FERS Disability Retirement Law: The Gist of Life

The gist of life is similar to the grist of life: They both stem from the same question — what is the “essence” of X?

So, when a person comes in late to a conference, he or she asks the natural question, “So, give me the gist of what has been discussed before I arrived.”  Meaning, thereby, that a short synopsis of the “essence” of what has been discussed — i.e., the meat, the substance, the main points, etc., of the meeting.

Often, when watching a movie, reading a novel, coming into the middle of a conversation, and many other forms and formats, besides, a person can quickly get the gist of what is being discussed, what the movie is about, how the novel is progressing, etc.  Most people have a need and desire to comprehend the gist of what has been encountered.  While peripheral details are often important, unless one has understood the gist of whatever is being viewed, there is a sense of unease which develops.

That’s why husbands turn to their wives in exasperation with the pointed question, “But what is the point of it?”  For children, however, it is often the peripheral things which are most important — not whether the story has any central meaning, but the funny way in which Dad reads it; not in whether you come out clean from a bathtub, but whether there are enough soapsuds with colorful reflections; and not whether you have perfectly picked up after yourself, but to be praised for how you tried your best, etc.

We often forget that.  For, the gist of life when we grow older has more to do with how we conducted ourselves, and less with how successfully others view us.  Then, when a medical condition hits us, we realize truly what the gist of life is all about — not how many hours we worked, but which meals we missed with our kids.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition and where the medical condition impacts the careers of the Federal or Postal worker, contemplation of initiating an effective Federal Disability Retirement application under the FERS system becomes the gist of what needs to be done.  The gist of life, suddenly, is that which was always taken for granted and never thought about — one’s health.

Contact a FERS Disability Lawyer who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and consider the gist of life — of one’s health, to begin with.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill
Lawyer exclusively representing Federal and Postal employees to secure their Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

 

FERS Disability Retirement Benefits: Worth Fighting For

Some things in life are worth fighting for; others, less so; and still others, of waning reactive significance such that the minimal relevancy to one’s life should make it evident that walking away from the issue is the wiser course of action.

Of course, there are those who never make a discretionary judgment as to the priorities of expending time and energy in the fight itself, but who — because it is being opposed — must by reactive necessity fight the fight.  Perhaps the person was a schoolyard bully; or, in childhood, he or she had to always “prove something” because of some trauma of inadequacy.

Then, there are the total opposites — those who give up and scurry away at the first sign of conflict or contention.  All of us have those in our families — when a “spirited” discussion begins to develop, the niece who slinks away or the uncle who turns suddenly very quiet, or the aunt who interjects with, “Let’s keep out voices down; we can all hold our own opinions.”

But some things are clearly worth fighting for — like a benefit which was promised when we first entered employment.  Federal Disability Retirement is one such issue worth fighting for.  Contact an attorney who specializes in FERS Disability Retirement, and begin the process of fighting for something worth fighting for.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Lawyer

 

OPM Medical Retirement for Federal Employees: The Before & After

In once sense, there can always be the identifiable spectrum bifurcated into the “before” and “after”, and the conditions, the context and the significant differences characterized by each.  There is the time “before” the 1929 stock market crash, and then the “after”.  There is the “before” period in Nazi Germany, and the “after” timeframe subsequent to defeat.  There is “before” television and “after”; there is the time period before X-presidency and after, and before the advent of the computer, the laptop, the smart phone, etc. — and after.

How can we identify and bifurcate based upon relevant contexts?  For example, one can point to the legendary bank robbers — of “Bonnie and Clyde”, “Pretty Boy Floyd”, “Baby Face Nelson”, etc. — and it is much fun to watch movies romanticizing such characters.  But how would they fare today in the era of cellphones and electronic tracking devices, modern technologies of security apparatus, etc.?  Could a person “get away” these days using the same tactics and strategies, or would any of the famous bank robbers have been smart enough to change tactics and adapt to this world of technological intrusion? Are the old bank robbers of “before” the new cyberspace hackers of “after”?

Before the Great Dust Bowl and the Depression was a country that was mostly agrarian and independent of the Federal Government; after, we became a nation where the greater populace looked to a more centralized nation.  Good or bad, we tend to view contexts upon a spectrum of “before” and “after”, and the same is true of individual lives.  “How” we view it all depends upon which events we consider as significant enough to posit as the bifurcating dividing point that separates the “before” and the “after”.

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, the “before” is quite simple: Before the onset of the medical condition.  It is the “after” that becomes problematic, and filing for Federal Disability Retirement is the next step in completing the process of the “after” so that you can go on to the next phase of your life and make the “after” the next “before” in a life that doesn’t remain stuck in the “before” of one’s medical condition.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Disability Retirement: Tempering euphoria

Life presents a wide spectrum; it is the limitation of one’s mind that restricts the expanse of that endless stream flowing on either side.  Euphoria rises to the pinnacle of that swinging pendulum; the high that reaches, follows upon a subsequence reversal of the tidal wave, and comes crashing down in fits and tumults of dismaying turbulence.  Does it necessarily need to be contained?

In modernity, and in society generally, there is a level and pitch of discomfort when intense feelings and exuberant outbursts of excitement surpass a certain arc of acceptability; there is no rule or law governing the demarcation where acceptance, discomfort and outright rejection are dissected, but it is there nonetheless.  It is like the line between light and darkness created by a campfire in the twilight on a beach that reaches forever beyond the darkness of the sea; yes, somewhere the glow of the fire ends and complete darkness begins, but we can never perceive with clarity where that boundary lies.

Some neuroscientists ascribe to the view that the extreme of euphoria occurs when there is a simultaneous, concurrent activation of all hedonic trigger-points with the brain’s rewarding system of stimulus-responses, but surely many have experienced such a state without the coalescence of such a perfect storm?  As the antonym of dysphoria, it is perhaps another hidden vestige of our evolutionary past, where intensity of emotional response was necessary for survival in a state of nature.

In civilized society, however, tempering euphoria – except in limited circumstances of heightened stimulation within the privacy of one’s home and restricted to context-appropriate circumstances – is what is expected, presumed and demanded.  There is always somewhat of an experiential oxymoron when a person manifests an unfettered state of euphoria; somehow, we all suspect that behind the uncontrolled exuberance will follow a “down” state which closely aligns itself with depression and despondency.

Is there really anything wrong with unrestrained expressions of pleasure and happiness?  Or, are we just being old fogeys and fuddy-duddies when we raise an eyebrow to such unsolicited declarations?

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who have filed a Federal Disability Retirement application through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, the issue of tempering euphoria is applicable within the context of having contact with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.  Waiting for months upon tiring months for OPM to respond can be exhausting.  Then, when a decision is made, one can become overwhelmed by the sheer revelation of information, whether euphoric or dysphoric.

Why tempering euphoria is important, is because filing for Federal Disability Retirement through OPM is a process, and must be seen as such.  There are many potential “stages” to the administrative process, and the bureaucracy as a whole does not lend itself well to emotional states of responsive exuberance.

In the end, it is not only civilized society that sees the benefit in tempering euphoria through normative means of behavioral reactions, but for the very sake of keeping expectations and emotions in check, tempering euphoria is a necessary mandate when dealing with the juggernaut of OPM’s indifference in the multiple stages of a Federal Disability Retirement application.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

FERS & CSRS Medical Retirement: Counting coup

It is not always in the outward and very-public display of emotions, in which a battle is fought and won; often, it is the restraining of a capacity and potential to reflexively counter, but held back just at the point of harm, that determines the pinnacle of gaining prestige.

Acts of bravery for a Plains Indian did not necessarily require harm inflicted upon an enemy; counting coup and the subsequent rise in respect and prestige could involve the mere touching of an enemy, while escaping unharmed despite that close encounter with the savage face of danger.  It is not always in the completion of an intended act that the standard by which the success or failure of the act is judged; rather, just at the point of fulfillment, the holding back or the deliberate withdrawal can be the penultimate evidence that one could have, but by sheer will of grace of self-control, did not.

In Western Civilization, perhaps the parallelism can only be embraced with an analogy of sorts; of the subtle remark with a duality of meanings, placed just at the right time in response to an otherwise untamable tongue wagging about with destructive force by its aggressive tone, ugly words and offensive remarks.  Or, of the realization that one is now a prisoner in an “enemy” camp, and the escape out is to stealthily retreat in the quiet of a proverbial night, without harming the members who may once have been counted as friends and colleagues.

This is often the situation the Federal employee or U.S. Postal worker finds him/herself in, when a medical condition arises and the Federal or Postal employee is no longer able to perform one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job.  Suddenly, the Federal or Postal employee is treated as an “enemy”, and the initial reaction is to counterattack, as the initial onslaught by one’s coworkers, supervisors, managers, etc., was neither deservedly received no invited by any act or statement by the innocent Federal or Postal worker.

But is the battle – the actually harm inflicted and the legal imbroglio ensuing – worth the hassle?  Or, is it better to prepare, formulate and file an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, submitted (ultimately) to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, and like the warriors of past in the battles fought in the far-off Plains of the American West, before the white settlers came to decimate and exterminate with the modern technology of weaponry unheard of in its efficiency as a killing machine – is it preferable by counting coup and withdrawing unharmed, in order to secure a future brighter for tomorrow, and less left with the residue of bloodstained wounds harboring lasting pain in the essence of one’s soul.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Medical Retirement from Federal Gov. Employment: Degree versus knowledge

Does a degree hold as much worth, if everyone possesses one?  Why are the economics of supply and demand not attached to degrees conferred by so-called institutions of “higher learning”?  Is the degree conferred of value because of the opportunities granted by the elevated status, or by the knowledge gained and imparted?  Or is the disjunctive bifurcation into universes of counterparts, between diploma represented as opposed to a jewelry box of wisdom, an offer of false alternatives, when some may indeed gain knowledge as well as certification in completion of courses advanced?

If everything is nothing, and nothing constitutes the combined aggregate of everything, can a distinction with a difference be proffered?  So, if everyone has gone to college, and the conferring of a degree is disseminated to all, has nothing been gained by the accessibility to everything?  It is, of course, best represented by Cordelia in Shakespeare’s Tragedy, King Lear, where he responds to the hesitant daughter, “Nothing will come of nothing”, and entreats her to further to expound by extravagant and flowery profusion of meaningless trope; or would it have been meaningless?

The silence which ensues between the cacophony of emotions in the short scene is painful and agonizing.  The old king whose feelings have been devastated; the insincere showering of expressed flattery by his other daughters; the pauses and elongated silences between entreaty and loss of words; for, it is ultimately that wide expanse and abyss between the words fabricated and the intent revealed, which formalizes the fate of a person’s soul and destined catastrophe.

It is the identical nature of a degree versus knowledge, and there are multiple parallels and counterparts of such contending artifices of conceptual constructs enamored; of silence versus quietude; of peace which merely poses as a veil for a ceasefire.  Knowledge is what is lacking in a society that promotes glitter, padded resume and degrees dispensed with abandon and devalued wisdom.

There are exceptions, however, and the pragmatic cynic will counter with:  Would you allow an individual without a medical degree to perform surgery upon a vital organ?  The answer, of course, is an unqualified “no”.  And that is why, in a Federal Disability Retirement application, the case-law conferred and rendered by Administrative Law Judges at the U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board have consistently held that a treating doctor possesses the greater credibility in formulating an effective Federal Disability Retirement application in a Federal Disability Retirement case, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset.

For, like the issue surrounding the distinction between “degree” versus “knowledge”, the medical doctor who has never treated a particular patient, but who certifies that the Federal or Postal worker is unable to perform one or more of the essential elements of the Federal or Postal employee’s positional duties, is likened to a person who wears the formalities of credentials, but lacks the individualized knowledge elevated to the heightened ascendency to wisdom, representing the doctor who has had multiple clinical encounters and can determine the capacity and capabilities of the Federal Disability Retirement applicant with confidence paralleling the man of knowledge who may lack a degree, but never fails to notice the pitfalls present on the pathway to an unlit gaze upon the heavenly stars of folly.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement Benefits: Present Perfect Future Tense

Acting in the present to secure your future with OPM Disability Retirement

Grammar is something we simply survive; it is rarely a career choice, and even less likely anything but a distant memory of distasteful dissonance. But the ability to convey thoughts and conceptual constructs remains a necessity throughout one’s life; and when a present circumstance calls for it, the capacity to plan for the future, while imperfect in any endeavor, must by dictates of life be embraced, in whatever tense of timeless warp by which we discover ourselves.

Grammar is a process; it is not the substance of that which we speak; rather, it is the vehicle, the procedural mechanism, and the artifice of conceptual constructs through which language is conveyed.  And thus do we faintly remember participles and pronouns, and tenses consistent between subject and object; but it is always and throughout the underlying substantive issues which we are attempting to address.

For Federal employees and Postal workers who find the present tense beset with future imperfection because of a medical condition which impacts one’s ability to perform the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal position, it is important to be able to think in terms of the present tense, while planning for the perfect future tense.

Perfection does not arrive by accident; it is a goal to achieve based upon present placement of foundational groundwork, imperfectly laid and lacking in coherence in any given slice of time; but it is the process of working towards a betterment for the future, through present toil, that the perfect future tense is achieved.  Present imperfection does not portend of loss of future perfection; and though the perfect future tense may exist only in the warped minds of grammarians, it is the process of attempting to attain that goal which secures the future.

Thus, for Federal and Postal employees who can no longer perform all of the essential elements of one’s positional duties in the Federal government, whether the Federal or Postal worker is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, planning for the future in an imperfect present world must include preparing, formulating and filing for OPM Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

That system of annuity, while less than perfect, is a Federal benefit which allows for the injured Federal or Postal Worker, or one who suffers from a medical condition such that the medical condition prevents him or her from performing all of the essential elements of one’s job, to receive an OPM disability annuity in order to secure one’s future, and to attain a level of rehabilitative existence in order to consider a second vocation for the future.

One’s present circumstances may never be a pinnacle of perfection; but it is the future tense of one’s present conceptual framework which you must always work towards; and while the present perfect future tense may exist only in the ephemeral universe of distant grammatical forms, the reality of the world should always motivate us to work towards the consonance between the present circumstances, and the future tense of who we are.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire