FERS & CSRS Disability Retirement: The Adaptable Criterion

If a criterion is advanced at the outset, one expects that the details of its applicability will result in a fair outcome so long as the requisite subsets are adhered to.  The problem is one of generalizations, however, and the linguistic malleability of hermeneutic interpretation, and in the end, the honesty of the individual.

There may have been a time when the sin nature of man was contained, and Pandora’s box was sealed, or at least somewhat secured; but once relativism creeped into the general populace, the game of restraint was lost forever.  Once, when man was left to individualistic devices, and information concerning the world was considered esoteric and reserved for the ivory towers of science and theological hoods of mystery shorn by Jesuit Orders of secrecy and cavernous enclaves of furtive whispers echoing down dark chambers in secluded corners, the application and usage of criteria demanded knowledge beyond the commonplace. Now, with Google and other search engines, everyone knows everything, or nothing at all.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who are considering 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 “trick” is to review the legal criteria, amass the information in a manner which fits the applicability for eligibility, then to “make the case” for an approval.

Is it a science?  Or, more precisely, are the regulatory subsets “open to interpretation”?  And more to the point:  Do the Administrative Specialists at OPM adhere to the “letter of the law”, or is hermeneutics less than an honest methodology these days?  Where human nature is concerned, one need not stray too far from the general knowledge of the masses.

If one has lived long enough, you know that you should always walk through the busy streets of a city with one hand on your back pocket, protecting your wallet.  Pickpockets are everywhere, and in preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through OPM, the Federal and Postal worker should always be cognizant of the fact that the adaptable criterion is not the fault of the agency or the promulgators of legal standards, but merely reflects the fact that Pandora’s box was left open long ago, and the serpents of horror and dishonesty were left to roam the earth like never before.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Employee Disability Retirement: Of Camels and Corsets

Both represent anachronisms in our modern, technological society; the former as still somewhat distant and antiquated, with images of pyramids and times of colonialism; the latter of a time when the secrets of the body were hidden by shame, left to lust and imagination.  They no longer fit into the common usage of everyday language games, whether because of being relegated to uncommon reference or to irrelevance.

Similarly, that is how castaways are treated in a society which relishes productivity and promotional positive thinking.  Time is rarely a marking of empathy; though we feign the importance of community, we are simply too busy to regard those less fortunate, except perhaps with a deductible donation.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, such that the medical condition begins to impact one’s capacity to perform all of the essential elements of one’s job, the sooner the recognition that inclusion and accommodation are likewise foreign concepts, the better in planning for one’s future.  Federal OPM Disability Retirement is an employment benefit which was negotiated as the greater package for Federal and Postal employees.  It allows for the Federal and Postal employee, whether under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, to remain productive in society in another capacity, yet, receive a base annuity from the Federal government.

The formula is set by statute, ultimately filed through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, and one must prove one’s entitlement after meeting certain eligibility criteria; but like camels, corsets, and even castaways, the arcane anachronism of the administrative system and bureaucratic process may require the strength of a camel, the mystery of hidden knowledge as only subsumed by corsets, and the thick skin of being treated as a castaway.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire