FERS Disability Retirement from OPM: Present Living

If the quality of present living makes a person less than satisfied, it often exacerbates memories of the past and hope for the future.  Human beings live within the spectrum of time past, present living and future hope.

The key to a successful life is thus to balance the three such that neither the past, nor the future, dominates the present.  For, the past is that which can haunt, in a quagmire of paralyzing memories; the future, an impediment by anxious insomnia; and how we live in the current manner of existence will impact upon both the past and the future.

Perhaps this is too obvious a concept to even discuss.  And yet, so many people around the globe allow for the quagmire of past memories and anxiety for future uncertainties to dominate, control, and ultimately — to destroy.  “Present living” includes all that we encounter — of diet; of exercise; of relationships enjoyed; of a family constituted; of governing the traumatic events of the past and setting realistic goals for the future.

The key, again, is in the “present”; the doors to lock and open only upon necessity and joyful pleasures, concern the past; and of the future, planning is crucial, with present steps taken in order to ensure success.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who presently 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 current Federal or Postal job, it is the “present” living which has become an impediment, perhaps from past conditions which have now manifested themselves with chronic and debilitating medical conditions, and it is the future which has become of concern.

Contact a FERS Disability Lawyer who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and consider whether it is time to presently prepare, formulate and file an effective Federal Disability Retirement application under the FERS system, through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, in order to put the past behind, and plan for the future.

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 Medical Retirement from OPM: Grasping at Straws

The etymology of the phrase comes either from Thomas More’s work, Dialogue of Comfort Against Tribulation (1534), or from a later work by Samuel Richardson — a novel entitled, Clarissa (1748).

The idiom itself is perhaps misinterpreted, as we think of “straws” as that plastic contraption (or, more recently, that environmentally-friendly one made of paper which begins to disintegrate the moment you take your first sip) created as a thin tube for soft drinks and the like.

“Straws”, in older times, however, refers to thin reeds which grow by the side of a river, and a man who is drowning may futilely grasps at such thin reeds in an attempt to save himself.  In today’s world, the idiom may imply an act or decision-making process, usually in a state of desperation, without sufficient knowledge or data, leading one to “grasp at straws” — entities which will not help you out of your state of desperation.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition such that the medical condition no longer allows you to perform all of the essential elements of your job, there is often a sense of “grasping at straws” as you flail about trying to retain the shambles of your career.

Conversely, the idiom may also apply at some of the illogical reasonings given by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management in denying a Federal Disability Retirement case — of “grasping at straws” to find a basis for denying a FERS Medical Retirement case.

In either case, it is important to contact a disability attorney who specializes in OPM Disability Retirement Law, and begin the process of grabbing onto the substantive basis of a Federal Disability Retirement case, and not allow for the futility of grasping at any straws along a fictional river where desperation should be left to myths, fairytales and idioms of old proverbs.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill
Lawyer specializing exclusively in Federal Disability Retirement Law

 

FERS Disability Retirement: Countering OPM’s Denial

OPM’s Denial of a FERS Federal Disability Retirement application can be a disheartening encounter.  OPM does a thorough job these days of selectively extrapolating portions of medical notes and records, isolating each one, then minimizing them in order to arrive at a singular conclusion: You have no case.

Not only that, the tone and tenor of the Denial Letter will make you believe that — not only do you not have a case, but — You never had one; it is so weak that it is a wonder that you ever even thought you had a case; and, moreover, to even request for reconsideration is an act of futility.

How do you counter such a denial?  The first and most important step is to recognize that OPM’s denial of a Federal Disability Retirement application is meant to make you feel like you never had a case.  That way, a certain percentage of denied Federal Disability Retirement applicants will simply walk away without ever filing for Reconsideration.

Oh — of course, they will at the end of a Denial Letter inform you of your “right” to file for reconsideration, but that is after itemizing a litany of reasons why you have no case at all.

The second important step is to contact an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law.  For, in the end, how you counter an OPM Denial of a Federal Disability Retirement application is by applying the LAW, and only a specialist in Federal Disability Retirement Law will be able to effectively counter OPM’s denial.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill
FERS Disability Attorney

 

FERS Disability Retirement: The Importance of Sequence

When and how do we learn that sequence is important?  Step B must follow A, and C comes after B, etc.  What happens if you perform B after C, and C before A?  It all depends, doesn’t it?

If random performance of a task has no impact upon the ultimate outcome, then such arbitrariness of selecting any given point in a sequence of events or assigned tasks is acceptable and workable.  It is when sequence matters — of the necessity of performing a specific task within a sequence of tasks — that one must first recognize why there is an underlying importance and significance in the final submission or conclusion of a project, task, etc.

For Federal and Postal employees who are contemplating formulating and submitting a Federal Disability Retirement application, sequence is important.  How one formulates the case — the legal arguments to be submitted, the medical documentation to be gathered, reviewed and coordinated; the Applicant’s Statement of Disability — of the “when” — are all important in formulating an effective Federal Disability Retirement application.

Consult with an OPM Disability Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and recognize, understand and implement the importance of sequence in preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement Benefits: The Bridge to Nowhere

It is a metaphor which evokes images of hopelessness and futility, if such images can indeed be captured at all.  Whether of an attitude, a perspective or the existential reality of one’s personal circumstances, the question is, Why was the bridge to nowhere built to begin with?  There it stands, in mid-construction, suspended but unfinished, not leading to anywhere, not going in any particular direction, not coming from any place known.

It is often how we feel in the middle of our lives.  One has only to sit in a cafe, by a window, and watch the midday rush of people coming and going, seemingly with purpose, appearing with decisiveness, until you catch the gaze of someone passing — a knowing look, a pause, a hesitation; and at that moment of illumination, the stranger and you both know that the constant, ant-like activity is merely a whirl of coming and going upon a bridge to nowhere.

The furious pace of life; of rushing to get to work, working, then rushing to get home within a factory of people uncaring and unaware.  Then, when calamity hits — a medical condition that interrupts, intercedes and imposes its existence upon you — suddenly the routine of ferocious activity finds meaning in the very meaninglessness felt the moment before.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who can no longer perform one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal job because of a medical condition, the sense that one is driving upon a bridge to nowhere is common and troubling.  Of course one’s health should be a priority; and of course work, the “mission” of the Federal agency and the harassment that is initiated without empathy or understanding — all of that stuff should be secondary and subordinated to taking care of one’s health.

Filing for FERS Disability Retirement benefits is the recognition that the bridge to nowhere will not take you anywhere, and it is in order to regain that insight of meaningfulness that it is important to prepare, formulate and file an effective Federal Disability Retirement application in order to focus upon the importance of priorities shoved aside — like one’s health.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Employee Medical Retirement: Damaged Goods

What do we do when first we realize the defects revealed?  If by mail order, we ship it back; if by direct purchase, we confront the storekeeper and point out the lessened nature of perfection and demand either a reduction to the original price or a full return upon the item purchased.

Damaged goods come in various forms: of complete uselessness; of partial defects that matter not; of a lifespan severely shortened; or of irreparable imperfection such that it cannot be used at all.  And of people who view others in a similar way — how do we judge them and what do we think?  Is it “right” for a person to view another as an object — as “damaged goods” — or must we always look beyond the person as a mere commodity and speak in terms of empathetic subjects reaching beyond the surface of a person’s value as nothing more than the price of a car or of an apple to be devoured?

Yet, that is how a person is looked upon, is he not — as in a Federal employee or U.S. Postal worker who begins to 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 his or her Federal or Postal job.  The Federal Agency or the Postal Service begins to view the Federal or Postal employee in terms of “productivity”, of “value” to the Agency or Postal unit — in other words, as a mere object to be assessed as a commodity, and whether the “damaged goods” should be sent back, returned, or replaced with a full refund.

When that perspective is asserted by one’s Federal Agency or the Postal Service, it is time to prepare, formulate and file an effective FERS Disability Retirement application, to be submitted to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.  For, in the end, the damaged goods must be replaced with a refund or a return, lest we recognize humanity’s incapability of recognizing the difference between commodities and people.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Medical Retirement under FERS & CSRS: Wants and needs

One often encounters such discussions, about the difference between “wants” and “needs”.  Needs are dictated by a loose definition of survival or existence — that which is required by or necessitated of the things which satisfy the criteria for continued existence or maintaining of a given modality of the status quo.  The other — “wants” — are defined as those “extras” that are not required for existence, but go beyond the prerequisite for survival and add to the comfort and meaningfulness of one’s very existence and survival.

There is always a grey area between the two when one engages anyone in a discussion involving the two — and it often depends upon the paradigm and perspective one takes, which leads to conclusions not only about the subject concerning wants and needs, but also about one’s own character, upbringing and attitude towards life in general.

Take the perspective of a member of the British Royal Family, for example — of a person who knows of existence entirely from the perspective of wealth, privilege and undiminished wants and needs.  Such a person will often have a widely differing view of the distinction between the two, in contradistinction to a person born in the ghettos of an inner city, whether here in the United States or of more underdeveloped countries elsewhere.

Can one who has never lacked for needs, or even of wants, recognize the objective criteria that determines the differences between the two?  In other words, can the poor person even have a logical discussion with a wealthy person by pointing out that food is an example of “need”, as opposed to a Ferrari being merely a “want”?  Or, will the member of the Royal Family retort with, “Well, yes, I can see how cheap caviar of a subpar quality could be a need as opposed to wanting a Rolls Royce.”

Such a response, of course, tells one immediately that there will be a difficult road ahead in attempting the bridge the gap between understanding, comprehension and the art of logic and discussion.  What we want, we often do not need; and what we need, we merely want for want of sufficiency.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who want to continue their careers despite a medical condition that prevents the Federal or Postal worker from performing all of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, preparing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, to be filed with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, will often cross the threshold between wants and needs.

