Legal Representation for OPM Disability Retirement Claims: ‘To’ and ‘For’

What would be the difference if, in the title of Willa Cather’s novel, “Death Comes for the Archbishop”, she had instead chosen to use the word “to” in replacement of “for”?  Would empires have fallen, world wars have been averted or earthquakes and other natural disasters have been delayed?

Likely, not; but would the countless minds that have encountered the novel, enjoyed its beautiful prose and admired its humanity and warmth in the telling of a tale of a time long past and a period now gone — would anyone have even noticed?  Is there a difference with a distinction: “Death Comes for the Archbishop” as opposed to “Death Comes to the Archbishop”?

Some might dismissively declare, “In any event, the Archbishop died, didn’t he?”  The subtlety of distinction — should it even be brought up?  Would that the title was of the latter instead of the former — would anyone have even noticed?  Is there a grammatical point of difference; is one “more” correct than the other?

Certainly, the “sense” that is employed exists — where, the “to” has a much more objective and distant, impersonal “feel” to it, whereas the “for” personalizes it, gives it warmth, almost as if “death” is a person as opposed to an event, and the “for” makes it a personal possessive as opposed to the “to” that connotes an arms-length relationship between the object and subject.

Are the prepositions interchangeable?  If a person is stricken with grief over a tragedy and a close friend arrives to provide comfort and says, “I came for you”, it would be a statement that would be considered heart-warming.  If, under the same circumstances, the person instead declared, “I came to you” — would we, again, mark the difference or even notice?  It is, certainly, a statement of objective fact — the person objectively traveled and arrived at destination Point B from origination Point A.

Again, the subtle distinction — the “for” connotes a greater personal warmth as opposed to a simple statement of fact.  It is, in the end, the subtle differences that sometimes makes the entirety of a distinction that makes the difference.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, such that the medical condition prevents the Federal or Postal worker from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, the distinction between “to” and “for” is often the difference between living a life worthwhile and one that remains cold and impervious.

Human beings are often careless in their personal relationships; and the test of such caring or uncaring attitudes will often surface when a person is going through a trial or tragedy, and preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the complex and impersonal administrative process of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, will often test the workplace relationships because of the self-interested motives that exist with agencies and the Postal Service.

Some coworkers, supervisors and others will distance themselves immediately, and they will remain in the category of the “to” people; while other coworkers, managers, supervisors, etc., will surprisingly be there “for” you.  Willa Cather chose the preposition “for” over the “to” because she was an excellent author, and it is the excellence of a human being that is revealed in the subtle differences we often overlook.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal & Postal Disability Retirement from OPM: The restorative morning

That is the purpose of sleep, is it not?  Or so we anthropomorphically attribute.  Is that the only reason for the somnolence that overwhelms, the snore that momentarily suspends in the air and pauses for people to smile, to be horrified or laugh because of the incongruence of the sound that shatters the quietude of twilight? Do humans sleep more soundly than other species? Is it really necessary to maintain a certain spectrum of that “rapid eye movement” (REM), or to be in a deep slumber, a state of subconscious quietude, etc., in order to attain that level of restorative sleep such that the morning itself is declaratively managed with rest and a sense of calm?

The restorative morning is that which follows a good night’s sleep; it is when the body is energized, the mind is ready to pounce with an excessive amount of acuity barely containable, and the combination of a night’s rest with boundless determination overcomes the previous period’s fatigue and exhaustion from the stresses of the day.

Do other species require sound sleep?  Or, did evolution favor the animal that can sleep, yet be awoken in response to an instinctual drive to survive, such that the mere bending of a blade of grass a hundred yards away will awaken with an alarm ready to defend and fight, or whisk away in flight?

It is the lack of it that creates that level of profound fatigue that goes beyond mere tiredness or exhaustion.  Modernity requires restorative sleep precisely because so much of our workforce engages in cognitive-intensive employment that places great stresses not just upon the physical capacity of the human animal, but upon the mental/psychological — stresses that pound away with untold and unmeasurable harm on a daily, consistent and progressively deteriorating manner.  Did nature and evolution factor in the way that we live in modernity?  Likely, not.

In Nature, there are no restorative mornings — only the calm that pervades and hides the predatory instincts and the ongoing battles that go on daily, minute-by-minute in this unforgiving universe of predators and prey; and so it is that we have created a reflection of that life-and-death struggle in this modern world we live in.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who struggle with profound fatigue, loss of any semblance of restorative sleep, and unrepentant diminishment of focus, concentration and the capacity to maintain an acuity of mind, it may be time to consider filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Sleep Disorders are not just a constant reminder of the stresses that impact us in this high-tech world, but is also a basis in which to qualify for Federal Disability Retirement, when profound fatigue sets in and non-restorative sleep impacts one’s ability and capacity to perform all of the essential elements of one’s cognitive-intensive job.  Whether under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, it may be time to consider preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement, to be submitted to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement: The Price of Admission

Private entities charge more; exclusive arenas tend to be out of reach; and it is, ultimately and as in all economic realities, determined by an admixture of supply (how many are allowed) and demand (how desirous is the goal of entrance and acceptance).  For every admittance, there is a price to pay.  Often, it is not merely the affirmative transfer of money or goods, but rather, the negative aspect of what one must “give up” in order to attain the end.  It often involves a comparative analysis, an economic evaluation of gain versus loss, and in the end, the emptiness of the latter being overtaken by the value of the former.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, such that the medical condition begins to awaken an awareness that one’s career may be coming to the twilight of that lengthy, successful run, it is often that “price of admission” which makes one hesitate.  For the Federal and Postal employee who must file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, the question is double-sided:  the price one “has been” paying to remain as a Federal or Postal employee, as opposed to the loss of employment status, or becoming an “ex-member” of that exclusive club.

Change always portends a trauma of sorts; the medical condition and the revelation of vulnerability, mortality and progressive debilitation was in and of itself crisis of identity; but when it becomes clear that the medical condition begins to impact one’s ability to perform all of the essential elements of one’s positional duties, and that further changes to one’s career and livelihood must by necessity occur, then the avalanche of reality’s namesake begins to dawn.

The price of admission for one’s health, ultimately, is priceless; and that is the reality which one must face when preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through OPM.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire