OPM Federal Disability Retirement under FERS: Not as Before

Before what?  That is the natural response.  We tend to bifurcate our lives into segments which are palatable and comprehensible; of a time before X happened, and then our present existence after X; before we had children, and after; before we became married, and after; before some traumatic incident, and sometime thereafter, etc.  The present “I” is never the same as “before”, and one could even say that truthfully about every minute, every hour and every millisecond of a distinction between the “I” in the current state and the “I” of a past state of being.

Whether on a physical, cellular level where genetic structures alter and decay even by the minute; or on a cognitive level where new information, additional data is being processed by our brains every moment of our lives.  We are not as before; we are constantly changing; and like the river which Heraclitus identified an analogy for human existence, so the vicissitudes of the world surrounding impacts us daily such that we are not as before.

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 likely bifurcating event is the medical condition itself.  No, you may not be the same as before, and it is that identifiable change which forms the basis for eligibility of a Federal Disability Retirement benefit under FERS.

Consult with an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law and consider applying for Federal Disability Retirement benefits; for, not only are you not as before, but likewise, your Federal Agency or the Postal facility are viewing your work and future not as before, as well.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement for Federal & Postal Workers: Meaninglessness

Without the second added suffix, it remains an adjective; with the addition of the second suffix, it becomes an abstract noun denoting quality and state of being.  The combination of the duality if suffixes, altering it from an adjective qualifying a noun (as in, “This meaningless activity”) into an abstract noun standing alone (as in, “The meaninglessness was evident in the manner he lived”) makes for an interesting conceptual construct.

It is, indeed, a word which describes a state of being — both the quality as well as the “kind” of.  It also denotes something else: that, at some time prior, both suffixes were absent, leaving the root of the word and the core of its origins intact — that of “meaning”.  It is thus a word which describes both a state “before” and a condition “after”, of once having had it, then losing it, then becoming a state of perpetual loss.

It is, in the end, the “state” of being which becomes of concern.  For, left as an adjective, one can argue that it is merely a temporary mode of being, as in: “The meaningless endeavor he engaged in was to merely get him through the day.”  However, when the second suffix is added and the root word alternates from becoming an adjective into an abstract noun, the denotation of becoming a permanent construct of eternal loss becomes ever more problematic.

So, as life mirrors language, and language expresses our inner state of thoughts, it is not only the meaning of words which becomes important but, moreover, the way in which we actually live.  Meaninglessness, as a way in which we live, becomes ever more pronounced when our health deteriorates.

For Federal and Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition such that the medical condition begins to prevent the Federal or Postal worker from performing one or more of the essential elements of ones Federal or Postal job, the problem of “meaning” and “meaningless”, as well as “meaninglessness” becomes ever more pronounced.  As one’s health deteriorates, and as work becomes a greater struggle, so the once-meaningful career becomes a greater burden and begins to gnaw at the root of one’s existence.

While Federal Disability Retirement may not be the answer to all of life’s difficulties, it allows for a Federal or Postal worker to re-focus one’s priorities in life and turn one’s attention back to the basics — that of health and meaning. Consult with a FERS Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law to discuss the particulars of your case, and begin to discard the suffixes which drag you down.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

OPM Medical Disability for Federal and Postal Employees: Comparisons

Does it help to make them?  Do we take comfort in judging the relative plusses and minuses in making comparisons — as in, X has A, B and C, but I have, in addition, D and E, and therefore I am more fortunate that X is.  Or, is it a comparison of one’s conditions, as in: “Boy, at least I don’t have X like Lisa does”, or “At least I am not in Y’s situation”?

To the extent that comparisons remind us of that which we are blessed with, they allow for a certain level of utilitarian value.  But there is a negative side to it: Of jealousy engendered by comparison, or of discontent resulting from making one.  Rousseau, of course, makes that point throughout his “Social Contract” analysis, of the purity of man’s intentions in that fictional state of “nature” that we were once in, but where society’s accretions of materialism created the artificial emotional response of discontent and jealousy.  But compared to what?

It is important to make the fair and correlative comparisons which are relevant — as in “apples to apples” and not “apples to oranges”.  For, it is the uniqueness of each entity, object or situation to be compared with the singularity of another that makes for a proper comparison.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition such that the medical condition prevents the Federal or Postal employee from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, it is inadvisable to compare one’s case to somebody else’s.  For, the proper comparison is not to evaluate one’s medical condition and the severity of one’s medical condition to that of another person’s medical condition; rather, the proper comparison in a Federal Disability Retirement case is to compare one’s medical condition to the essential elements of one’s position.

Thus, comparisons made must always take into account the relevant connections which relate not just in terms of similarities, but as is the case in Federal Disability Retirement Law — in what the law allows for and considers significant.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire