OPM Disability Retirement Benefits: Holding on Too Long

We all have that tendency; we live with the old rule & adage: “throwing good money after bad”; “to abandon is to admit failure”; “maybe tomorrow will be different than today”, etc.

Few of us are able to cut the string or the proverbial umbilical cord when time, circumstances and all indicators reveal to us the wisdom of doing so.  We hold on for too long; we don’t want to admit and face “the facts”; we want to believe that tomorrow is that ray of hope where yesterday was the shadow of darkness, but where darkness was a thing of the past.

Yes, there are rare instances in which stories of hope and rejuvenation profited the stubborn exception; but that is why there are such stories in the first place — they are the exceptions which defied the normal course of most circumstances.

For the Federal employee or U.S. Postal Service worker who suffers 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, holding on too long has more than a price to pay in terms of time wasted; it has to do with your health.

Holding on too long can continue to help deteriorate the health which you are attempting to preserve.

Contact an OPM Disability Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law and begin the process of “letting go” — an act of the will, and not merely the words of a Shakespearean fool who brings down the King and his kingdom with a crash of tragedy echoing beyond Lear’s empty ravings.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Lawyer

 

OPM Medical Disability Retirement: The Swing of Things

How do you explain such an idiom to a foreigner?  How do you explain it to yourself, or to a friend or family member?

It is a phrase which is often used, rarely considered, and never questioned.  We say such things without thought and, if it fits the context, no one ever pauses or stops to question its applicability.

The Holidays are over; people have been on a somewhat extended break; and in returning to work, someone says, “It’ll take some time to get back into the swing of things”.  Others smile, nod in agreement, or utter supportive addendums.

Someone comes back from maternity leave; an elder person enters as a Freshman/Woman in college; a young novice begins a job; to all, someone declares, “It may take some time to get into the swing of things.”  All appropriate applications?

A person has been working at a job for over 2 decades.  Someone says audibly in the middle of the day, “It takes time to get into the swing of things.”  People look up quizzically.  An inappropriate application?  But why?

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, is the idiom, “It is difficult to get back into the swing of things” appropriate?

If not — both because there are no potentialities for ever “getting back” what has been lost, and because the medical condition has gone beyond the ‘difficult’ and into the ‘disabling’ stage — it is time to consult with an OPM Disability Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement.

The “swing of things” must now be something different from your current Federal or Postal job.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

FERS Disability Retirement: The Garden of One’s Mind

The metaphor has been used often enough; whether it enhances or enlightens one’s knowledge of one’s self is of dubious prospects.  The physical, objective entity identified as a “garden” is simple enough in being defined: it must include some plants and soil; perhaps a few rocks or boulders to enhance the natural contours of the landscape; and a person who “tends” to the garden — i.e., a “gardener”.

Can there be wild gardens without a gardener?  In other words, can you walk through a forest and come upon a clearing where there are flowers and various plant lives, and declare, “Oh, what a beautiful garden!”?  Similarly, can a person who lives in an apartment who has a collection of potted plants have the “right” to say to someone, “You should come and admire my garden sometime.”?

Purists may object to the application of the term “garden” to either of those described scenes, but a looser definition is still widely accepted in this modern age where malleability of language is a given.  Then, of course, there is the “stretching” of language’s boundaries by applying the metaphor of a “Garden of one’s Mind”.

What can it mean?  It often refers to the state of one’s mind: Of whether one has allowed for too much neglect and has failed to “prune” the overgrowth or let the weeds overtake; of failing to replenish the soil or allowed by disease and decay to overshadow.

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 concept encapsulated in the metaphor of the garden is appropriate.

For, like the untended garden, the Federal or Postal employee who suffers from a medical condition must apply the same principles as the gardener who must begin to prune and replenish: decisions about the next steps, of what to cut out or whether one can leave things as they are; these are all contained in the metaphor within the Garden of One’s Mind, and it may be a first step to consult with an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law before making important decisions like career changes and leaving the Federal government.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Medical Retirement Legal Representation: Simplicity

There is certainly something to be said about it.  But, then, by adding to the very word itself, there is always a danger of complicating the very concept implied from the singular word that stands alone as a paradigm of striving, a goal to attain, an end to achieve.

“Simplicity” is a state of being, a characteristic of existence and the pinnacle of wishes in dreams fantasized.  Yet, nowhere in the historical archives of any fairytales of yore, in whatever form and differences of versions presented — you know, the one that involves a genie who allows for 3 wishes to be granted to the lucky one — do you find the individual request: Simplicity.

