Within the world of biology, the distinction between an unicellular eukaryote and a prokaryote is one defined by the absence of a distinct, membrane-bound nucleus. The latter is thus without a homunculus, constrained by a parameter and protected as the central seat of control. One would assume that, because of this, the former would be easier to genetically manipulate, while the former would be more difficult.
Similarly, while widespread dissemination of responsibility and delegation of authority may have the positive effect of getting much work done, the corollary negative impact may also become uncontrollably representative of an organization: loss of qualitative control.
Upon reading a denial letter from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether under FERS or CSRS, from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, one may begin to suspect that you are dealing with a prokaryote-type of entity: for anything may be said, and what may be stated may not even remotely be the law of the case.
Being unconstrained by a membrane may have its advantages for survival; being unconcerned by the constraints of language will have its definite impact upon a Federal or Postal employee attempting to obtain Federal Disability Retirement benefits from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management: confusion for the Federal or Postal Worker, or worse, surrender and retreat. But there are ways to counter such an untethered approach — but one which must use all of the legal tools available to the Federal or Postal applicant.
The key is to build a membrane and change the prokaryote into an eukaryote. In order to do this, however, one must know the law, apply the law, and force the law upon the organism — thereby effectuating the genetic modification. Thus does science, logic and law coalesce into a unified, rational whole. Go figure.
Robert R. McGill, Esquire