Disability Retirement for Federal Government Employees: Uniqueness versus homogeneity

It is the lack of recognition of singularity within the greater species of one’s kind, which results in an universal loss of empathy and understanding. Homogeneity presumptively recognizes the cumulative identity of functional values, and from that, extrapolates to an assumption of sameness in everything — from capacity to ability; from tolerance to reactionary fortitude. We tend to project that which we are able to handle; if we have withstood years of stressful environments, we assume that everyone else can do so, and should; if we have lived through tragedy with little to no ill effects, we scoff and sneer when others break down and disintegrate upon experiencing a fractional encounter of comparative insignificance.

But it is precisely the fragile uniqueness of human beings which is overlooked in such embracing of homogeneity; as Aquinas modified Aristotle’s perspective and argued that it is the combination of form and substance which results in the essence of being, so some of us have psyches which are made of more brittle but fragile ingredients.

For Federal and Postal employees considering filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether under FERS or CSRS, the issue is often when, to what extent, and how long can one hold out until the breaking point arrives? There is no “objective” criteria in which to apply; for, just as the individual is an unique entity, so the impact of one’s medical condition upon one’s ability/inability to perform the essential elements of one’s job is also singularly tied to the facts and circumstances of each case.

Abstract forms in a platonic world are no longer believed in; and as unicorns and giants pervade only those universes of mythology and science fiction, it is a sad thought to consider when the uniqueness of individuals are overlooked for the commonality of a subsumed species.  In our work-a-day world, it is easy to walk past a hurting soul; and all the more so when the one hurting is the same one who is walking by.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

 

Federal Disability Retirement: Perspectives, Altered and Static

Medical conditions have a way of changing one’s perspective; the daily outlook of merely taking ordinary things for granted reverts to an ongoing sense of appreciation for the mundane.  Even to be pain-free for a few moments may seem like an utopian state of blissful enlightenment.  The ordinary becomes the miraculous, and the order of priorities for others may become inversely reorganized.  But the problem remains for the world at large whose perspective has not been impacted by such alterations.

For the Federal and Postal employee who is suddenly confronted with a medical condition, such that the medical condition prevents one from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s job, the Agency, the Supervisor, coworkers, the U.S. Postal Service, etc., may not (and one can more forcefully predict, “does not”) share that change of perspective.

Pausing to smell the flowers may be fine for some, but not while in the same room as the Supervisor who sneers at such folly.  Such altered perspectives may need the mundane remedy of a legal response; and, ultimately, if filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management is the option to pursue, because the Federal or Postal employee is no longer able to perform all of the essential elements of one’s positional duties, then such a course of action should be initiated as soon as practicable.

Not everyone shares a change of perspective; and, indeed, the Federal or Postal employee who has an altered perspective should recognize that he or she once resided in the exclusive club from which expulsion and ex-communication is now imminent.  The static nature of the ordinary will always dominate; it is the extraordinary which remains in the minority, as history has always proven.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

Disability Retirement for Federal Workers: Loss of Empathy

Does it establish the existence of empathy if a person asks after someone’s health or wellbeing?  If, in the next moment, the querying individual does something which would constitute “backstabbing“, does it negate the previous sincerity of the asking?  Is there a numbing effect upon a generation of individuals who have engaged in daily role-playing through video games which defy a conceptual designation of “virtual reality“, and for the most part serves to be the “real” reality for most?

Is empathy a lost virtue; is virtue even a meaningful concept in this day and age; and if lost and not, does it make a difference at all?  Or has human nature been consistently mean and low throughout the ages, and any romantic semblance of a Shakespearean view (paraphrasing, here) that man is the paragon of animals and somewhat akin to the angels, is merely a profoundly meaningless statement of reminiscences long past?  And what impact does such foreboding hold for individuals with medical conditions, especially in the context of employment?

For Federal and Postal employees who suffer from a medical condition, whether under FERS or CSRS, there is fortunately the default option of filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Fortunately, such an option does not depend upon the empathetic character of fellow human beings, leaving aside other Federal or Postal employees.  Instead, Federal OPM Disability Retirement benefits are completely dependent upon “the law”.  This is as it should be, as opposed to the fickle character of individuals who sway to and from as the unstable emotions of individuals may change from day to day.  It is ultimately the law which one must cite, rely upon, and use both as a shield and a sword.

As for the lost generation of empathy: Let the laws governing Federal Disability Retirement determine the outcome of that forecast, as laws last somewhat longer than the fickle character of human beings.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire