of the prior, piecemeal attempts of an organization attempting to shed itself of a burdensome workforce. Modified or “light duty” assignments are now a thing of the past. If a Postal Worker has an accepted OWCP Claim, and is being paid Temporary Total Disability compensation, that Postal Worker has one of two options upon recovery from an on-the-job injury: upon rehabilitation from the injury, return to full duty, or remain on OWCP. There was a time when the Postal Service (in conjunction and cooperation with the Office of Worker’s Compensation Program coordinator) was offered a light duty, modified position – one which attempted to allow the Postal Worker to perform duties within the physical restrictions and limitations imposed by the medical condition, and the treating doctor. No more. In this day of streamlining and squeezing every ounce of productivity, past loyalties amount to no quantifiable good will. Either the Postal Worker is fully productive, or he or she is shown the exit.
Lawsuits – whether individual or class-action — challenging the National Reassessment Program, are all well and good. Fighting for a principle; challenging the legality of a monolithic program which blindly discriminates against the most vulnerable in a society – those with medical conditions which prevent them from performing the full panoply of a Postal job – is an admirable and worthwhile fight to engage in. But for the individual, there is always the problem of fighting for a cause while at the same time providing for one’s family, one’s future, and securing one’s income. For that, each individual must decide what is best for one’s personal circumstances.
Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS or CSRS has always been an option for Postal Workers who have a chronic medical condition. Where a medical condition arose as a result of an occupational disease or an on-the-job injury, a claim under the Department of Labor, Office of Worker’s Compensation Programs was the first and primary option for a claim. However, because OWCP is not a “retirement system”, but rather a compensation program designed to allow for rehabilitation and reentry into the workforce, unless a medical condition was expected to last a minimum of 12 months or more, Federal Disability Retirement was and is a “second option” for most Postal Workers. If, on the other hand, the medical condition did not arise as a result of a work-related injury, then Federal Disability Retirement often became the primary option.
For most Postal employees, because of the very physical and repetitive nature of work required of Craft employees, the injuries which one sustained and incurred were more often than not, job-related. Everything from Cervical and Lumbar injuries to Rotator Cuff and Shoulder Impingement conditions; from Carpal Tunnel Syndrome to arthritic knees; from Plantar Fasciitis to radiating pain and chronic and diffuse pain – most such injuries could be attributed to the very physical and inherently high-impact nature of the duties required. Even Psychiatric medical conditions – of Major Depression, Anxiety, Panic Attacks, etc. – could often be successfully filed as an OWCP claim.
As an OWCP claim, rehabilitation and reentry into the Postal Service with either a modified light duty position in duties performed, or in number of hours worked (with the remaining hours being paid for by OWCP) was a possibility. But with the National Reassessment Program, and the general movement by the U.S. Postal Service to refuse any modified or light duty positions, the only option available has become Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS or CSRS.
Because OWCP is not a retirement system, the NRP net which has been widely cast, has resulted in the tightening of options open. The purpose of the NRP has been to shed the U.S. Postal Service of all workers who are not fully productive. This then forces the Postal Employee to file for OWCP benefits. But because OWCP is not a retirement system, such benefits are neither permanent, nor predictably stable. Where does this leave the Postal Worker today? One can always file a lawsuit, or a grievance, or join a class-action lawsuit. The choice between fighting for a principle, or attempting to survive economically is always a hard one to make.
More and more, the option of filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS or CSRS has been the preferred option. While Federal Disability Retirement benefits pays only 60% of the average of one’s highest three consecutive years the first year, then 40% every year thereafter, nevertheless, it is a stable base income which allows for the individual to go out into the private sector and make (in addition to the annuity) up to 80% of what one’s former position currently pays. As such, it is an option which can be attractive and viable for the Postal Worker today, precisely because the avenue of options have become more and more delimiting in this day and age.
About the Author
Attorney Robert R. McGill specializes in securing Federal Disability Retirement benefits for Federal and Postal workers under both FERS and CSRS. He represents Federal and Postal employees from all across the United States, from the West Coast to the East, and every state in between, as well as Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, Europe, Japan, etc. For more information about his legal services, please visit his Federal Disability Retirement and U.S. Postal Service Disability Retirement websites
Editorial: 10 Tips to Remember When Filing for Postal Disability Retirement Benefits
Filed under: Articles, FERS, nrp, postal, postal news, retirement, usps
Article written exclusively for PostalReporter.com by Robert R. McGill,Esq.