No, instead, it is the complex which is always wished for: More wealth; the key to the universe; eternal youth; to be the “greatest X”; or any other of a number of states of being or accumulation of stuff that will only further complicate one’s life.  Never, ever, does one wish for: Simplicity.  Yes, that is what everyone all over the world always claims to be striving for, while at the same time doing everything in order to undermine it.  Does one think that acquiring greater wealth, being granted eternal immortality or an extended childhood of innocence will result in the attainment of simplicity?

And of the world that promises anything but delivers short on everything, the empty palms begin to echo hollow: This new technological gadget X will be a greater time-saver and will “simplify” your life; and that shortcut invention Y will allow you to “spend more time doing the things you want to do”…  If we could bottle up all of the minutes promised to have been saved for every gadget offered, we should all be living the life of simplicity in a stress-free universe.

What becomes apparent is that simplicity is a malleable concept that cannot so easily be defined, and is bundled up with a conundrum of complexities depending upon one’s perspective and viewpoint.  For example, for the Federal or Postal employee who suffers from a medical condition and who needs to file a Federal Disability Retirement application — is the process of presenting proof to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management a matter of administrative simplicity such that completing SF 3112A, Applicant’s Statement of Disability, can be accomplished without proper legal guidance?

The form itself looks simple enough; the questions posed, an artwork of simplicity; and the space in the boxes provide, a simple couple of inches of allowances; so how can such simplicity present a complexity of legal entanglements?

Until, of course, one realizes that simplicity is often the trap for the unweary: look upon that pinnacle of simplicity wrapped in the morning sunlight where the dew forms upon a spider’s web — ah, such simplicity in nature, awaiting the unweary to be trapped and irreversibly enmeshed.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Attorney Representation for OPM Disability Claims: Limitless time

Does the concept even make sense, and is it theoretically possible to imagine such a state of existence?

Perhaps a cogent explanation could be properly delineated by some specialized expert in the field of Physics — of time, its limitations and whether destruction of all objects in the universe must first occur as a prerequisite to limitless time, or upon the non-being of objects, does time itself become extinct because it is dependent upon the movement of objects?  In a vacuum and void, does time retain any meaning at all?

For simpletons (like the author of this subject) who possess scant scientific knowledge, can “time” be anything more than the imposition of one’s calendar upon the limited period encountered each day?

Philosophy can ponder upon the concept of limitless time, and upon time itself; physics can more precisely delineate the theoretical constructs by mathematical calculations upon the limits of time; and literature can cast the idea of limitless time upon those summer days when waves roll lazily upon the sands of eternity and laughter of children running amidst the sand dunes may evoke the dreamless nights where the quiet hollow of relaxed sensations may pervade the scent of peace.

Then, of course, there is the reality of life — of calendars that demand; bosses that shout; production quotas that must be reached; and statutes of limitations which require that filings be met within a prescribed time frame.  Federal and Postal workers who have been separated from Federal Service, whether by resignation or termination, have up until one (1) year to file a Federal Disability Retirement application to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Thus, for Federal and Postal employees who suffer from a medical condition during the tenure of one’s Federal or Postal career, the right to file for Federal Disability Retirement extends only during that 1-year period after separation, and as preparing, formulating and filing a Federal Disability Retirement application needs to be submitted to OPM within such a constraint of time, abandonment of the concept of limitless time is a prerequisite — at least for this particular challenge of life.

Sincerely,

Robert R.McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Disability Retirement Law: Greener pastures

We all engage that game of the “other” side of things, don’t we?  Greener pastures; the pristine lawn on the other side; the “why-is-it-that” game, as in, Why is it that the ‘other guy’ has a better life than I?  Is it merely because of the age-old problem that Plato pointed out – that appearances are deceptive?

The problem is that one will never truly know the circumstances of another unless one has an “insider” perspective on the matter.  The neighborhood that you drive through that always seems like a friendly conglomerate of families laughing, having picnics together, presenting with a coherence not known in your own neighborhood; or the “perfect family” that seems to always get along and shows such support and love for one another; do these entities of inviolable perfection really exist?  Likely, not.

That is why an interview with an “insider” always turns one’s ear and contains revelations of salacious details of internal discord, concealed disharmony and bitterness untold.  Thus do the halls of the Vatican scream with priests who committed unforgivably abusive acts towards children – yet, to the “outsider” for all of those years, the men in flowing robes appeared upstanding and caring; and what about the actor and actress with the perfect marriage – how many times have they appeared since on the cover of multiple tabloids once the crack of separation and divorce occurred?  But for the publicist who wanted to control the exposure, no one would be the wiser.

Greener pastures are always attractive nuisances; they attract precisely because they do not reflect the reality of one’s own situation, and they are nuisances because we know inside that it cannot possibly be real, but the appearance of perfection is oh-so salivating by invitation of concealment.

For Federal or Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, such that the medical condition necessitates the filing of an effective 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 greener pasture may be a Federal Disability Retirement benefit.  However, before one goes down that road, the Federal or Postal employee contemplating such a move should get an “insider” perspective on the matter, and this is done by simply getting the facts.

Obtaining a Federal Disability Retirement annuity may not be the answer to every problem, but it can certainly resolve some of them.  The Federal Disability Retirement annuity itself will be a pay cut of sorts, but the focus upon one’s medical condition and its treatment, as opposed to continuing on in the turmoil of a hostile work environment, may be green enough to consider those “greener pastures”.

Whatever the appearance, it is obtaining the facts that is most important, and consulting with an experienced Federal Disability Retirement attorney is the first important step in getting an “insider’s viewpoint” on the matter.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

FERS & CSRS Medical Retirement for Federal Employees: The Abridged Joyce

The extraction and extinguishment is done by unnamed others, sometimes in teams of unknown quantities, and certainly of dubious qualification of insight.  In a similar vein, writers have always complained of the artistic ineptitude of editors, and editors of the quaint verbosity detracting from the plot, narrative and captivating flow missed by writers in pursuit of “Art”; but is there ever a “middle ground” when it comes to the integrity of the soul?  But how can you cut away the content of the work, when the process itself is part and parcel of the substantive construct of the whole itself?

It would be like removing the heart itself, or perhaps even the human brainstem from the spinal cord, thereby violating the vertebral contiguity and effectively separating thought from movement, material from the spiritual, and soul from the activity which defines life itself.  Can Joyce, Tolstoy or even Scott Fitzgerald be abridged?  One can imagine the journalistic brevity of Hemingway, where incisiveness of narrative is reflected in the economy of words, but even to that, isn’t the stronger argument that the great Papa’s works are already so edited to the core that any further amputation would render the body functionally illiterate?

Yet, we accept the Reader’s Digest version of works for want of time saved and the capacity to declare a reading conquered; and others would quip, but surely it is better than just reading the Cliff Notes, isn’t it?  Not sure about that; as such cottage industries serve a different purpose — of understanding the content and context of a thing, as opposed to the enjoyment of the work itself.

But if quantity of linguistic captivation is so interwoven with the rhythmic balance of the entirety and aggregate of the whole, can an abridged Joyce be justified, ever?  Or have we accepted that, as life itself can be cut short without demeaning the relevant historicity of its linear heritage, so reading the partiality of an excised edition is just as good, somewhat as acceptable, and ultimately a pragmatic decision in terms of time saved and effort expended?

As Art reflects Life, so for Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers whose careers and lives are interrupted by a medical condition, such that the medical condition prevents the Federal or Postal employee from continuing in the chosen field and career, preparing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management allows for the abridged Joyce of a hyphenated accentuation.  For, in the end, the quip that Life mirrors Art is a limited proverb.

The Federal or Postal employee never asked for the interruption of the medical condition, but there it is — a bump in the pathway of life itself, with very little “art” to show for it.  But the narrative of one’s Federal or Postal career must be written in the Statement of Disability with care and collection of medical evidence to back it up, and the SF 3112A, Applicant’s Statement of Disability, is nothing but an artful way of deceitful cunning by a bureaucracy which attempts to subvert and deny at every turn, and the life of such a linguistic animal must be prepared well, formulated cogently, and submitted with confidence of purpose to maneuver into the maze of bureaucratic obfuscation.

The abridged Joyce will always be offered in this world of abbreviated concerns; filing for Federal Disability Retirement, whether under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, on the other hand, is the only option remaining for many Federal and Postal workers injured or ill during the Federal tenure of one’s life, and should be accomplished with the care of the expanded version, and not an edited parcel to be cut and sliced like so many narratives in the trashbin of society.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement Lawyer: That Spare Tire

We rarely think about it; and it is somewhere “back there”, in the event of, in case, if it happens, as a contingency, as an insurance policy, for the rare occasion of a potential mishap.  But with the modern ingenuity of reinforced rubber with a manufacturing process of innerliner calendering, one rarely even sees a car on the side of the road with a lone figure attempting to locate the spare tire, with the car unevenly perched upon a device secured in a dimensionally precarious manner, to change that flat tire.

But it does happen, and even with all of the advances in technology which resists direct punctures and roadside hazards pounding away at the four (or more) elements which keep the vehicle running, the flat tire and the need for a spare requires the safety net to ensure that secure sense of a peaceful mind.

Like life insurance, fire and catastrophic umbrella policies, the spare tire will always remain, no matter any future inventions or guarantees of outdated necessity.  For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who are part of FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, Federal Disability Retirement is precisely that spare tire which provides a semblance of security if and when the need arises.

Most Federal and Postal employees continue their careers to the end, until the time of retirement, or a transference of talents and abilities to the private sector for more lucrative venues; but for that small percentage of Federal or Postal employees who find that, during the course of one’s career, a medical condition has interrupted one’s goals and prevents one from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s positional duties, then preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management is a necessary contingency to trigger.

Suddenly, the benefit looms larger than ever, is more important than previously recognized, and becomes lauded as the lifesaver of the moment.  That is precisely what we do with the spare tire — we do not even think about it, nor are aware of its precise whereabouts (except that it is under the vehicle, in the trunk, or somewhere “back there”), but travel about with the peace of mind that, in the rare hypothetical event of “if”, it is there to be accessed, so that once the change is made, we are again well on our way down the road of life.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Medical Retirement Laws: Confirmation and Affirmation

The former is both a religious sacrament in Church doctrine, as well as a state of establishing that something is true or correct; the latter, an act or statement of support for that which was previously thought to be so.  Both imply a previous state of foreknowledge, or at least an indication of some prior existence of validity; it merely needed a further stamp of approval or attestation of verification.  And that is how most opinions are sought, aren’t they?  In our own minds, we already know the answer; the search for counsel is not for new revelation, but merely a confirmation of that which we know, and the affirmation of what is needed to be done.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, such that the medical condition impacts the capacity and ability of being able to perform the essential elements of one’s positional duties, the recognition for the need to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal employee or U.S. Postal worker is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, is determined far in advance of any phone call to an attorney for guidance and counsel.

The search for “advice”, as the term is loosely presented, is often to merely confirm that which is already known, and to affirm the process which has already been discovered.  For, the medical condition itself already tells the Federal or Postal employee of the necessity of filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through OPM, and the agency’s unfriendly and often hostile response has established the harbinger of one’s future.

Like secrets between nations and skeletons in one’s proverbial closet, the preparation, formulation and filing of Federal Disability Retirement benefits through OPM is somewhat of a formality; it was known already for quite some time, but the Federal and Postal employee just needed to confirm and affirm the inevitability of necessity already revealed, but wanting of declaration.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Disability Retirement and the Price of Loyalty

Salinger’s character, Holden Caulfield, recognized the influence of movies, and the media in general.  When used as a tool for political purposes, they mold and direct the issues to be discussed, the pathways of thoughts to be taken, and the passions to be experienced.

Though we think we are libertarians within the secluded confines of our own minds, what actually occurs is that we fail to recognize the subtle influences of those forces which we rely upon so much for our daily focus and guidance.  Where did we learn such high-minded concepts such as “loyalty“, “commitment” and “dedication”?  And who taught us to apply such vaunted paradigms upon the stereotypes of our lives?

For Federal and Postal employees who suffer from a medical condition, such that the medical condition prevents one from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s positional duties in the Federal agency or the U.S. Postal Service, often the one stop-gap measure preventing the Federal or Postal employee from taking the necessary and pragmatic steps in preparing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application is in clinging to a false sense of misdirected loyalty.

Loyalty requires a bilateralism which simply does not exist, or exists so rarely as to be inconsequential, but which pervades with Federal and Postal Workers under the guise of “mission of the agency”.  Such false pretentiousness (and pretending) quickly dissipates when that mission of the agency becomes a proposal to remove based upon the mission’s “other” sidebar — for the “efficiency” of the service — and then it becomes an emergency and a time of enlightenment.

Throughout all of those years, loyalty was lauded, but existed as a one-way street — from the Federal employee to the Federal agency, and not the other way around.  But when a medical condition hits, it is of paramount importance to focus upon the singular entity of significance:  the health and well-being of one’s self.

Filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management may be one of those necessary steps required as part of that process of self-care, and one should be wary of paying too high a price for that overinflated commodity listed under the category of “L”, which also includes “Lies” and “Lip-service”, as well as “Loyalty”.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire