HAPPY 4TH TO ALL

Happy Holiday everyone to you and yours. Hopefully we all will become free of USPS tyranny and declare our Indenendence Day!

Thanks Rick I thought that I could. No specific date for injury. I know that they will fight me. I am already fighting an on the job injury from 07. I have had the surgery for that injury, but continue to fight for my claim.

midwest t6 /m5350 - Yes, by all means, you can claim your hernia on a CA-2. Your doctor would have to write a medical narrative explaining your diagnosis, possible treatment, and how your employment caused, aggravated, or precipitated this injury/condition.

If your doctor says that your hernia is a DIRECT RESULT of a SPECIFIC ONE TIME event that happened on a specific date and time then you would need to file a CA-1 instead of a CA-2 because it would be a traumatic injury and not an occupational disease. BUT, this is ONLY if your hernia is the result of a direct injury or action.

You would not submit your CA-2 (CA-1) until you have your doctors medical narrative to submit along with your CA-2. Make certain to keep a copy for your records. Read the forms instructions completely.

USPS will controvert - they always do. So, be prepared for this.

Ed Daniel, I have been diagnosed with a navel hernia. I am a city carrier , would I be able to claim this on a ca2? and if so what do I need to include with it. Dr. says that I need surgery or it could get worse.

Ed Daniel, Thank you for your reply. Let me see if I have it right. Because of no work avalible in the USPS for my limited duty job, I qualify for a recurrence of disability. For sure the C-7 and CA-2A will be submitted. Maybe I can finally get a good nights sleep tonight.

Bing

Ed Daniel, I am a bit like post 5345, but I hear if OWCP did a LWEC determination on you and found no wage loss and PO lets me go "No work available" and I file ca 2A it will get denied. NWA is not an injury. I was put in a mod. position only, never a real job, take away mod job and I am stuck. what is best wording to put on Ca 2a to get past this new devil? NWA is not an injury even if you had not had this LWEC done on you. What is the difference? Why do they get approved?

Edited by author 07-02-2009 07:32 PM
Yes, he released me to come back full duty with NO RESTRICTIONS. It's very important that I be able to argue fully recovered WITHIN ONE YEAR.

Even though my position is still open and vacant, if I came back fully recovered after one year, I know absolutely the agency will go by the 5 CFR which states after one year you are only "entitled to priority consideration, agencywide, for restoration to the position he or she left or an equivalent one provided he or she applies for reappointment within 30 days of the cessation of compensation." (And of course I know you know this. Was just highlighting it for others.)

It would protect me immensely to return to work with the 'within one year' clause. "employee....is entitled to be restored immediately and unconditionally to his or her former position or an equivalent one."

The new doctor that says I can go back to work was working off of the previous doctor's restrictions 5 months ago that I be off from work for 2 months. Up to that point, no doctor who had ever treated me had recommended that I be off from work since 2004. That's why my situation is confusing.

And if you go by the definition of over one year recovered it states:

b) Fully recovered after 1 year. An employee who separated because
of a compensable injury".....ok, so I feel I WAS separated three months ago when they placed me in E.L. and I DID have a bona fide injury because that previous doc took me off for 2 months, and that fits my situation also, except here again, I don't want the 'fully recovered AFTER ONE YEAR" clause!!
______________
Have another quick question: I just happened to remember that I DID return to work in the tail end of 2003 and I DID get paid Holiday pay for Christmas of '03, so couldn't OWCP use THAT? Does it have to be a full YEAR of Holiday pay?

Thank you again!

Bing:The definition of a recurrence of disability is a shift in the thresehold of pain WITHOU an intervening incident, or withdrawal of light/limited duty provided for the IW to accomadate work related injury restrictions. I would suggest that file a CA-2a, Notice of Recurrence of Disability (date of recurrence would be date the light/limited was withdrawn), CA-7 Claim for Compensation (effective date of compensatiuon is the date you go into leave without pay (LWOP) status and a copy of the written documentation that shows the reason that your employer withthe light/limited duty.

Question for Ed Daniel: I'm getting conflicting answers, so I hope you can tell me what to expect. In 06 I was injured in Rural Carrier craft which put me in excepted OWCP. After surgury I was placed into a modified Clerk position made just for me in 07. I was retrained in the Clerk craft to do spacific jobs do to my restrictions. After a fuction 4 (study of work hours)the PO has to release 4 cleks. Because I am a junoir clerk (least years in the clerk craft 1-1/2 ) (my full postal yrs are 19-1/2 yrs) I am being excessed out. Problem is USPS says there are no jobs availible do to my restrictions. So I will be let go. Some say my C7 & CA-2A will be accepted as reacurrance do to no job availible for my injury. Others say because I changed crafts from Rural Carrier to Clerk and stayed with same pay I will be denied. Which is correct?
Thanks for sharing your knowledge,
Bing

pattib:When your doctor said you could return to work did he release to full regular duty without restrictions or did he release to light/limited duty w/restrictions?

Great thanks for the promptness in the reply!! : )

Have another situation: I had been off work for 2 years--not drawing compensation. I came back to work in 2004. Almost immediately my supervisor caused an altercation and injured me mentally. I was told to go home. I later filed for an OWCP claim. It was accepted.

I filed a CA-7. The agency REJECTED it and returned it to me, instead choosing to place me in administrative leave with pay. This lasted several years. The admin. leave with pay ended when the agency placed me in enforced leave for refusing a suitable job offer. (Even though OWCP ruled that it was unsuitable.)

Only when the agency placed me in enforced leave did I try to submit another CA-7 and it was accepted. Now my current doctor is saying I can come back to work. It's been 3 months since they're placed me in E.L.

Here again, c.e. is saying the agency doesn't have to take me back after one year. (He's going all the way back to 2004). But I never went out on stress. (Yes, I did see doctors in the interim but remember I was sent home and never allowed to return to work in the first place.) Is this kosher, here again, for the c.e. to say this? Because in my research I found that 'fully recovered' is an employee who fully recovers from a compensable injury within 1 year from the date eligibility for compensation began. Ok, I wasn't allowed to submit CA-7's for years. And now that I'm receiving actual OWCP payments, thus making me 'eligible' and I've recovered after 3 months (within one year after being eligible), can I not argue that I am fully recovered within one year?

Also, you are considered 'fully recovered' (within a year or over) once "compensation payments have been terminated on the basis that the employee is able to perform all the duties of the position he or she left or an equivalent one."

This is all really confusing and I know I probably didn't do a good job of providing all the pertinent details for you to help me with this but just ask and I will try to supply.

Thanks again!

pattib: Since Holiday premium pay is not a regular part of your salary, in other words, the amount you earned could vary from year to year depending on whether you actually worked the holiday, the office will request that the employer provide the actual dollar amount you earned for holiday pay for the one year preceeding the effect date of the pay rate being used to compute your entitlement.

Prior to my injury I had not worked the year previously. When I claimed Holiday pay in the 'Other wage loss" part' of the CA-7, my claims examiner said that he could only pay me Holiday pay if the agency can show what I earned in Holiday pay one year prior to being off. Is he right? Where is the Reg on this? Thanks.

Any on here every go through a LWEC determination with OWCP? Any one every fight it?

Thanks Ed, I just wanted confirmation.