Federal Employee Disability Retirement: Disambiguation

Aside from being an ugly word, it begins with the premise of negation and mistake.  As a reversing force, it clearly undermines the root word and takes away from the primary centrality of meaning.  It is the ambiguity which needs to be corrected.

In narrative forms, where stated purpose is important to convey, to begin with a lack of communicative clarity presents a problem of origins.  Where one begins; how one came to be formed; the historical context of one’s existence; these are all contained in the roots of the pretext of being:  “The beginning…”

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers embarking upon the voyage of formulating, preparing and filing 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 important lessons to be gleaned from such a concept is that the vehicle of the written word is best put forth at the outset without a later need for correction.

Arguing one’s medical condition, and the linguistic bridge between one’s positional description of duties for a Federal agency or the U.S. Postal Service job, requires a clear and linear methodology of logical argumentation.  Preparing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application should not lead the reviewer at OPM to scratch one’s head in confusion; rather, there should be an unwavering “point-by-point” roadmap like an unequivocal teleology of straight and narrow discourse, without confusion, without puzzlement, and certainly without the creation of an endless maze.

There are times when convoluted discourse has an intended effect, and where lack of core clarity may have its advantages (look, for instance, at politicians who dissemble for obvious reasons on those sensitive “issues” during a debate); but walking on a bridge without railings on a thick misty morning has its dangers, and it is better not to have fallen, than to learn that the depths of the rushing waters below requires more than just an ordinary swimmer’s strength.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Medical Retirement: The Categorical Imperative

It is, of course, the foundation of Kant’s moral philosophy; of the unconditional call to act in a certain way, accepted and mandated precisely because there is no room for question.  But that life were so easy; automatons would simply act in mechanistic ways, driven by moral certitude; free will could be determined by the comforting thought that universal codes of conduct shall always confine and direct.  And bureaucracies would always make decisions within a framework of computational algorithms.

But Federal Disability Retirement is not a matter of a diagnosis; unlike Social Security Disability, which does contain a semblance of categorical imperatives when it comes to certain medical conditions, the preponderance of the proof needed in becoming eligible for Federal Disability Retirement benefits is threefold: First, the minimum number of years under FERS (18 months of creditable Federal Service) or CSRS (5 years, which is presumably already met by everyone in that retirement system); Second, a medical condition which came into existence during the time of Federal Service (with some arguable exceptions within one (1) year of being separated from Federal Service); and Third, a nexus of relevant impact between one’s medical condition and the essential elements of one’s positional duties one performs for the Federal agency or the U.S. Postal Service.

It is this third step in the process which effectively compels one to step outside of the identification of Federal Disability Retirement laws as containing an element of the categorical imperative; for, in the end, it is not simply an evaluation of “which category” one falls into, but rather, how significant and persuasive is the bridge built upon between the two primary land masses:  one’s medical condition (land mass #1) and the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job (land mass #2).

That metaphorical “bridge” must be constructed with care, clarity, and concrete argumentation of persuasive force in order to withstand the inspecting scrutiny of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Look upon it as if OPM is walking through the construction site with a hard hat, pen in hand and taking notes furiously in attempting to discover deficiencies in the qualification standards imposed.  Jumping up and down and screaming at the inspector that the bridge fits into a pre-defined category will not suffice; instead, the categorical imperative must be argued for by pointing to the medical evidence, the law, and the connective tissues which form the effective and persuasive confluence of all of the elements which comprise the ultimate imperative of life:  that of a methodology of argumentation that one is “right”.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal & Postal Disability Retirement: Conceptual Relationships

Word associations are revealing.  When once a word is uttered, the immediate association of another concept provides a prelude to the cognitive perspective of an individual.  Conceptual relationships are forged through upbringing, personal experiences, and memories fulfilled through impact, trauma, significance of meaning, and attribution of value.  The thinking “I” within the subjective realm of a personal universe, is made up of ghosts of the past, goblins of present fears, and gadflies yet to swarm.

Medical conditions, and terms associated with diagnoses and disabilities, whether physical or psychiatric, tend to engender fear and loathing, precisely because of the limitations they impose, the havoc they wreak, and the problems they present.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, such that the medical condition begins to impact the ability and capacity to perform the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, the option of choice to resolve the impending problems of unbalance — of the growing and magnified inability to juggle work, medical care, and physical/cognitive/emotional health — is to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal worker is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset.

No, it is not a perfect solution.  Yes, it is an option which is final, in the sense that one is retired from the Federal System.  But when alternative courses of actions are delimited within the purview of pragmatic choices, conceptual associations must be tempered within the objective realm of reality.

The moon may well be made of blue cheese, and such conceptual associations can be wrought within the realm of Platonic Forms and cognitive gymnastics; but in the real world, conceptual relationships must by necessity be forged within the iron ore of a witch’s cauldron brewing the germinations for future discourse.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Experience and Federal Disability Retirement Benefits

The vicious circularity of having or not having “experience” is comprised of the following: If too much weight is placed upon it and one is passed over because of its lack, then one will never be able to attain the experience needed in order to qualify; in order to attain experience, one must be given the opportunity to grow by trial and error; but such trial and error only reveals the lack thereof.

For most endeavors, the experience of undergoing X is merely a singular event, and one need not have repetitive encounters in order to aggregate a composite of a series of such events in order to become “better” at it.  For FERS and CSRS employees, whether a Federal employee or a U.S. Postal worker, the experience of filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, is normally just a singular lifetime event.

The experience itself may well be a difficult one; and while no prior experience is required in order to prepare, formulate and file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, it is often a good idea to obtain the counsel and advice of someone with experience, in order to make the process a less-than-devastating experience.

Experience matters; experiencing an administrative process without the guidance of experience makes that experience all the more a difficult experience. It is in these conundrums of life that we find the true puzzlement of the tumultuous linear-ness of experiential phenomena, and for Federal and Postal employees filing for the difficult benefit of an OPM Medical retirement, such mysteries are made all the greater when one is left in the dark about the secret matters which boil in the cauldron of a witch’s brew.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire