FERS Disability Retirement from OPM: The Fish Story

Over the years, Uncle Ben’s famous catch of the marlin in a skiff off the coast of Maine became suspiciously similar to Hemingway’s famous novel, The Old Man and the Sea.

There were some details which remained somewhat believable — like, the fact that he actually caught something.  But of others, the exaggerated embellishments — of some “unknown sea monster, likely a Great White Shark or a Killer Whale” which gobbled up most of the catch by the time he arrived on shore, the skiff barely seaworthy by that time; of how the townspeople had to “fight off” the sea monster and hit it with various implements; and of the photograph taken — but somehow lost — of the skeletal remains of the large fish caught and lost.

Alcohol on nights gathered seemed to exponentially embellish the story of Uncle Ben and the Sea, when as twilight tended to quiet the lips of nodding heads, it would begin with, “Did I ever tell you about the Big One that almost got away?”  Everyone, of course, had heard the story 10x over and more, but it was more told by tradition than a query for interest or information.

It was like the Hasidic challenge as told by Chaim Potok in The Chosen — where a new and inaccurate twist would be inserted in the narrative, and someone would say, “But Uncle Ben, you never told us about that, before!”  There would be a pause, and everyone would laugh uproariously, knowing that the Fish Story had added to it anther saga that was to ever develop as the years ensued.

That was, in the end, the beauty of The Fish Story — for, the house of words was built upon a memory, with no evidence needed to back it up.  In most other aspects of life, however, that is not the case.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who need to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under the FERS retirement system, facts and evidence matter.  The preparation of an effective application for Federal or Postal Disability Retirement, to be submitted to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, cannot be like the Fish Story — even if it is well-told like Hemingway’s Old Man and the Sea.  Instead, it must be meticulously prepared and detail-oriented.

Contact an OPM Disability Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and consider whether or not you want to rely upon an experienced Federal Disability Retirement Lawyer, or on Uncle Ben’s rendition of The Fish Story.

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 Help: OPM’s Medical Specialists

OPM — the U.S. Office of Personnel Management — has “Medical Specialists” from the “Boyers Division” to review, evaluate, assess and ultimately make decisions upon each Federal Disability Retirement application submitted by Federal and Postal employees under FERS.

Now, there is no doubt that they possess unique medical knowledge — to whatever degree that they hold, from whatever perspective they come from, and the context of their applying such knowledge and background, etc.  But they are not lawyers.

Doctors and nurses have a specific perspective in viewing the world, just as lawyers and engineers, also, have a unique perspective. Their background and expertise is like a colored lens through which the world is seen.

Federal Disability Retirement is not just about a medical condition; it is, instead, the nexus between the medical condition and one’s ability/inability to perform one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, within the context of a continuously-growing body of law.  That is why OPM’s Medical Specialists are often wrong in their conclusions in making a determination on a Federal Disability Retirement application.

If you need to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, or have been denied such benefits from OPM, contact a FERS Disability Lawyer who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law; for, in the end, it is not up to OPM’s Medical Specialists to make the final conclusion on a Federal Disability Retirement application — rather, it is The Law.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill
Federal Disability Attorney

 

OPM Disability Retirement: Point-by-Point Refutation

Must every point made by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management be refuted point-by-point”?

Some points, of course, are rather irrelevant and harmless; others, perhaps disingenuous, at best, and poorly argued, at worst.  Still others are blatantly untrue (i.e., an euphemism for “a lie”), while the remaining are often taken out of context or singularly and deliberately isolated without considering the context of the actual meaning of the statement made.  Not every point needs a refutation.

Furthermore, what is the basis of the refutation? Is it merely your word, your opinion, etc., as opposed to the reviewing “medical specialist” at OPM — or, do you have refuting facts backed by the law in rebutting the untrue or “out-of-context” statement or allegation?

