OPM Disability Retirement Law: Mental Accretions

It is the “process of growth or increase, typically by the gradual accumulation of additional layers or matter”.  It is that which becomes magnified within the insularity of the mind — of the aggregation expanded by creativity, imagination, fears, potentiality, impotence, nightmares; in short, the fullness of one’s cognitive infinity.

Mental accretions include the limitless capacity of the mind towards exponential creations by taking the encounter of Being — of what “is” — and going beyond and imagining the worst, or the best.  Kantian philosophy would be compatible with this perspective — of the categorical imperatives, the imposition of human perspectives upon the noumental world of pure objectivity; and in the end, it is the human, mental accretions which determine whether or not we can maneuver the greater world within which we must operate.

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, mental accretions are often the roadblock preventing the next step in moving beyond your present circumstances.

For, it is often the mental accretions themselves — of magnified fears out of proportion to the reality of your situation; of imagined impediment reflecting not the problems able to be solved, but of unreasonable conclusions reached without sound advice.

Do not let the mental accretions rule and ruin the potentiality of what may be; instead, contact a Federal Lawyer who specializes in FERS Disability Retirement Law, and begin the process of getting sound and practical advice in preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, and stop fretting over the mental accretions which fail to reflect the true perspective of your current circumstances.

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.

 

OPM Disability Retirement for FERS employees: Poetry and Prose

The objective world reflects the insular mind; and though we expend less and less energy in modernity to engage with the former, the latter nevertheless continues to reflect the former.

Poetry is to the objective world as the morning’s dawn allows for clarity of thought.  The scent of a rose; the first snowflake; a rainbow after a thunderstorm — these and more represent the poetry of the objective world.

Prose is the rest of life — of the long and sluggish days in work and solving problems; of slogging through an especially difficult time; of marriage, family, and merely living life, for endurance and making it through the day represents the lengthy prose of paragraph after paragraph, page after page.

Then, there may be a short interlude — a line of poetry, a happy smile, a child being born, a light-hearted moment.  But then the prose of life comes roaring back, as the daily struggles overwhelm us like the darkening clouds of summer rains.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who struggle with a medical condition such that the medical condition prevents the Federal or Postal worker from performing all of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job — has the prose of life extinguished any poetry left?

Contact an OPM Medical Lawyer who specializes in Federal Employee Disability Retirement, and let some stream of poetic light enter back into the lifetime of prose’s deficient enamor.

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 Employee Disability Retirement Benefits: Getting There

Where is the “there”?  What is the mode of “getting”?  Normally, we don’t even think about it, and in modernity where we rely upon a GPS tracking device, the mind has no concept of non-mechanical means of devising a pathway.

In centuries prior, whether by the direction of the sun or the constellation of the stars; or, more recently but of antiquated methodologies, we could competently use a compass or a Rand McNally map which folds out and where numbered and lettered graphs could pinpoint the roads and highways most efficient for travel.  But Google maps and other similar devices have changed all of that.  We barely give consideration to the question, “Do we know how to get there?” — other than the reflexive response of, “Oh, I’ll just punch in the address into my Smartphone”.

Yet, because of such thoughtless approaches which lull us into passivity and a false sense of security, we have become trained into become drones of monotonous routines, unable to think about the basic questions which can become complicated affairs in a different context.

“Getting There” — is an important consideration for Federal and Postal employees who are considering filing for FERS Disability Retirement benefits from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.  What needs to be done?  How does one prove one’s case?  What constitutes sufficiency of evidence?  What is the legal criteria in proving one’s case?  Is it as simple as “all that”?

Consult with an experienced attorney who specializes in FERS Disability Retirement Law before and during the process of filing for Federal Disability Retirement.  For, in the end, if you don’t know the pathway for getting there, you will likely end up lost in the morass of bureaucratic complications within a neighborhood of denials and disappointments.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

FERS Disability Retirement: Structure and Content

The former provides the form; the latter, the character of the entity.  It is the duality in combination which creates the ability to identify the particular being in an Aristotelian manner — as opposed to the more generalized definition of “Being”.  Without the largest organ of the human body — one’s skin — the “content” of that which separably identifies one individual from another would be lost, and we would all be mere aggregations of various organs not necessarily organized in any coherent way.

Similarly, in any presentation of a written form, it is important to plan the structure and content such that the former allows for coherence and ease of understanding while the latter compels the force of persuasion to impact upon the reader.

In preparing a Federal Disability Retirement application to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management under FERS, it is important to provide both structure and content in order to enhance the chances for an approval at any stage of the process.  For, the Federal or Postal applicant who is preparing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, to be filed with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, one must first recognize that such an application is a “paper presentation” to OPM, and thus does structure and content both matter.

To merely focus upon “content” — i.e., medical records; the words in the Statement of Disability (SF 3112A) is to overlook the persuasive nature of the structure of the application itself.  Conversely, to concentrate too heavily upon the structure of the FERS Disability Retirement application — the forms to be filed; the “checklist” of necessary and required paperwork — is to underestimate the power of content.

The two must be formed [sic] in tandem; and a persuasive and powerful legal memorandum that provides both a roadmap as well as content-filled legal citations is a “must” in every FERS Disability Retirement application, and this should be formulated and prepared by an experienced Federal Disability Retirement Attorney who specializes in, and is fully knowledgeable of, Federal Disability Retirement Law.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill
OPM Disability Lawyer

   

Federal Disability Retirement: “I would rather. . .”

The ellipses that follows is from the Ancient Greek that denotes “omission” or “that something which follows which is left blank”, and allows for wandering thoughts and meandering reflections to complete the lack.  What is the range of an acceptable addendum?  Does it matter what the prefatory statement allows for, and does the logic of its completion depend upon the spectrum of grammatical technicalities that confine and maintain boundaries of meaningful discourse?

For example, what if a person was asked to complete the incomplete sentence, and the response is:  “I would rather [red, blue, pink and all of the flowers in the universe].”  Would we say to the person, “Wait a minute, I asked you to complete the thought and you have provided me with gibberish.”?  And he/she comes back with:  “That’s how I would finish the sentence, because that’s how I feel.”   Would that be allowable?  Or, should the rules of grammar confine and restrict, so that the formality of completion should reflect a coherence that is expected and anticipated, such as, “I would rather [be at the beach than going into work today]”?

In the insular universe of private thoughts, of course, we can add whatever fanciful thoughts that infringe upon the uncertainty of our subconscious minds; but when the breach between private/public dichotomy occurs, suddenly we are thrown into an arena that restricts and confines, and compels us to follow the rules of conversational efficiency, including grammatical rules, traditional sense of coherence, logical consistency and meaningful conceptual constructs.  Exiting the arena of private thoughts right into the concentric complexities of the public world alters the rules of engagement.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, such that the medical condition begins to impact, prevent and block the Federal or Postal employee from performing all of the essential elements of the Federal or Postal job, the critical point of departure — from breaching that dichotomy between the insular world of the “private” and stepping over into the “public” — begins when first there is an admission that a “problem” exists.

Preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, to be submitted ultimately to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, is likened to completing the fanciful thought that begins with, “I would rather…”.  The replacement of the ellipses can have many forms, restricted and delimited by grammatical constrictions and  restrictive contexts, but no Federal or Postal employee who begins the process ends such a sentence with, “I would rather … [be on disability retirement than be healthy and continue to remain in my chosen career].

Those who believe that there is a scintilla of coherence or meaningfulness in such a sentence do not know Federal and Postal employees.  Instead, it is a choice resulting from limited options, but sometime the best one available, as filing for an OPM Disability Retirement may be the only alternative where other such contingencies have already been exhausted.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement Benefits: The misplaced comma

It is such an inconsequential mark in the universe of imprints that pervade, and yet so significant, but in a cloak of anonymity, when misplaced.  It possesses the same features as other punctuations of grammar — identical to the apostrophe, the same in mimicking as the singular quotation mark that is so prevalent; and the same shape is used in multiple diacritic writing systems common within Ancient Greek writing systems, and still survives apparently in the written systems utilized in Latvian, Romanian and Livonian.

It allows for clauses to appear, to become dependent and separated, and to confine into a separate meaning where the conceptual clause, whether dependent and leaning for support upon the main thought expressed, can convey an independence of meaning that adds and modifies the original idea.

It is the misplaced comma that makes one pause and ponder — why must we hesitate here?  Why did they put a red-light in the middle of the sidewalk?  Why does the sign say, “No passage” in the center of a store, and yet we can step beyond the red line and still proceed?

Does the misplaced comma apply in spoken language?  Take the following example: You are standing and talking to a friend, and the friend says: “Now, I want you to — no comma, here — know that tomorrow it is going — no comma, here — to rain— here, there is a comma — and therefore we have to have — no comma here — our umbrellas with us.”  Aside from rendering an irritating manner of speaking, it was all so unnecessary, wasn’t it?  We don’t have to apprise others of a misplaced comma unless it is actually misplaced, and when speaking as opposed to writing, it is not needed because the hesitation in speech itself tells us of the comma, whether misplaced or not.

In written form, however, the misplaced comma — again, aside from being a mere irritant — compels us to pause, to hesitate, to take a reflective millisecond — like coming upon a crack in the sidewalk when we were kids and thinking, “Should I skip and jump over it or just be brave and step on the crack?”

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, such that the medical condition begins to prevent the Federal or Postal worker from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, the pervasive feeling of one’s tenuous position in the workforce is often likened to a misplaced comma.  You no longer “fit” into the mission of the agency.

Others begin to hesitate when approaching you; there is “talk about” you that you sense, and there appears to be commas all around, bifurcating, separating, creating dependencies that seem to segregate and confine, like invisible fences — nay, commas – that have been placed all around.

It is then time to begin to prepare, formulate and file an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, to be filed with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal employee or Postal worker is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset.  Consult with an experienced attorney and replace the misplaced comma with an emphatic period that will end the misery that continues to deteriorate.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Medical Retirement from Federal Government Employment: Of Karl Popper’s ‘World 3’

Karl Popper’s division of the world into three clean segments of definable universes was, on the one hand, quite controversial — especially as the esoteric world of philosophy had been steadily ‘progressing‘ towards pure materialism and scientism; and yet, on the other, self-evident to almost a simplistic, tautological fault.  Perhaps that is the very implication of profundity: it is that which appears so basic and elementary as to presuppose idiocy, but containing such inherent complexity as to remain beyond the reach of most.

In simple terms, the division of the world followed the classic lines of human history and linear development of evolutionary concordance: ‘World 1’ referred to the physical universe surrounding us; ‘World 2’, the purely psychological make-up of human beings, with a special concern to Popper concerning the internal pain and anguish which we feel; and of ‘World 3’ — that universe which is the subject of this short blog, the aggregate of human products and man’s creative injection into the world, comprised of art, literature, cars, buildings, customs and normative behavior, including dress, style, fashion, etc.

There is, of course, inevitable interaction and intersecting between the bifurcated ‘worlds’ — for example, a book of literature (say, Salinger’s The Catcher in the Rye) would be both an object existing in ‘World 1’ as well as a product of human creativity from ‘World 3’. But note the peculiarity of the overlap, which makes for a unique phenomenological observation: Say you had 2 copies of the book, but one which was published in January, 2015, and another with the stated date of July, 1951.  Consider further the added element that in the latter edition, a scribble appears, which happens to be the autograph of the author.

From the perspective of Popper’s ‘World 1’, both objects would appear to be essentially identical — with the former intact, and the latter somewhat damaged because of the graffiti defiling a clean page.  However, from the vantage point of the person who possesses and ‘owns’ (a concept which would clearly belong to Popper’s ‘World 3’, as well) the autographed object, a sudden recognition of value, wealth and uniqueness would immediately attach — leaving aside intersecting points with ‘World 2’ involving envy, jealousy, awe and disbelief (which would be shared by the undersigned writer).  Thus do the various and variegated ‘worlds’ of Karl Popper posit for our study, agreement/disagreement, and further reflection.

Such division and segmentation of worlds and universes are often proposed merely for esoteric and pedantic purposes; of ivory tower conceptual constructs which have little to do with the day-to-day lives of ordinary human beings who struggle to make a living, maneuver through the complexity of the world, and attempt to survive the manipulative machinations of a society governed by microcosms of powerful but unnamed sources of evil and collusion.  But there is a recognizable worth and value to some of us, for pointing out the existence and demarcation of artifice as opposed to the natural environment from whence we came.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who are considering filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, such a bifurcation of the universe into clean segments of definable compartments, is to recognize that the complexity of the administrative and bureaucratic process encapsulating the entirety and aggregation of the process cumulatively entitled, “Federal Disability Retirement under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset”, is ultimately a product of Popper’s ‘World 3’, and not merely a nightmare emanating from the deep recesses of our troubled psychosis self-contained in ‘World 2’, but of an intersection between the universe of madness created by our own desire to further separate ourselves from the simplicity of ‘World 1’, from whence we came.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal & USPS Disability Retirement: The Advantage of Persistence

If there are innate, underlying underpinnings of genetic inlays which provide for greater advantages in the evolutionary progression for those who consider survival of the fittest to be the teleological force behind man’s advancement, then the character trait of persistence must be one such data entry.  It is certainly a personality pre-condition for the meanest, most hostile and unrelenting individuals and organizations across the spectrum.  Like the wild dog with the unbreakable jawbone, persistence is that trait where relenting is not an option, and where right or wrong is not the standard which guides or otherwise influences the decision-making process of an individual who embraces a course of action.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who are filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, it is important to recognize and identify one’s friends, enemies, and those stuck somewhere in the middle, whether because of indifference or apathy; as well as the worth of avenues to pursue, those best left to abandonment, and what reactionary efforts should be engaged.

Federal Disability Retirement itself is a long, arduous administrative process which will require insistence, persistence and an intractable quantity of good, old fashioned stubbornness.  The identified adversary, the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, as well as one’s own Federal agency and the U.S. Postal Service, are entities known for persistence already.  The Federal and Postal employee who takes on the Goliath of the Federal system, must be prepared to endure the persistence of the opponent.  This, despite the disadvantage of suffering from a medical condition, which is and continues to be the primary underlying basis of one’s Federal Disability Retirement claim, to begin with.

Federal Disability Retirement is a benefit which allows for one’s future to be secured, and it is certainly worth “waging the good fight“. Recognition of what one must encounter; the greater advantages of the “opponent” in the fight; and the unrelenting nature of the bureaucracy; these are all elements which should be recognized at the outset, and to acknowledge that in preparing, formulating and filing for Disability Retirement benefits through OPM, there is always an evolutionary and genetic advantage in embracing the character trait of persistence.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire