Tag Archives: changing paradigms: when federal disability retirement is not a choice but the choice

FERS Medical Disability Retirement: Getting to Your Final Destination

Following a GPS can be a nerve-wracking experience.  Yes, there are ways to override specific elements; yes, you always have to be smarter than the technology which one utilizes; but since we have come to a point in our ordinary lives of placing reliance upon technological efficiency, the natural course of events is to simply enter the vehicle, punch in a destination point, and follow blindly.

It is a metaphor of how we operate in the world in all aspects of our lives; and while we like to engage in self-aggrandizements of how we are the highest beings in intelligence, innovation and inventiveness, the fact of our ordinary lives betrays the simplicity of our mindlessly habitual actions.

Following blindly a GPS is rarely the shortest route; it is never the most efficient way; and it is almost certainly not the road to be taken as the safest course.  Once there, of course, all questions about the manner of “how” one got there, disappears; but it is often important to consider the “how”, and not merely the fact that one got there.

Similarly, for Federal and Postal employees who are seeking to obtain a period of respite, it is important to consider “how” one will get there.  Trudging along and slogging through routes without considering the options and avenues will often result in the further deterioration of one’s health.  Mindlessly and repetitively doing the same thing will not advance an individual one iota towards the destination that one seeks.

Federal Disability Retirement is an option which should be considered, and whether one is under FERS or CSRS, it is an avenue which may be the singular road which effectively “gets there” for the Federal or Postal Worker who can no longer perform all of the essential elements of one’s job.  It is an option worth considering, but one which the Federal or Postal Worker must “override” the mindlessness of continuing in the same course as yesterday, and the day before.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

Federal Disability Retirement Lawyer blog: Meeting the Legal Criteria

Lawyers often speak about “the law” as if it has the character of a science — of established principles which are objective, without the arbitrary influences of subjective interpretive devices or nuances. But even science itself fails any pure test of universal unalterability; one need only read Kuhn’s description of shifting paradigms in the history of science (The Structure of Scientific Revolutions) to understand that objectivity is merely another word for pragmatism. For, that which “works” or is “effective” in the eyes of the greatest number of people, is what matters to most people. That is why success is an irreplaceable harbinger of general opinion.

In the Federal government, one would like to expect application of rules, regulations, etc., somewhat in an algorithmic form, where favoritism is lacking, and where everyone has a “clean shot” at everything.

Especially when it comes to a benefit such as Federal Disability Retirement, which impacts those who are most unfortunate — one beset with a medical condition such that one can no longer perform all of the critical elements of one’s job — an expectation that an objective criteria which can be met by pure factual presentation, legal magnification of relevant statutes and laws, and perhaps some modicum of argumentation for persuasion, is what it should really occur in a perfect world.  But as the proverbial perfect world fails to materialize, we must do with what we are given; subjective interpretation, and selective analysis are merely human frailties and imperfections.

That is why legal argumentation and countering of subjectivism must be the proper, employed approach.

Federal and Postal Disability Retirement, whether for CSRS or FERS employees of the Federal government, must be fought for, and “won”; there is no mathematical algorithm of objective application; there is no parallel universe of perfection; there is only the human condition, which requires interpretation, knowledge, analysis, and argumentation which persuades and cajoles.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire
Federal Disability Retirement Lawyer

Federal and Postal Disability Retirement: Paradigm Shifts

One of Thomas Kuhn’s major works, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, provides an excellent historical analysis, as well as a philosophical proposal, of how science works — not in a progressive linear fashion as one would expect and anticipate, but rather in erratic paradigm shifts based upon pragmatic considerations of that which works, replacing outmoded or unworkable models of inefficiency.

The book itself is instructive on how, in a macro sense, the scientific community, with all of its fallibilities, works with fits and starts; in a micro perspective, it is profoundly revelatory on how individual human beings operate in this world.  We all carry around paradigms; of who we are; what role we play in our family, our greater community, and in the historicity of our involvement.

Often, however, the outside world, through all of its influences and mandates, will force a change of our internal paradigm; at other times, we decide in our own volition to alter and tinker with the paradigm.  For Federal or Postal employees who are forced to contemplate filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether under FERS or CSRS, the upheaval of a sudden career change, of a self-realization that one is no longer that youthful, energetic colleague who is efficient and competent, but rather a medically disabled employee, is often a devastating shift in one’s self-image and the paradigm which one carries about within the vast world of empathetic devoid.

Yet such a paradigm shift is necessary.

The good news is that Federal Disability Retirement is itself a paradigm which contemplates future potential for a second vocation; it allows for Federal and Postal employees to obtain an annuity, then to go into the private sector and continue to work, and make up to 80% of what one’s former Federal job currently pays.  Federal Disability Retirement is not a paradigm of “total disability”; it is one based upon a slight amendment to one’s original paradigm, with a view towards a brighter future.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire