OPM Disability Retirement Benefits: The Privacy of Weirdness

Privacy provokes weirdness; or so it would seem.  Things which people would not otherwise do, they do in the apparent seclusion of privacy.  It is when the “private” becomes “public” that embarrassment, revelation, uncovering and shame is brought out.

People engage in activities ranging from the mundane to the absurd — and this is often witnessed in that “bubble” created by sitting in one’s car.  The vehicle creates a strange phenomenon — for, although it does not truly provide a privacy space, people get into their vehicles and act as if no one can see them.  Witness how we suddenly dance uninhibited to the music playing when driving; or talk to yourself, or perhaps other acts of weirdness.

Then, of course, there are the more absurd revelations of recent vintage — of weirdness performe while on Zoom when privacy was thought to be the case.

Pain is on the spectrum of weirdness — for, it is a “private” or “subjective” matter, experienced within the bubble of one’s own body and self.  We often try to hide it — but it manifests itself through grimaces and facial contortions.  It can be hidden and masked, but whether it is healthy to do so, is quite another matter.

When the privacy of weirdness — of pain which can no longer be masked — enters the public arena, as in a Federal Disability Retirement case, it is then time to consider filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits.  Contact an OPM Disability Lawyer who specializes in OPM Disability Retirement Law, and begin the process of turning out the privacy of weirdness into a Federal Disability Retirement case.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Lawyer

 

Medical Retirement under the Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS): Money

We all groan about it (well, perhaps there does exist a 1% who never worries about it).  We complain and moan.  There is never enough.  When an unexpected amount is received, it provides a momentary thrill.

Idealists bemoan it but recognize its transactional necessity in an economy no longer viable in bartering terms; talking heads who self-proclaim to be “financial experts” (whatever species of animals they are, no one knows) talk about value, worth, “printing too much”, “pumping” too little, etc., leaving us all confused.  In the end, it is always a matter of, “How much”.

For Federal Employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition such that the medical condition necessitates filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS from OPM, the question of “how much” is a simple calculus of receiving 60% of the average of one’s highest-3 consecutive years of Federal Service for the first year, then 40% every year thereafter until age 62, at which point the annuity gets recalculated based upon the total number of years of service when you reach age 62, including the time that you are on disability retirement.

Thus, you are actually “building up” your regular retirement by being on disability retirement, as those years you are on disability retirement count towards your total number of years of service when recalculated at age 62.

Imagine that — you receive an annuity (money) while on disability retirement, and at the same time, you are building up your retirement system so that, when you turn age 62, those years you were on disability retirement are calculated and added on to the years of Federal Service you had before you went on disability retirement.  It is money well earned and deserved.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Lawyer

 

Disability Retirement from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM): Giving the Argument

It can be a sign of over-confidence, or merely a regret for a mistake made.  Granting the “other side” — whoever it is — the ammunition to make their argument, is normally not the best strategy in any endeavor.

Sometimes, in a debate, it is a strategically advantageous move to “grant” the other side the argument they are about to make.  By doing so, two things may occur: First, a quiet recognition that the argument granted is a powerful one, but by preemptively dismissing it via the power of concession, it undermines the efficacy of the argument itself.

Second, it makes moot the necessity of the opponent to actually make the argument, thereby focusing the debate upon other issues — ones which you want to emphasize.

Such “giving” of the argument, however, is quite different from the times when we mistakenly provide fodder to the other side for greater strength to “their” argument, and concurrently, weakening one’s own position.

Thus, for example, in a OPM Disability Retirement case, it is normally not a good move to suddenly resign from one’s Federal or Postal position before filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits — for a number of reasons.

For one, it gives OPM the argument that, “How do we know whether or not your agency or the Postal Service could have accommodated you?”  Giving the argument to the other side should always be a deliberate and conscious decision at the outset.  It should not be a move based upon regret.

To prevent that regret, contact an OPM Disability Ret. Lawyer who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law and begin the process of formulating your arguments, and preventing the giving of the argument which might defeat your own case.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Lawyer

 

Long-Term Disability Benefits for Federal & Postal Employees: Carelessness

In some professions, it matters not; in others, perhaps of a de minimus impact; but to many, of a great and irreversible impact.

For an eye surgeon, the slightest tremor may mean the difference between sight and blindness, where carelessness is a measure of delicate differentiation.  For the store clerk who stocks the shelves — whether slightly crooked; not quite neatly presented; perhaps placed in the wrong aisle or section — carelessness may have some minor impact upon the profits gained, but likely not quantifiable in comparison to the dexterity needed for the eye surgeon.

Carelessness is just that — of a lack of care, a negation of competence which ultimately is traced back to the intentions of the individual.  Does the person care?  Is the worker diligent?  Does the employee have a sense of self-awareness to be able to improve?

Sometimes, “intentions” are mistaken by the results of the work itself — as in, when a medical condition is impacting one’s ability and capacity to perform at the same standard of care.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition such that the medical condition is beginning to manifest itself through carelessness at work, contact a Federal Disability Lawyer who specializes in securing OPM Disability Retirement benefits for Federal employees, and begin the process of carefully putting together an effective Federal Disability Retirement application through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management under FERS.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Lawyer

 

Federal Employee Medical Disability Retirement Help: Resisting

Whether against a temptation or an innate sense that something is not quite right, the temporary delay of gratification — for, that is ultimately the result of resisting — can be of great benefit.

The impulse is often very strong; to resist takes a deliberate and conscious decision, empowering one’s will to deny that which urges one on.  By practice and, over time, embracing a habit which becomes a part of one’s character, resisting becomes easier; the will is replenished with daily fortitude; the nature of one’s character becomes emboldened and whole.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition such that the medical condition prevents the Federal or Postal worker from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, resisting is an important part of the process: Resisting just quitting and walking away; resisting just giving up; but not all resisting is positive — as in, resisting contacting a Federal Disability Lawyer who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law in order to consider the next steps to take to successfully formulate a strategy to obtain one’s Federal Disability Retirement benefits.

For that, you should give in to the urge: Contact FERS Disability Retirement Attorney who specializes in OPM Disability Retirement Law.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Lawyer

 

FERS Disability Retirement for Federal Employees: Future Planning

It is perhaps a redundancy to put the two concepts together; for, “planning” is almost always about the future (can one plan for the past?  Or, even for the present — as every moment of the present must by conceptual imposition tick the time for a future event), and thus the inclusion of the concept, “future” becomes an irrelevancy and an unnecessary conceptual appendage.

One can, of course, confuse some concepts — as in, for example, planning for one’s future funeral, or writing one’s obituary (which is essentially future planning but incorporating past events); or of writing a story about something which occurred in the past (as opposed to a science fiction story, which by definition would involve some future event).  So, one might simply entitle an essay, “Future” — but would that necessarily encapsulate “planning”?

On the other hand, to simply say, “Planning” would, by conceptual inference, necessarily involve the future, merely because we all presume that any “planning” would incorporate the future because of the absurdity of thinking that we could plan for what has already passed.

That being said, future planning is always a problem because of the very fact that it must involve “unknowns”, as every future cannot be completely and entirely predictable.  The future, by definition, is an unknown and unknowable quality and quantity; it is not quantifiable; it remains a mystery.  Otherwise, we would all be able to predict which numbers would appear in a lottery, what stock market picks will be winners, and even be able to understand what a “commodities futures” is/are.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers suffering from a medical condition necessitating a filing of a Federal Disability Retirement application with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, “Future Planning” can be difficult, at best.  How strong is your case; what is a realistic assessment of time frames involved; what can be done to enhance the chances of success; what will be a predictable amount of the monthly annuity; and many more questions, besides.

Contact a FERS Disability Lawyer who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law and begin the arduous process of future planning — or just planning.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Lawyer

 

OPM Medical Retirement under FERS: Routines

We all have them; we rely upon them; and in times of tumult and upheaval, they are what gets us through because we can endure them with thoughtless efficiency.

There are the rare and few who try and avoid them — thinking that such avoidance characterizes a higher level of creativity, imagination, and resistance to monotony; but in the very act of such avoidance and rejection of routines, the chaos itself becomes a routine and represents the repetitiveness which one sets out to replace in the first place.

Routines represent the foundation of normalcy; it is what we rely upon to maintain a Kantian order of stability in a world which is often unreliable and chaotic.  When those routines are systematically interrupted, the balance of proportionality must be assessed in order to determine the significance of such disruption.

Medical conditions tend to do that — of forcing one to rethink the impact upon the routines one relies upon.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition such that the medical condition prevents the Federal or Postal Worker from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal position, the impact and imbalance perpetrated by the medical condition in disrupting and interfering with one’s routines may be an indication of the need to file for OPM Disability Retirement benefits.

Contact a Federal Disability Lawyer who specializes in FERS Disability Retirement benefits and begin to consider and reassess the importance of the routines you once took for granted.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Lawyer

 

Help with Disability Retirement from Federal Agency or USPS: Fences

“Good fences make good neighbors” — a proverb we are all familiar with.  It is a saying which recognizes with suspicion and realism the inherently evil nature of man in his natural state.

It draws up, encapsulates and summarizes well the philosophical lineage of Hobbes, Rousseau and Locke concerning the distinction between Man’s State of Nature and the contractual empowerment achieved by the constraints of agreement, laws, civil society and the collective powers gained and applied with the rise of a government, state, and nation.

Fences establish the first border separating anarchy from civil society.  It recognizes the line which cannot be crossed; the restraint which is imposed in favor of both sides; and reduces the tensions resulting from misunderstanding and misapprehension.  Laws do the same — they provide the acceptable demarcations and impose a standard and criteria for decision-making.

The “fences” in a Federal Disability Retirement case are comprised of the statutes, regulations and case-laws handed down both from the U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board, as well as from the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals — which constrains and restricts the otherwise unfettered and capricious decisions render by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Contact a FERS Disability Retirement Attorney who specializes in OPM Disability Retirement Law, and make sure and impose the necessary fences upon OPM in a Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Lawyer

 

Federal & Postal Employee Medical Retirement: The Mistake Unrecognized

We can always quibble about what constitutes a “mistake” — but, generally, there are circumstances described which fall into the center of the conceptual definition, those which border on the periphery, and then the remainder which, while having a consensus that they stray outside of the boundaries, nevertheless are often described as a “mistake”, but only in a retrospective manner.

Examples: A man is driving down a road and makes a left turn instead of a right.  He thought he knew where he was going, but clearly did not.  He made a mistake.  A clerk in an ice cream store thought the customer said, “Give me a scoop of Godzilla Ice Cream” — a specialty of the shop comprised of chocolate and large fudge bits. Instead, the customer had said, “Give me a scoop of Vanilla Ice Cream.”  In the din of the noisiness, the clerk misheard and made a mistake.

An individual purchases some stolen items from a street vendor.  She suspects that they are stolen, but because of the extraordinary price for which the items are aggregately offered, represses such thoughts and agrees to the purchase.  Later, the police raid the woman’s home and confiscate the property.  Was it a “mistake”?  In what way?

Here are several: It was a mistake to repress the suspicions aroused; it was a mistake to purchase such items from a street vendor; it was a mistake to fail to connect the dots of illogic; but had the person never been caught, and the value of the items later increased a hundredfold and was legitimately sold at Sothebys for an eye-opening profit, would the transaction be characterized as a “mistake”?

And finally: A similar transactional relationship; but let’s change the hypothetical somewhat.  In the new scenario, the person about to engage in the transaction asks for advice before concluding the deal.  Everyone tells him, “Don’t do it.  It is clearly fenced goods.”  A friend — a retired police officer — gives the following advice: “You know it’s gotta be stolen. You can be arrested for participating in receiving of stolen goods.  Don’t do it.” Multiple family members say t he same thing.  The person goes ahead and attempts to close the deal and, in the process, the police raid the establishment, charge the individual and place him in jail.  Was it a “mistake”?

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition such that the medical condition prevents the Federal or Postal employee from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job — don’t make the mistake of unrecognized scenarios.

Contact a FERS Disability Lawyer who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and avoid those “mistakes” which are clearly there and which can — and will — defeat a Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Lawyer

 

OPM Disability Retirement Application: Denials for the Unrepresented

Why are denial letters issued to those Federal Disability Retirement applicants different in nature from those with legal representation?  Why should there be a difference in quality and content?  Why, indeed?

It is an “indication”, of course, of a lack of objectivity in how the U.S. Office of Personnel Management approaches cases.  For, the denial letter issued to an unrepresented individual is often characterized by language which makes it appear as if the person filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits “never had a chance”.  You were a fool to have even tried.  Your application has no merit and should be summarily dismissed!

On the other hand, a denial letter to an individual who is represented by an attorney often will point out some of the legitimate deficiencies; questions about lack of performance deficits; and a greater amount of logical argumentation.

In the end, one might argue — does it matter?  For, both still constitute an OPM Disability Retirement denial.  The answer: Yes.

Not every FERS Disability Retirement application prepared by a lawyer will pass through at the First Stage with an approval.  However, most should at least come close to satisfying the threshold, and those which do not, can always be supplemented at the Reconsideration Level, or with an appeal to the MSPB.

Contact a FERS Disability Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law and make sure that your legal presentation to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management is given the best shot possible.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Lawyer