Whether you call it “Postal Disability Retirement”, “Federal Disability Retirement”, or “OPM Disability Retirement”, the available options under the National Reassessment Program all lead to the same road: the injured Postal Worker is being squeezed out of the workplace, and it is time to secure one’s future by asserting the legal rights that are available.
If a gentleman tips his hat to a lady, has he given anything? If he tips his hat unaware that the lady is present, has he still tipped his hat? If you tip your hat to a waiter, have you satisfied the convention of tipping? If a man receives ‘a tip’, must it be of value in order for it to truly be a tip, or is bad advice, or nonsense, still considered a tip even if it leads to nothing? If a bill is for $1,000.00 and you leave a $100 tip, are you still a cheapskate? If the same person receives a bill for $200.00 and leaves a $100.00 tip, is he then a generous tipper? – From Top to Toe and Tip to Tip
10 Tips to Remember When Filing for Postal Disability Retirement Benefits
During this time of turmoil, when Postal employees are undergoing economic, financial, internal and structural corporate reverberations from all angles; where the Postmaster general has decided to call it quits and retire; where email and technology have altered the landscape of how a population communicates, thereby impacting the profitability of a mail service whose paradigm inception began in the days of Benjamin Franklin; during these economic times of hardship – when the National Reassessment Program is impacting Postal employees all across the United States – filing for Federal Disability Retirement is an option that Postal employees must consider.
Some common questions are often asked when contemplating filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits for FERS & CSRS (as well as “CSRS-offset”) employees. How easy is it to get? Should a Postal employee try to submit the application for Federal Disability Retirement, get it rejected, then get an attorney? Should Social Security Disability benefits (SSDI) also be filed for? Should I file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits while I am on OWCP?
These are just some of the preliminary questions which a Postal employee will face when first contemplating filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits. When contemplating this course of action, it is well to remember the following 10 “tips”: Read more
Federal Disability Retirement and the U.S. Postal Service: Lack of Loyalty & Full of Shortsightedness
The following is an article from Attorney Robert R. McGill written exclusively for PostalReporter:
There was a time when the U.S. Postal Service worked in conjunction with the Department of Labor (under FECA/OWCP) to keep hard-working Postal employees who were injured on the job, with offers of modified duties to retain a productive workforce. It was a time when the USPS was forward-looking; when competition from other companies was of no concern, because the USPS had the most productive workforce and could compete with the best of them. Part of the reason why this was so was because of a conceptual paradigm which is fast disappearing: Loyalty.
Loyalty, as a working corporate model, requires a bilateral conceptual paradigm. By retaining injured workers and providing them with meaningful work in a modified environment and tools, the U.S. Postal Service was daily telling its people: You worked hard for us those many years; we will work with you and remain loyal.
Fast-forward to the present day. Postal Workers who for several years have worked under the Rehabilitation Job Offer Guidelines, are suddenly handed a letter which states: “Notice of No Work Available within the operational needs of the service.” The letter goes on to delineated the fact that such determination of unavailability of work is based upon a “comprehensive review” of the USPS operational needs and comparing them to the current medical documentation of the injured Postal Employee. What is missing in this “new” paradigm? Does this reflect an organization which looks to its competitors with a positive view to challenging them in the marketplace? Does it value its employees? Does it engender a desire on the part of its workforce to work harder, be more competitive, and to expend all efforts to the point of excellence? Or, does it act like a wounded animal, fearful of its own shadow, and trying to protect its executive-level benefits and perks?
In professional football, how many times have we seen the team try and protect its 3-point lead for the remainder of the game? What inevitably happens?
Under the National Reassessment Program (the “NRP”), the U.S. Postal Service is attempting to validate a methodical paradigm of cutting its workforce by going after everyone who is less than “fully productive”. By doing so, it has destroyed any sense of corporate unity and company loyalty.
The Postal Worker today who is subject to the NRP is left with limited choices. On the one hand, he or she can accept the determination of the U.S. Postal Service that “no work is available”, and go on to file for benefits under FECA/OWCP. However, the Postal Worker must recognize that OWCP is only a temporary system of monetary compensation. Another avenue which the Postal Worker needs to consider is to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS or CSRS. While Federal Disability Retirement benefits do not pay as well as OWCP benefits (generally, 60% of the average of one’s highest-3 consecutive years the first year, then 40% every year thereafter, under FERS; a different calculation under CSRS), it provides for one benefit which FECA/OWCP does not: independence and separation from the government entity.
Loyalty is a dying concept. It was a concept which was alive and well when, once upon a time, companies took the long view, looked to the future, to its continuum of growth and prosperity, and sharing that vision of a bright future with its employees. For the essence of loyalty always encapsulated a sense of the long term – of “being in it together” through prosperous times, as well as challenging times. Of course, even during the primacy of the U.S. Postal Service, Federal Disability Retirement benefits were still there for Postal employees (and similarly for all Federal employees) who could no longer perform one or more of the essential elements of one’s job. The interesting thing, of course, is that many Postal employees continued to work at modified jobs offers by the U.S. Postal Service, because of their sense of loyalty and commitment.
Indeed, when the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit rendered its opinion in the case of Bracey v. Office of Personnel Management, 236 F.3d 1356 (Fed. Cir. 2001) — most Postal employees continued to work at their modified jobs, despite being eligible for Federal Disability Retirement benefits. Bracey is still the prevailing case addressing the issue of accommodations for Federal and Postal employees. It stands for the proposition that a Federal or Postal employee is eligible for Federal Disability Retirement benefits even if he or she works in a “light duty”, modified position which may include “an ad hoc set of light duties” and may even continue “to pay the employee at the same level as before.” (Bracey, 236 F.3d 1356, at p.1362). Thus, while some may argue that the primary reason why injured Postal employees continued to work at the U.S. Postal Service was because the jobs were “easy” and that they couldn’t find a better-paying job elsewhere, the truth of the matter is that the vast majority of Postal Workers continued to work under the Rehabilitation Job Offer Guidelines because of an overriding belief that it was a career worth pursuing.
Loyalty was still a paradigm which Postal Workers believed in. With the implementation of the National Reassessment Program, in conjunction with the deep economic recession which the country is undergoing presently, Postal employees should not feel that filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits is an act of “disloyalty”. Loyalty, in order for it to retain its meaningful paradigm, must at its core reflect a bilateral proposition. By initiating and implementing the National Reassessment Program, the U.S. Postal Service has abrogated its core pledge of loyalty. As such, the U.S. Postal Worker is left with a unilateral avenue of loyalty – one which must now be viewed with a singular focus: not upon the best interests of the organization that once was – that competitive entity called the U.S. Postal Service; no, rather, that singular focus must be concentrated upon the best interests of the individual Postal Worker. Federal Disability Retirement is an avenue which allows for independence and a foundation of income; it is something to be considered.
Attorney Robert R. McGill specializes in securing Federal Disability Retirement benefits for Federal and Postal workers under both FERS and CSRS. He represents Federal and Postal employees from all across the United States, from the West Coast to the East, and every state in between, as well as Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, Europe, Japan, etc. For more information about his legal services, please visit his OPM Disability Retirement and U.S. Postal Service Disability Retirement websites.
© 2010 PostalReporter.com – This article may not be reproduced without express written consent.
Federal Disability Retirement under FERS or CSRS: Understanding the Different Perspectives and Differing Interests
by Attorney Robert R. McGill
As with most things in life, attempting to secure a Federal Disability Retirement annuity under FERS or CSRS requires an extraordinary amount of time, effort, planning, and the collection, formulation and coordination of a compendium of information. Multiple questions arise at the early stages of planning: Can I live on 60% of the average of one’s highest-3 consecutive years of salary for the first year, then upon the second and subsequent years at 40% (planning stage)? Will my doctor support me (collection of information stage)? How must it be stated, and what must be stated, on the Applicant’s Statement of Disability (Standard Form 3112A, both for FERS & CSRS) (formulation stage)? How do I get the doctor to cooperate, make sure my Supervisor does his or her portion, and who fills out the Agency Certification of Reassignment and Accommodation Efforts (SF 3112D) (coordination stage)? And these are just a small fraction of the questions one needs to ask in preparing to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits.
Before engaging in the minutiae of preparing an application for Federal Disability Retirement, it is often a good idea to take a macro-perspective of the process as a whole.
What a potential applicant for Federal Disability Retirement needs to understand, at a minimum, are the varying perspectives of (potentially) differing interests involved in the totality of the process of this “thing” called Federal Disability Retirement under FERS or CSRS. The four (4) main interests involved are: (1) The individual applicant who will be filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits; (2) The Agency for which the applicant works; (3) The Doctor who is treating the applicant who is contemplating filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits; and (4) The Office of Personnel Management. The key to success in filing and winning an approval is to recognize the different perspectives of each of the four main interests, to coordinate the differing interests, and then to formulate a plan to garner the proper support from each.
Thus, let us take each interest in the order listed:
1. The individual applicant who is contemplating filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS or CSRS. Whether because of medical conditions which have impacted the physical body – from Cervical, Lumbar or Thoracic degenerative diseases, or Shoulder Impingement Syndrome; Lupus; Multiple Sclerosis; Parkinson’s Disease; Carpal Tunnel Syndrome; Plantar Fasciitis; Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (including allergies); Fibromyalgia; Chronic Fatigue Syndrome; Migraine headaches; or a host of other medical conditions not listed (this is not intended to be an exhaustive list, by any stretch of the imagination) – to Psychiatric diagnoses of Major Depression, Generalized Anxiety Disorder; panic attacks, Agoraphobia; Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder; ADD or ADHD; Autism Spectrum Disorders (including Asperger’s); Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, etc. (again, this list is not meant to be exhaustive), the important point is to know that the individual has come to a stage in his or her life where a medical disability has become so intractable, despite surgery, physical therapy, medication regimens; psychotropic medications; psychotherapeutic intervention; and multiple other reasonable modalities of treatments – all of which have been merely temporary and palliative in nature; but work is and has been suffering; and the individual cannot perform one or more of the essential elements of the job, and the medical condition is expected to last for a minimum of 12 months. The time has come to file. Work and career have been a major part of one’s life, and it is difficult to come to acknowledge the reality that such work cannot be performed anymore, and the years invested with an Agency must come to an end. This is where “quality of life” issues become important: Am I coming home each day just to recuperate to make it to work for another day? Am I using up so much LWOP that my performance is suffering? Am I in danger of being placed on a PIP? Is my Agency thinking about terminating me? Before it reaches a critical point, it is important to begin planning; and the first step in planning is to acknowledge bluntly and forthrightly, that the time has come to file for Federal Disability Retirement under FERS or CSRS.
2. The Agency for which the applicant works. Agencies are strange organic entities. They reflect, on a microcosmic scale, the people at all levels who work for the Agency. Don’t ever expect that loyalty is a bilateral avenue – it is not. Your loyalty for twenty years to an Agency will not be remembered on the day you start to impede the mission of the Agency. An employee’s loyalty to an Agency is rewarded only to the extent that the level of performance reflects positively upon the immediate Supervisor. Once the performance level begins to falter, the true avenue of loyalty reveals itself: it is a unilateral avenue. Your years of loyalty are forgotten. Is there a solution to this problem? To some extent; by persuading those who are open to persuasion, that the applicant for Federal Disability Retirement benefits and the Agency have a common goal: the Agency wants the vacant position which the applicant presently fills; the applicant wants to secure his or her financial security by obtaining Federal Disability Retirement benefits. Thus, the emphasis upon the commonality of goals can result in a positive result which is beneficial to both parties.
3. The Doctor who is treating the applicant. He or she is the critical linchpin of the case, and to garner the support of the most valuable resource in a Federal Disability Retirement case is essential. By his or her very nature, the doctor hates such administrative details of the job. To be asked to write a medical narrative report is anathema to the very essence of who a doctor is. A doctor is trained to treat patients. The administrative headaches of writing a convincing, excellent narrative report is the last thing that a doctor wants to do. It is therefore critically important to explain to the doctor, in clear and concise terms, the nature of Federal Disability Retirement; how it differs from Social Security or Worker’s Comp; what elements and issues need to be addressed in the narrative report; and why helping to obtain Federal Disability Retirement benefits is in the best interests of the patient.
4. The Office of Personnel Management. This is the toughest out of the four. This is the Agency which receives and reviews all Federal Disability Retirement applications under FERS or CSRS. They apply the legal criteria in determining whether or not the applicant qualifies. Not everyone who makes a decision is fully informed of the governing laws, and so it is imperative that an Application for Federal Disability Retirement is well-formulated, concisely written, descriptively delineated, and supported by credible medical documentation. The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) will never meet you; you are a faceless entity with merely a paper trail. As such, the paper submission must be convincing, persuasive, and meet the burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence.
A successful Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS or CSRS, submitted to the Office of Personnel Management, must take into account all of the four (4) interests described above, and coordinate them, taking into account the differing perspectives which will often involve seemingly opposing interests. It is the ability to garner the support of each, to coordinate and extrapolate the advantages from each, and to compile, formulate, and prepare an excellent presentation which will have a high chance of being approved by the Office of Personnel Management. This is where one might consider the “5th” entity – that of an Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement laws. It is a consideration worth pursuing, especially because it concerns the future financial security of a Federal or Postal employee which we are speaking about – you.
Attorney Robert R. McGill specializes in federal disability retirement cases helping Federal and Postal workers secure their disability retirement benefits under both FERS and CSRS.