You may want to extend your career, but need to end it because of your medical condition.  Your agency may want to be compassionate, but may need to follow directives from above.  You may want to remain, but need to depart.  The conflict between wants and needs is one of life’s ongoing clashes between the two, and preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, to be filed through OPM, may need to be initiated in order to satisfy the ultimate need of one’s existence: The need to want to look after one’s health.

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

 

Federal Employee Disability Retirement: Catching with a net

Have you ever tried catching multiple entities with a net?  Whether more than one butterfly, or goldfishes in a pond, or even debris floating at the skimming water’s edge, the act of scooping, trapping and encircling with the tool of a net requires dexterity and unique hand-eye coordination.  Then, the one first caught escapes, and the frustration of gain-versus-loss ensues.  Is it greed which continues to compel despite the persistence of loss and diminishing return, or sheer stubbornness that we somehow battle against our own interests even when further escape occurs?

Ever the frustration of observing those once caught and get away, and chasing after those very ones we just enmeshed and caged within the netting of this ingenious deployment; and yet we insist.

How does that translate into a specific personality, or the manner in which we carry on in our daily lives?  Is going out and catching butterflies with a net the perfect methodology of determining a prospective employee’s “fit or unfit” personality and character for an organization?  Does it reveal a side of the person – for example, in the financial sector, or investment banking, if a person approaches the task by catching one, stopping, putting the insect or other entity into a bottle with pre-bored holes for oxygen, then proceeding in a sequential manner and attending to catching the next one, etc., does that tell of a prefatory commensurateness with careful investment strategies?

Or, take the very opposite, where the task is to catch 10 moving entities, and instead of stopping after each one, the future employment prospect goes about madly racing through the tall fields of grass furiously attempting to net the quota of requested numbers, despite imposing no time-frame in the completion of such a task – does that necessarily reveal a personality of lesser caution, of a person who may be rash and imprudent?  Does one revelation of acting in a particular context unmask a parallel semblance of reality in another, or do the specific circumstances themselves confine and define within a marginalized mirror?

Whether transferable or not, the imagery and metaphor of a person attempting to catch multiple entities with a single net, shows a side of human life which can be both comical as well as compelling.  For, as a reflection of parallel circumstances, it is somewhat indicative of the Federal or Postal employee who must begin the process of preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset.

Like the person handed the net, the Federal or Postal employee with a medical condition who can no longer perform one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal positional duties, must make a pragmatic determination as to the diminishing returns recognized in continuing in the same repetitive venture of living.  At some point, there comes a flash of realization that the same acts cannot continue without something else giving – and whether that “giving” is the butterfly which escapes, or one’s deteriorating health further and progressively becoming destroyed – is the flashpoint of reality revealing itself in compelling a decision for today, and no longer procrastinated for some unknown time in a future left insecure.

And like the butterfly which escapes to be free for another day, the Federal or Postal employee who cannot perform the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal positional duties must by necessity attempt to free him or herself from the medical condition in order to reach that place in life where pain, misery, and the sense of being “caged” will no longer apply.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Medical Retirement Law: How Does One Know the Age?

It cannot be by counting wrinkles, or the number of gray hairs; for, some people never develop them, and in any event, new methodologies of plastic surgery, hair dyes and other cosmetic creativities can easily override such superficial eruptions of telltale signs.  Photographs can no longer be evidence of aging, for airbrushing and digital modifications can dispense with such irritating characteristics.

But when there is a personal encounter, how can one judge, and fairly and accurately assess?  Is it the eyes?  That “window to one’s soul” — does it reveal a depth of depravity over time, such that the hollowness revealed in innocence at an early age is replaced by a coldness and cynicism of reflective hurts?  And of the greater age — of this epoch, the generation and historicity of time; how does one know it, too?  Older generations tend to cling to the past, and it is through that prism of past time that the present is viewed, the future foreseen; but does such a perspective differ from those who are young and never experienced the discomfort of lack? And medical conditions and their impact upon one’s ability and capacity to continue a career — how does one know?  The subtlety of warnings can be non-decipherable when asked to describe in words.

For the Federal employee and the U.S. Postal worker who suffers from a medical condition, it is fairly early on that one has a sense of where one’s career will be going.  Doctors can talk about surgical intervention and medical regimens and their supposed efficacy in treating a condition; but in the end, the Federal or Postal employee who experiences the medical condition itself, knows in one’s proverbial “heart of hearts” whether the Federal or Postal employee will be able to continue in one’s career.

Preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether one is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, is a process which is daunting, and thereby delay of diligence is often a factor which is merely engaged despite having known for some time.  It is like guessing the age — whether of another person, or of the historicity of being a stranger in a strange land — it is the subtlety of telltale signs which reveals the future course of an already-determined process of inevitability.  And like aging itself, the fight we pretend to engage is merely an act of futility, and we know it; we just don’t want to look in the mirror and face it, lest those lines of time show us who we are, what we did, and where we are going.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire