Have you ever sat with company at a dinner table, and engaged in a conversation where it appears as if you are continuing someone else’s conversation? Or your presence is merely a substitute for an extension of a previous debate or discussion? Where a topic is brought up, and immediately a barrage of critical attacks — of arguments you have never made, and of statements you don’t recall disseminating (and where this is only 5 minutes into the salad and you’ve barely tasted the first glass of wine)?
The problem with unfinished business is that the transference of what one wanted to say is normally unloaded upon the wrong subject. Conversations, debates, forums of intellectual exercises in linguistic battles — it is a rare person who has been able to convey the full force of one’s collective thoughts and beliefs on the matter, and it is more often the case that one leaves with the regretful remorse of, “I wish I had brought that point up…” But rarely do second chances present themselves in a satisfactory follow-up forum; unless you are the unfortunate object for an unexpected dinner invitation.
In responding to a denial of a Federal Disability Retirement application with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether under FERS or CSRS, the applicant — through his or her Federal Disability Retirement attorney — needs to understand that the person who issues the denial will not be the same person who will review any additional submissions or legal arguments at the Reconsideration Stage.
It will be reviewed, in legal parlance, de novo. As such, while the basis of the denial as issued by the Caseworker at OPM at the First Level should be taken into consideration, one should approach the case in light of the following question: To what extent will the Reconsideration Branch care as to the original basis of the denial of the first caseworker? If it is being reviewed de novo, the approach should be to go over all of the elements — and to reinforce and amend those weak points, some of which may overlap what the first caseworker pointed out, others which may not.
It may not be the best approach to argue to a dinner guest who wasn’t present at the first round of arguments; the points you are trying to make may not be heard because the bell has already rung, and the fighter in the second round has been replaced with someone upon whom you have never previously landed a punch.
Sincerely,
Robert R. McGill, Esquire
FERS Disability Retirement Lawyer
Filed under: OPM Disability Process - 2nd Stage: OPM Reconsideration Stage | Tagged: a different opm case worker will review a federal disability appeal, appeal reconsideration in cases of medical retirement for federal employees, appealing to an opm disability application denial to get a second denial, apwu retirement disability, asking the opm disability administration office to reconsider its first decision, attorney representing federal employees, de novo concept in fers disability retirement, de novo process in OPM disability law, disability insurance for postal and federal employees, discretion with the opm in handling a federal disability reconsideration, federal disability retirement, federal injury blogs, FERS disability retirement, how to handle the reconsideration stage, how to respond to a federal disability retirement denial, I need a lawyer to help me with my disability retirement with the post office, if your opm disability claim was unfairly denied, law firm representing clients in opm disability law all across america, lawyer representing postal workers, moving forward into a complex federal disability retirement process, nationwide representation of federal employees, opm application for disability benefits, OPM denied my FERS disability claim, OPM disability retirement, OPM Reconsideration Stage, owcp disability retirement, persuading an opm representative to rule in your favor, Postal disability, postal service disability retirement, postal workers denied benefits, reasons why the opm can deny disability application, representing federal employees in and outside the country, responding to a denial of fers disability benefits with the basic statutory requirements in mind, Responding to an Initial Federal Disability Retirement Denial of Benefits, some further thoughts on the opm reconsideration stage, the "nuts and bolts" of federal disability retirement, the most complete blog on federal disability retirement, the nexus and the accommodation issues must be emphasized during the fers disability reconsideration stage, the opm at the second stage of the opm disability process, the opm case worker at the second stage of the federal disability retirement process, the second appeal process to get fers disability retirement benefits, the second stage opm representative, the weakest statement is used many times by opm to deny disability, usps disability blog, when it looks that your fers disability claim is heading towards reconsideration, when opm disability retirement is denied, will a fers disability reconsideration be approved? | Leave a comment »
Federal and Postal Disability Retirement: Responding to Stupidity
Sometimes, one’s initial reaction in a situation — professional setting, social discourse, event gathering, etc. — requires a momentary pause; and it is precisely that couple of seconds of gathering one’s thoughts which saves one from further putting fuel upon a potential fire.
Perhaps you have every right to have responded with a drip of sarcasm; or others would have approved of the lashing back; and still others would say that the response was appropriate and deservedly given. But the greater question should always be: how effective was the response; did it evoke the necessary end; and for whose benefit was the aggressive retort given — for the benefit of truth, or for one’s own satisfaction?
In a professional context, of course, it is probably never appropriate to respond in an unprofessional way, if merely by definition alone. Similarly, in a FERS or CSRS Federal Disability Retirement context, when one receives a denial from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, there are statements made — whether one pertaining to mis-application or mis-statement of the law; or perhaps a wrong reference to a medical report; or even more egregious, a selective use of a statement from a medical report or record taken out of context — which can deservedly provoke a response involving sarcasm, a deluge of epithets, or worse, a barrage of ad hominem attacks — and in each case, it would be neither appropriately given, nor proper in a professional sense.
Fortunately, paper presentations and paper responses have the advantage of time over social discourse and person-to-person contact.
Holding one’s breath and counting 3 seconds, or 10, or perhaps an eternity, is an effective way of avoiding catastrophe. Writing a diatribe of what one wants to say, then trashing it, is also acceptable. On the other hand, beware of that “send” button; and, moreover, never push that “send to all” button.
That would indeed be unprofessional.
Sincerely,
Robert R. McGill, Esquire
Filed under: OPM Disability Process - 2nd Stage: OPM Reconsideration Stage, When the OPM Application Is Denied | Tagged: a rational response to an unreasonable letter of denial opm benefits, an effective federal disability retirement application, an effective written communication to the opm, an individualized response to your fers disability denial, an understandable emotional response to an irrational fers disability decision, applying old-fashioned ethical principles in the second stage of the federal disability retirement process, attorney representing federal workers for disability throughout the united states, CSRS disability retirement federal attorney, denial of fers disability benefits and the proper response, effective personal skills when dealing with supervisors, emotional comments won't always help to get opm application approved, federal disability attorney, fers disability retirement and effective communication, how to respond to a federal disability retirement denial, law firm representing clients in opm disability law all across america, legal effectiveness in government disability claims, legal help after first application denial, legal services for federal and postal workers all across america, nationwide representation of federal employees, one key ingredient for a successful fers disability claim: effective communication, reflecting on emotional tone from the legal angle, refrain from fast and emotional responses when opm denies your disability claim, representing federal employees from any us government agency, resources for injured federal workers, Responding to an Initial Federal Disability Retirement Denial of Benefits, response to denial of opm disability retirement benefits, Second Step OPM Appeal, the 2nd fers disability stage is still an administrative process with the opm, the date of the denial letter and responding to a denial of opm disability benefits, the dreaded denial letter, the effective way of presenting one's opm disability case, the federal disability retirement application with an emotional tone deep inside in the objective medical language used, the opm case worker at the second stage of the federal disability retirement process, the role of the applicant during the second stage, the second stage opm representative, using some emotional content in your fers disability application, USPS disability retirement, we may be talking about emotional issues or medical documentation -- but never forget the nexus | Leave a comment »