01.03.2013 Views

Printing - FECA-PT2 - National Association of Letter Carriers

Printing - FECA-PT2 - National Association of Letter Carriers

Printing - FECA-PT2 - National Association of Letter Carriers

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

2-0601-6 Effect <strong>of</strong> RTW on QCM Status<br />

6. Effect <strong>of</strong> RTW on QCM Status. Except as specified in subparagraph c below, QCM procedures apply<br />

to any accepted case where the claimant returns to light-duty work, until the claimant returns to the job<br />

held on the date <strong>of</strong> injury (DOI) or OWCP issues a formal decision regarding the claimant's entitlement.<br />

a. No Claim Filed. Manual entry <strong>of</strong> a record into the Disability Tracking System will be<br />

necessary if no claim for wage loss or recurrence has been filed (e.g., the return to work occurs<br />

during the COP period). A "00" disability record should be created with the appropriate RTW code.<br />

The date <strong>of</strong> the claimant's return to light duty should be entered as both the disability date and the<br />

RTW date.<br />

b. Coding. If the claimant returns to full-duty work or OWCP issues a formal decision about<br />

the claimant's wage-earning capacity before any QCM intervention occurs, the QCM record should<br />

be coded category 0. For cases where such interventions have occurred, QCM status codes are<br />

used as follows:<br />

(1) In a new QCM case, if the associated Disability Tracking record already has a RTW<br />

code <strong>of</strong> LP or LF, the QCM record will be created with a status code <strong>of</strong> PLP or PLF and a<br />

category code <strong>of</strong> B.<br />

(2) In an existing QCM case where the claimant returned to work in other than the DOI<br />

job before QCM intervention, the CE should enter a status code <strong>of</strong> PLP or PLF, with a status<br />

date corresponding to the date <strong>of</strong> the claimant's RTW. If the claimant's work status<br />

improves due to application <strong>of</strong> QCM procedures, the QCM code reflecting this change should<br />

be entered.<br />

c. Certain Recurrence Cases. If a claimant working in a light-duty job suffers a recurrence and<br />

then returns to the same light-duty job, the following rules govern whether QCM procedures apply:<br />

(1) If an LWEC decision had not been issued (e.g., the RTW was for less than 60 days),<br />

the CE should apply QCM procedures and track them under the new recurrence. Status<br />

code CRN should be used to close out an existing QCM record.<br />

(2) If an LWEC decision had been issued, the CE need not apply QCM procedures, and<br />

the QCM record should be changed to category 0. (However, if the claimant returns to work<br />

in a light-duty capacity other than the LWEC job, the CE should apply QCM procedures.)<br />

2-0601-7 Consistency in Coding<br />

7. Consistency in Coding. Consistent coding is essential to proper measurement <strong>of</strong> QCM actions. One<br />

aspect <strong>of</strong> consistency is ensuring that cases which do not actually undergo QCM procedures are "zeroed<br />

out". For instance, a new QCM record is created whenever an accepted recurrence claim is entered into<br />

the Disability Tracking System without a RTW code. If the claimant had already returned to full duty<br />

before the claim was accepted or before QCM procedures were applied, the CE should change the QCM<br />

record to category 0, so that case will be excluded from the QCM count.<br />

Consistency also requires use <strong>of</strong> the same standards to define the actions which should be considered<br />

"interventions" under QCM. To be counted, the action must meet a certain threshold in prompting or<br />

<strong>FECA</strong>-<strong>PT2</strong> Printed: 06/08/2010 91

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!