Posted on July 20, 2012 in Administrative Law
Sometimes, all that one can do is scratch one’s head. That common statement — to "scratch one’s head" — is meant to convey puzzlement or disbelief over an action, statement, or occurrence which belies rational explanation. As rationality has been the foundation of thoughtfulness and considered formulations of explainable actions, so logic and reason have been the joists which provide the bridging support for acceptable discourse. In preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, one assumes that there will be a fair and reasoned review of each Federal Disability Retirement application. If a Federal Disability Retirement application is approved, then of course the level of rational discourse need not be extensive — for, implicit in the approval itself is an acknowledgement that the legal nexus between the medical conditions described and the statutory criteria required to be met, have been adequately constructed. But in a denial, one would expect a well-reasoned discourse of "why", as opposed to a standard template of identifying various documents submitted, and multiple declarative statements (with barely a rational explanation) of, "You do not meet criteria No. X". Often, it is a waste of time to try and understand the perspective of OPM. The Office of Personnel Management is an agency which is busy and overwhelmed with a volume of cases. Time constraints often betray the proper application of the law. It is well that the old saying did not refer to scratching one’s back; for, there are many places where one simply cannot reach in order to scratch, and that is the sense one is left with in reading some of OPM’s denials.
Sincerely, Robert R. McGill, Esquire
Sometimes, all that one can do is scratch one’s head. That common statement — to "scratch one’s head" — is meant to convey puzzlement or disbelief over an action, statement, or occurrence which belies rational explanation.