OPM Federal Disability Retirement: Not Unhappy

There is the state of “being happy”; conversely, of “being unhappy”; but what of the neutral sense?  Can you be in a state of “being not unhappy” and, if so, what could it mean?  Is it a neutral mood — sort of like an emotional purgatory where you are neither happy nor unhappy, but of a state of measured deliberation, where most of us are throughout the greater slice of our lives?

Modernity demands the first; to experience episodes of the second state of emotional constitution is to somehow have something “wrong” going on; for, the cottage industry of “be happy” is devised to manipulate and commercialize a state of natural being which has been artificially characterized as a “negative”, and given the greater multitude of herd instincts and the inculcated belief that there is something wrong if you are either “not happy” or “unhappy”, it goes without saying that any “neutral” state of being is likewise unacceptable.

Yet, most of life is of a state of medium; and the archaic, arcane Western Tradition of the Aristotelian “middle way” — where neither extremes of emotions are the preferred stage, but rather, a governance of the appetitive nature by the intellect and reason constitute the near-perfect character — has long been abandoned, and now deemed unattractive.  But reality, in the end, has a way of creeping back into our lives, and the state of being “not unhappy” is where most of us remain, cottage industries of “being happy” notwithstanding.

For Federal and Postal employees who are unhappy, and wish to get back to the purgatory of humanity by being not unhappy because of a medical condition which impedes and interferes with his or her life, both professionally and personally, it may be necessary to consider filing for Federal Employee Disability benefits under the current Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS), through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Neither chronic happiness nor persistent unhappiness are the natural states of Man; rather, the goal is to reach that purgatory of emotions — of being not unhappy — and it may be that, to reach that state of being, Federal Disability Retirement is an option to consider.

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 Medical Retirement: Consider What Was Lost

In modernity, there is an obsessive fetish to be positive; to ignore negativity; to maintain a smile throughout, and ultimately, to have “happiness” as a goal.

Roger Scruton, the late great English Philosopher and one of those under-appreciated giants of thoughtful intellect, wrote a book about the importance of pessimism, entitled, The Uses of Pessimism and the Danger of False Hope.  In it, he argues essentially that pessimism is a characteristic required for survival, and the abandonment of it is a dangerous artificiality which goes against the natural instincts of man.

Rousseau, similarly, cautioned against artificial accoutrements which posed a danger to man’s survival.  In accepting and adopting unnatural characteristics, consider what was lost — of a sense of community; of a humanity replaced by selfishness.

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, consider what is lost — was lost — when you pushed yourself to keeping working: Health; joy; ability to enjoy even the least of life’s offerings.  Is it all worth it?

Consider preparing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS, through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, and consider what was lost just in the struggle to maintain what you have.

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 under FERS: Societal Paralysis

At every turn, society seems to have become paralyzed.  Nothing seems to “work”, anymore — and fear abounds, whether about the collapse of moral norms and the ethos of behavior, or in the bureaucracies of government.

Perhaps it is just a perception — of having been constantly fed a steady diet of dystopian novels, movies and video programs, and we now are paying the price where virtual reality feeds upon a dim-lit perspective embracing such a viewpoint, and further self-actualizing such a perspective.

The national debt grows; subversion of government seems to be embraced by half of the population; and the basic foundations of society often appear to lack the focus of a goal-oriented character.  In the end, we seem to be left to our own devices.  Of course, the macro is merely the aggregation of the micro, and so societal paralysis is merely the compendium of individual inability.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition such that the medical condition paralyzes one from continuing in one’s Federal or Postal career, the option to prepare an effective Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS is a consideration and step forward beyond the paralysis of individual inaction.

The U.S. Office of Personnel Management is alive and well, and exists in order to subvert and stop a Federal Disability Retirement application — another form of societal paralysis, where one is prevented from gaining a benefit for which one is entitled to.

Contact a FERS Disability Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and don’t let the societal paralysis abounding to prevent you from asserting your individual right as a Federal or Postal employee to a benefit which should not be impacted by the greater societal paralysis.

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.

 

Disability Retirement for Federal Employees: Altering Events

There are critical junctures in everyday lives that alter the course of our plans, daydreams, expectations and choices.  Most are mundane and go on unnoticed; others, more significant and captivating; and those few, of memorable relevance which necessitate a wholesale upheaval and changing of the metaphorical furniture in one’s life.

Altering events are those new circumstances which change one’s perspective, outlook, attitude and priorities.  Medical conditions are normally included in that definition of altering events.

For Federal and Postal employees who suffer from a medical condition such that the medical condition has come to a critical juncture of an altering event, contact a disability attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and begin the process of preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS, with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

For, in the end, all altering events become altering by the decision made by the altered individual, and not by the event alone.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Lawyer

 

Federal & Postal Disability Retirement: The Unexpected

It can be exciting, yet disconcerting; a pleasant surprise, but moreover an unwelcome event; and perhaps even a pleasurable moment but with an uncomfortable edge.

We live by routines but thrive through tumults.  The “unexpected” is what jolts us out of the doldrums of daily repetitiveness, and is sometimes that which is needed in order to bring us out of the complacency of comfort and monotony.  Some thrive on it so much that they seek the adrenaline that accompanies, and attempt to make it as the mainstay of life — like the high of addicts which is constantly needed in greater doses in order to return to the baseline of euphoric feeling itself.

Some forms of the unexpected are unwanted; others, tolerable and endurable; and still others, perhaps gleefully embraced with open arms.  Much of the unexpected, or course, was fully expected; it is just that procrastination and disregard allowed it to remain out of our consciousness for a time such that, when the unexpected finally arrived, we forgot that it was to be expected but wanted it not to be so.

Isn’t old age expected?  Aren’t the chances of an automobile accident to be expected if you commute 100+ miles every day?  And aren’t medical conditions to be expected over a lifetime of stressful living?

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who encounter the unexpected — a medical condition — which begins to impact you in an unexpected way — of preventing you from performing one or more of the essential elements of your Federal or Postal job — it may be time to consider the unexpected: Of preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS.

Consult with an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, lest the unexpected bureaucratic complexities involved in filing a Federal Disability Retirement application with OPM should further complicate the unexpected, and so that the unexpected can be exposed to reveal the greater expectations of a future yet unexpected.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

FERS Disability Retirement Benefits: Losses

How many losses must one accumulate before being deemed a “loser”?

Was it just yesterday that Cal Ripken, Jr. won with the Baltimore Orioles in 1983, after a mere couple of years in the minors, but with that World Series ring on his finger, would then see decades of losses mount as a result of poor decisions in trading players, acquiring “has beens” and being in the unfortunate AL East where the Yankees and the Red Sox seem always to vie for the top tier of the elect?

Can a team win a World Series one year, then go on for thirty-plus years without ever winning one again, and yet be deemed “a winner”?  Or, can one always pause, give a grin, and say, “Yeah, but we were winners in 1983!”

Does one win wipe out an avalanche of losses such that the singularity of glory negates the overwhelming statistical significance of unending disappointments?  Or, what of the person who once had a promising career, but through a series of unfortunate circumstances considered by most to be no fault of his or her own, cannot quite achieve that level of promises dreamed of but never materialized?

Do we, in our own minds, create conditions which are impossible to attain, and then deem those unreachable goals as “losses” despite the artificial nature of the criteria imposed?  Do losses mount and exponentially aggregate because failure seeks after failure, and somehow the subsequent one is a natural consequence, inevitably by inherent nature, of the previous one?

Does bad luck come in bunches because of some Law of Nature, or is it just in our imagination that it seems so?  Are much of losses artificially created — i.e., we set the proverbial “goal post” in our own minds, then miss the metaphorical field goal and become despondent over the “loss” created within our own imagination within contextual circumstances fantasized that have no connection to objective reality?

For Federal and 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, that sense of “loss” can be an admixture of both objective reality and subjective, artificial creations.

The medical condition itself is an “objective” loss; but the Agency or the Postal Service’s efforts to compound the adversarial circumstances can be created in an ad hoc manner, where there are no rules or criteria to follow except upon the whim of the supervisor or the department’s reactionary intuition.  The interruption to one’s career; the constant struggle with a chronic medical condition; of being forced to deal with deteriorating health — these are all real “losses”.

On the other hand, adversarial initiations by one’s Federal Agency or the Postal Service — these, too, are “real” losses, though artificially created and unnecessary, in many instances.

Both must be dealt with when preparing, formulating and filing a Federal Disability Retirement application, to be submitted to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset — but the fact that one must “deal with” so many “losses” does not, in the end, make one a loser.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal & Postal Disability Retirement from OPM: The chasm

It is that expanse between fantasy and reality; of the indentation after the existential encounter with the world deflates the puffery that enlivened us in the first place and compelled one to test his or her mettle against the greater world; and it is the test that withstands, as opposed to mere words that fail when pushed against the substance of the universe.

Virtue is great in a vacuum; it is only when it is tested against real temptations that one can decide upon its existence, or likely not.

One can say of a husband and wife who live on an island, secluded from the rest of civilization, that they are such a “faithful” people; but if not tests arise as to the faith of their fidelity, what good is virtue in a vacuum of an untested existence?  Or of the principled individual who enters into politics — you know, the allegorical “Mr. Smith who goes to Washington” — with innocence and an unstained character; of him or her, we begin with, “Oh, such a principled person!  So unspoiled!  So unable to be corrupted!” But the test of a person is not at the beginning; it is when the chasm between concept and the wide expanse towards reality is finally bridged; then, and only then, can we make any judgments about virtue, truth, reality and one’s character.

For the Federal employee and U.S. Postal worker who suffers from a medical condition where 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, it is the reality of the current situation and the realization that one’s Federal Agency or the Postal Service, and the people who one worked/works with, that comes to the fore in realizing that, NO, the world is not such a nice and accommodating place.

Others begin to whisper; you begin to feel shunned; you are no longer the star that shines upon the face of an otherwise incompetent universe.  Filing for Federal Disability Retirement is often the best option available, if only because the Federal Agency or the Postal Service is unwilling to “work with you”.

The chasm between dreams unrealized and the ugly truth of others may finally be bridged; but in the end, the bridge that needs to be crossed is the health that is deteriorating, and that is why preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, whether you are under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, is an important next step in closing the chasm between what you would like to have happen, and what must occur in order to secure a stable future.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Lawyer Representation for OPM Disability Claims: The charade

We have all enjoyed playing the game – of the silent act in order for our team to come up with the name of the book, a famous saying, identification of a country or place; and with some inebriation as a helpful assistant to even greater pathways of outrageous laughter, the game is enjoyed in homes and neighborhoods when gatherings aggregate in times of holidays or special occasions.

It is the silent opera for the actor; the guessing laughter and thoughtful pose for the other members of one’s team.  How did that game come about?  Is it because games reflect a reality of a slice of life?  It reminds one of the “perfect lie” – you know, the one that always retains a kernel of truth, and thus is believable.

The imperfect lie is the one that is made up out of whole cloth – the one’s that a kid who is not yet a master of the believable lie tells to the parents, thinking that a make-believe world is distinguishable from the objective universe of reality, but that you can simply insert an imaginary event into the day-to-day workings of this parallel universe.

No, the perfect lie is like the charade of life – it is acting, but always retaining and containing a slice of reality and truth.  And of other games – of monopoly, cross-word puzzles, trivial pursuit, etc.; are they merely distractions to escape the harshness of life, or do they contain a sufficient amount of that slice to make it all the more interesting?

And of the charade of life – to what extent do we engage it daily, and if someone catches you in the act, can you simply respond with, “Well, I will just playing charades with you all.”  To which the audience (or the police) might say, “But no one else was playing, and you have no team.”  To which the Shakespearean actor would say, “Ah, but all the world is a stage!”

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, such that the medical condition begins to prevent one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, it often seems like you have been playing at the game of charades for quite some time.  The only problem is, your own “team members” haven’t been trying to guess at what is wrong, but rather, have been trying to ignore or otherwise act as if they don’t know.  Or, perhaps you, too, have been trying to hide the medical condition, in somewhat of a “reverse charades play”.

But the time ultimately comes, where you have to prepare, formulate and file an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, to be submitted to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether you are under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset.  At that point, the game of charades is over – for you have been finally realized and recognized as “the man who is filing for Federal Disability Retirement” and the Federal or Postal employee who suffers from a medical condition.

Yes, real life is a reflection of the games we play, and charades is truly a mirror of who we are.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Postal & Federal Medical Retirement: Imperfect lives

Is it a characteristic trait that must even be pointed out?  How, to begin with, did we even come to possess the antonym of that concept?  Of course, that is partly the residual argument made by medieval theologians as to further evidence of the existence of God – that in order to have come to possess the concept of “perfection”, there must by logical necessity exist a being of the sort such that we can even comprehend such an idea.

Thus may the converse of that argument be made:  that in recognizing our own imperfect lives, we must have recognized perfection as a contrast to our own state of existence; ergo, a perfect Being must exist.

Of course, there are fallacies to be pointed out in such argumentation (to which the ancients would immediately posit that there are perfect logical explanations, otherwise we would be unable to recognize the imperfect fallacies contained therein – and ad infinitum, ad nauseum), but in the end, what comes out is that there is no questioning a basic fact:  We all live imperfect lives.  That, in and of itself, is not the interesting part of the equation, however.

What is astounding is that, despite the recognition that we all live imperfect lives, extrapolated from the realization that it is impossible to live a perfect life, we nevertheless attempt to portray to others, and the world over, that it is simply not the case that we live an imperfect life, but that we come as close to perfection as possible, and it is only every other schmuck that lives an imperfect life, even though we all know that the other schmuck knows that we, too, live imperfect lives.

What evidence is there of that assertion?  Look at how people act on Facebook, Instagram, any and all magazines that contained the air-brushed images of pictorial perfection – we all fear to reveal the ugly underbelly of reality, and attempt instead to show how near-to-perfection we live.  Or, the secondary argument goes, if we don’t live perfect lives, we come as close to humanly possible.

And if that one doesn’t quite convince, then the use of a rhetorical device:  Well, what choice do we have, in the end?  That’s the point; in the end, the living of an imperfect life is greater evidence that such a characteristic is not necessarily any fault attributable; it is just the natural state of a decomposing body, a deteriorating mind, of organic matter that is exposed to the influences of the world around.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who realize that a medical condition is preventing the Federal employee or Postal worker from performing all of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, the recognition that we all live imperfect lives is an important one.  For, what often prevents the Federal or Postal employee from initiating the necessary steps to secure a Federal Disability Retirement benefit is the fear that others may “think” that to prepare, formulate and file an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, first through your own Human Resource Department, then on to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, may reveal the underlying imperfection of your life.

Don’t worry about it; if you haven’t figured it out, the “others” who may think that you are imperfect for doing what needs to be done, are imperfect as well.  Really?

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Employee Disability Retirement: The Moral Code lost in pragmatism

Kant is the best example, and is used often.  Of that arrogance defined by universalization of a query; and if we are willing to apply it in all circumstances, regardless of individual differences that may matter in the context of exceptions recognized, we are to adhere to that which may harm our own interests.  Why is transcendence important?  Why do philosophers insist that any “valid” moral basis possess a metaphysical foundation, transpired in order to justify a cornerstone unsullied by the meanness of common life?  Is the fact of relative significance unacceptable merely because it is subject to change?  Do we not, in daily life, have to adapt in every circumstance, all the time throughout every encounter with experiences, and is this not the very essence of survival?

We bought the posit of Plato and Aristotle – those two old Greek men who provided the foundation of Western Thought – that either (A) a transcendent Form of universalized principle must exist, or (B) that a methodological argumentation must be able to be advanced, in order to “justify” the ethical groundwork telegraphed.  That is how laws, statutes, and societal foundations have evolved – from the implicit assumption that, somehow, principles above and beyond the pragmatic are necessary.  But are they?  In a world that embraces pure materialism and the genetic predisposition of all that exists, without the inconvenience of a creator or grand inquisitor, is not the approach of pragmatism – of that which merely “works” – enough?

That is how the Federal agencies and the U.S. Postal Service operates these days; they care less about any “principles” of fairness in the workplace, or employment “codes” that allegedly overshadow the work ethic applied to employees, and instead, approach it with a view towards the bottom line:  Profitability.  For so many years, the Federal Government was incessantly being compared to the private sector – in terms of output, efficiency and investment-for-returns.  Such comparisons failed to recognize the obvious:  the two general entities served different purposes and needs of society, and forcing them to coalesce and reflect each other merely denigrated the essence of each.

It is not so much the attributable similarities between Plato and Aristotle which form the foundation of such thinking; rather, it is the contrasting approaches between Heraclitus and Parmenides that conform our moments of contemplative underpinnings:  between change and permanence, betwixt relativity and transcendence.

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, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, the question often arises as to a conflicting sense between one’s “Moral Code” and the pragmatic need to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through OPM.  Often, such a conflict is merely a result of muddled thinking – that, somehow, it is not “right” or “fair” to file for benefits when one is so young, or where one can still be productive, but not at the same level as before.  But that is precisely how the benefit of Federal Disability Retirement is set up – to allow for a retirement from one’s particular kind or type of work, yet presenting an opportunity to remain productive in the private sector, and potentially make up to 80% of what one’s former Federal or Postal position currently pays.

Morality is all well and good for the elitists of our culture, but in the common world of pragmatism, we must embrace that which we are given, like breadcrumbs dusted off at the dinner table of the behemoth called, the United States Office of Personnel Management.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire