Last Updated on April 5, 2012
That which is not explicitly stated, may leave room for the listener to infer multiple meanings based upon the implicit statement of the speaker or writer.
Thus, in a Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS or CSRS, filed with and obtained through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, it is important to state with explicit redundancy those elements which meet the legal criteria for eligibility for Federal Disability Retirement benefits. X impacts positional element Y. X may impact positional elements Y or Z. X will surely prevent Mr. A from performing some of the essential elements of his job. Of these three statements, which one states unequivocally and explicitly, while the other two allow for inferences which may well result in a denial from the Office of Personnel Management? Obviously, the answer is the first statement, leaving the subsequent two room for inference and implication.
Remember that the Disability, Reconsideration and Appeals “Specialist” at the U.S. Office of Personnel Management is specifically targeting a Federal Disability Retirement application for any excuse to deny it. The reviewer will selectively choose any cracks in the aggregate of the disability retirement packet, and where there is room for inference or implication, the language used will be interpreted in the light most favorable to the Office of Personnel Management, to issue a denial in a Federal Disability Retirement case.
Wherever and whenever possible, make explicit that which sounds implicit. The crack of dawn is a time to get up and get things accomplished; a crack in the meaning and usage of language is merely an excuse for misuse and abuse.
Sincerely,
Robert R. McGill, Esquire