The point is, not every point needs to be refuted, but in making such an important determination, it is a good idea to consult with an experienced attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, lest the pointless point made by OPM becomes a greater point of contention that needs to be pointed out now in order to become beside the point later on in point of fact.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire
Federal Disability Retirement Lawyer

 

OPM Disability Retirement: Stress and the Harassment Factor

Stress is a reality which has become a normal aspect of everyday living.  The more stress we feel, the greater interpretation of outside actions as harassment; and thus does the vicious cycle begin.  Life is stressful enough.  When another ingredient is added — like a medical condition that weakens one’s body and mind — the tolerance for stress becomes reduced and the capacity to keep things in its proper perspective becomes impossible to manage.  Stress always seems to come in bunches, doesn’t it?

When you are dealing with a medical condition, everything and everyone you interact with becomes a stressful encounter.  For Federal employees and U.S. Postal Service workers who suffer from a medical condition such that the medical condition prevents you from performing one or more of the essential elements of your job, the stress of dealing with the medical condition itself is more than enough.

Add to it, your agency or the postal facility will inevitably begin to pressure you to return to work, to file this or that request, to follow their “procedures”, etc.  Whether such actions are objectively considered “harassment” or not is beside the point; you, as the Federal or Postal employee, are dealing with enough factors without having to deal with the harassment factor.

Contact an OPM Disability Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and begin the process of reducing your stress levels by initiating a Federal Disability Retirement application with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Medical Retirement for Federal Employees: The Perfect Case

If planning leads to perfection, does it necessarily follow that lack of planning renders its opposite?

There are rarely perfect cases in a Federal Disability Retirement application.  Most people do not go to their doctors with the predetermined view of filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, and most doctors (other than those specializing in providing disability assessments, evaluations, etc.) are there to treat their patients in hopes of ameliorating the underlying medical condition.

If “planning” is what makes for perfection, then lack of planning — in other words, just “living life” — makes for the imperfect case, and that is where the U.S. Office of Personnel Management pounces upon and attempts to characterize such imperfections as a valid basis for denying a Federal Disability Retirement application.

Thus, it is important for a Federal employee or U.S. Postal worker to consult with a Federal Disability Retirement Lawyer once you begin thinking about the future need to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits.  For, while there may never be a “perfect case”, some amount of thoughtful planning prior to submitting an OPM Disability Retirement application is necessary in order to get as close to perfection as possible.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

FERS Disability Retirement from the OPM: Coils of Hardship

That is often how it feels; of the coils, whether of a spring, of wires, or copper, or even of a rattlesnake that coils; it is the bundling up, the tightening, of energy or anxiousness curling upon itself until the release becomes inevitable.  Hardships and difficult times feel like that; like coils that keep circling upon itself until — like a spring that is compressed together and suddenly let go, the energy released is of an unfathomable force that cannot be mitigated.

Life is difficult and challenging as it is, without the outer world concomitantly crumbling around us.  Whether of financial difficulties, of career problems, of medical conditions that intervene and interrupt — the coils of hardship come upon us without warning or predictability.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition such that the medical condition impacts one’s ability and capacity to perform the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, the coils of hardships tend to wrap around tighter and tighter: From dealing with the medical condition itself, then with the unreasonable demands of the Federal Agency or the Postal Service; to the profound fatigue felt by the end of each week because of the conflict between the medical condition and the demands of the job, etc.

It may be time to consider filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS.

Consult with an OPM Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law and consider the options available.  It may unfurl the coils of hardship and allow for the release of energies otherwise needing to be relieved.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Postal & Federal Disability Retirement: The Problem of Resignation

“Resignation” in a non-technical sense is the belief or feeling of withdrawal, whether from a position, a job, society in general, or of any chosen lifestyle.  One can have a feeling of resignation; or, there can be a formal resignation given — as in a cabinet minister who offers a letter of resignation to the prime minister or the president.  Or, in literature, it can apply to a person, as in: “He had a look of resignation, with a gaunt face and a sense that he no longer belonged in this world.”

