Lawyers are trained to engage in linguistic gymnastics; that is precisely why Plato railed against rhetoricians of his day, as they used language to distort the fullness of being (as Heidegger would say). For, the malleability of language allows for a spectrum of purposive and mischievous play upon words; only an abiding sense of integrity in the face of a world which has abandoned parameters and boundaries of what constitutes “fair play” in the arena of linguistic word games, would save the original foundation of the correspondence theory of truth.
In this postmodern world where objective truth can no longer be argued for, subtlety in playing a language game is no longer necessary; one can simply, deliberately and without conscience switch one word for another, and maintain a straight face.
So, in a Federal or Postal Disability Retirement case, when the U.S. Office of Personnel Management inserts words which clearly do not reflect the legal standard as presently existing, what does one do? When the standard is raised to require “disability which precludes you from the workplace”, or evidence of a medical condition which is “compelling”, how does one respond?
Such unwarranted and baseless legal applications are inserted in many denials from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, requiring a Request for Reconsideration or an appeal to the Merit Systems Protection Board. In the end, in order to properly respond, one must first recognize the malleability of language; then to identify the proper legal standard to be applied; then to selectively address such improper legal standards.
In a Federal Disability Retirement case, whether under FERS or CSRS, the ultimate problem is that one is dealing with a Leviathan of an agency — the U.S. Office of Personnel Management — and one which has the power to engage in rhetorical flourishes with unfettered abandon.
Sincerely,
Robert R. McGill, Esquire
Filed under: When the OPM Application Is Denied | Tagged: applying for federal disability, argumentative higher medical standards from the office of personnel management, civil service disability, don't believe the excuses opm uses to deny your federal disability claim, examining the basis for the denial, excuses a federal agency will make to fire the elderly and the disabled, false standards in opm disability law, Federal Disability, FERS disability retirement, fers disability retirement and false standards, higher legal standards used by the opm to deny disability retirement, how the language of a federal employment settlement can affect federal disability eligibility, is it still difficult to get opm disability retirement with the "more likely than not" legal standard?, law firm representing clients in opm disability law all across america, legal standards must be met during the opm disability process, legal standards to be met in an opm disability application, misunderstanding or misinterpretation opm disability legal standards, narrowing down OPM excuses for application denial, nationwide representation of federal employees, objective language and evidence in the opm disability claim, opm disability legal standards not explained in opm disability application, opm's excuses to deny your federal disability retirement, opm's misinterpretation of the legal standard used to approve fers disability retirement, playing the opm's game to win your disability benefits, representing federal employees from any us government agency, speaking the federal disability retirement language, standard of proof applicable to opm disability retirement, statutory legal standard of disability or impairment, the malleability of opm's varying stances, the sequential and persuasive use of language throughout the federal disability retirement process, the untrue and inapplicable standard of law being applied to your opm denial of benefits, type of legal standard that applies to federal employee disability retirement, using legal standards to win a federal disability claim, USPS disability retirement, what "standard of proof" applies to fers disability retirement, what medical standards the opm uses to approve or deny disability?, what standard applies to fers disability: "more likely" or "beyond any reasonable doubt"? | Leave a comment »
OPM Disability Retirement Help: Different Standards
To overdress is almost always acceptable; to underdress — well, while it may be acceptable, you may have to endure being the subject of curiosity and quiet whispers of raised eyebrows.
There are different standards for every occasion, endeavor, event or engagement; some high, others low; a few enforced without exception while still maintaining a sense of decorum and the rest of them left to ignored apathy where anything goes. Some private clubs seem to thrive upon the exclusivity of standards maintained so high that few can meet the exceptionalism applied, while those more accessible to the public allow for flagrant violations with nary a nod or a wink.
It is when the context becomes the content that eyebrows become raised, and the higher the brow the more exclusive the thinking. For the rebel, it is always difficult to try and convey the notion that one must adapt and change with the circumstances — that standards are applied, and you must recognize those standards and act accordingly.
For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition such that the standards set have now failed to be met — whether at the personal level or the professional — it might be time to consider filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset.
Whether through a recognition of the standards set for yourself — which is often higher than what is acceptable by others — or because you are beginning to get the hints that your agency or the Postal Facility has become dissatisfied with your work performance, your attendance or excessive use of sick leave; whatever the reason, the plain fact is that the medical condition itself is always the basis for determining the need to alter and modify one’s personal and professional standard.
Don’t be too hard on yourself. The standard you used to apply before the onset of a medical condition should not be the same one that is applied to your present situation, and you should therefore consider that the standard of maintaining one’s health is the present priority exclusively, no matter what your Federal Agency or your Postal Facility tries to have you believe.
Consult with an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and determine whether you “meet the standards” to apply for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management. They may be different than what you think.
Sincerely,
Robert R. McGill, Esquire
Filed under: Reflections of an OPM Disability Retirement Lawyer | Tagged: applying the sufficient documentation test to a standard in an opm disability retirement case, awol for medical reasons federal employment, biased disability reasonable accommodation committee in post office and what my options are, blog information from fers attorney end of federal employment for disabled us postal workers, dealing with supervisors negative comments on request for fers disability retirement, different laws and standards of disability, disability leave for postal employees, disciplinary actions and disabilities discrimination fers attorney, disciplinary actions for awol medical leave fers lawyer, excessive sick leave postal employee lawyer, federal employee fers disability for crohns disease, fers benefits if resign for physical or mental impairments, fers opm attorney expert on the usps long term disability application process, fers retirement for stress and depression, fers retirement form 3107 disabling conditions, forced fers medical retirement by us postal service, getting permanent benefits when you have a partial disability which won’t allow you to work in the federal government with efficiency, hiring an attorney excessive sick leave federal employee, how to apply for postal medical retirement benefits, how to resign from a civilian dod position for medical disabilities, how to resign from the postal service if I have a disabling condition, if a postal employee on owcp doesn’t expect to recover from an illness or long term injury, improper standard opm disability retirement, law blog on tips to complete sf 3112 attorney for federal employees, legal standards to be met in an opm disability application, limited duty mail handler with back injury, mail carrier postal employment light duty, opm disability retirement tsa employee, opm disciplined for using excessive sick leave, opm medical retirement filing after resignation from federal employment (be careful there is one year limit only), partial disability benefits federal worker, postal clerk with repetitive type of injuries, postal service letter to sign for disabilities, postal sf 3112 disability application package, qualifying for a disability retirement under opm fers, question to attorney McGill: how long do you have to work to qualify for civil service retirement, recovering from arthritis after employment in the u.s. post office, requesting advance long term leave for postal mail handler, resignation and medical retirement with usps medical retirement attorney, separation from federal employment medical inability to perform position chores, statutory legal standard of disability or impairment, stress traffic control medical retirement lawyer, top fers disability attorney serving now fers disability cranberry pa employees and surrounding areas, tsa.gov transportation security administration medical retirement attorney, us postal service shared services private attorney light duty, watch out for the federal employee medical retirement 80% rule, when sedentary postal positions for light duty won’t work, when there is an unfair termination of federal employee with cognitive limitations contact best fers employee advocate, workers comp with usps long term sickness | Leave a comment »