It is often characterized by a state of desperation, where all avenues have been closed off, the alternatives have been exhausted, and there are no choices left but to resign.

Often, Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers “feel” that way, and then resign out of this sense of desperation.  A self-contained universe based purely upon one’s own thinking can result in a myopic, distorted view of one’s circumstances and situation, and it is often a good idea to seek outside counsel before making a rash decision.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition such that this condition prevents the Federal or Postal employee from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, isolation is often what leads to desperation, then to resignation.  There are unique obstacles which present themselves in a Federal Disability Retirement case resulting from a premature resignation from Federal employment.

The problem of resignation is not limited to a feeling of desperation; it has practical consequences in the field of Federal Disability Retirement Law, and therefore you should consult with an attorney who specializes in FERS Disability Retirement Law before desperation results in greater obstacles beyond the resignation itself.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement for Federal & Postal Workers: Lost Paradise

We all have a notion of it; for some, it may just be a memory of a day at the beach; for others, somewhere in the recesses of a childhood memory; and for others still, the reality of a time before an illness, the rise of a medical condition or even of that moment when a doctor declared a diagnosis.

Paradise itself is a relative term; it engenders images of perfection and pleasure; of endless joy and a state of eternal mirth; or even of a negation of sorts.  For, if a person lives in constant agony, doesn’t it stand to reason that the negation of that agony would represent a paradise of sorts, and the loss of that state of happiness occurred because of the existence of whatever created that state of agony?

One who burns in hell would consider a momentary cessation of the agony of eternal torture to be a slice of paradise, and the lost paradise no more than regretting the sins committed.  We rarely consider the greater good as that which we take for granted, and that is why when we are confronted with the hypothetical proposition of “3 wishes to be granted by a genie”, we jump to material goods or conditions of physical pleasure, unlimited wealth or a time of perpetual joy.

Rarely do we include the wish for good health when we already enjoy it, precisely because the paradise one lives in, until lost, is assumed as eternally granted.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition such that the lost paradise of good health no longer allows for continuation in one’s Federal or Postal career, it may be time to consult with a FERS Attorney who specializes exclusively in Federal Disability Retirement Law in order to prepare, formulate and file an effective Federal Disability Retirement application.

Don’t let the lost paradise of former days extinguish a future of hope and betterment; for, the mythological state of a paradise lost need not be a perpetual state of dread and dismay.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Medical Disability for Federal and Postal Employees: Comparisons

Does it help to make them?  Do we take comfort in judging the relative plusses and minuses in making comparisons — as in, X has A, B and C, but I have, in addition, D and E, and therefore I am more fortunate that X is.  Or, is it a comparison of one’s conditions, as in: “Boy, at least I don’t have X like Lisa does”, or “At least I am not in Y’s situation”?

To the extent that comparisons remind us of that which we are blessed with, they allow for a certain level of utilitarian value.  But there is a negative side to it: Of jealousy engendered by comparison, or of discontent resulting from making one.  Rousseau, of course, makes that point throughout his “Social Contract” analysis, of the purity of man’s intentions in that fictional state of “nature” that we were once in, but where society’s accretions of materialism created the artificial emotional response of discontent and jealousy.  But compared to what?

It is important to make the fair and correlative comparisons which are relevant — as in “apples to apples” and not “apples to oranges”.  For, it is the uniqueness of each entity, object or situation to be compared with the singularity of another that makes for a proper comparison.

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, it is inadvisable to compare one’s case to somebody else’s.  For, the proper comparison is not to evaluate one’s medical condition and the severity of one’s medical condition to that of another person’s medical condition; rather, the proper comparison in a Federal Disability Retirement case is to compare one’s medical condition to the essential elements of one’s position.

Thus, comparisons made must always take into account the relevant connections which relate not just in terms of similarities, but as is the case in Federal Disability Retirement Law — in what the law allows for and considers significant.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire