OPM Disability Retirement Benefits: The party never thrown

Why do we have angst over the nonexistent, the unknown, the yet-to-become, while concurrently failing to appreciate the concrete, that which is realized and the presence of those whom we declare to love, is before us and has stood by for all these years?  What is it about the future participle of life that haunts us?

It is Kierkegaard who gave us an insight and understanding into the anxiety that humans throughout history have felt, of this life of striving for happiness, yet never to be realized because of an inner sanctum of unease and joyless emptiness.  It is like the party never thrown; no one was invited, or no one cared to show up; in the end, whether thrown or no one came, it all amounts to the same thing.  That is the conceptual construct which Kierkegaard posited, for all doubters to latch onto:  The either/or of life, of that leap of faith into the unknown, in order to fill that nothingness and abyss of life’s mysteries.

We feel cheated, empty, withdrawn behind a curtain of unknown and unknowable puzzles, and left to die in the emptiness of an unforgiving universe.  Misery, unhappiness, disappointment, illness, chronic pain, and finally death; is this the best that the gods could do?

The party never thrown is not unlike the one where, you are told of it but uninvited; or, invited, you arrive and find that the host had misinformed you, and the guests had already arrived, had a good time and left, and you have entered into the used bits of paraphernalia, half-eaten plates of crusted and stale cake, and ice cubes still melting in the swirl of activities you can now imagine and picture – without you in it.  Then, to add insult to injury, you are asked if you could help clean up the mess, and perhaps as a consolation, you could have a leftover piece of pie?

The party never thrown is the one you will never experience, and yet you worry with the angst of having never been invited, never been considered, for that which is nonexistent and without a future of foretold happiness.

For the Federal employee or U.S. Postal worker who suffers from a chronic, progressively deteriorating medical condition, such that the medical condition necessitates the preparation, formulation and filing of a Federal Disability Retirement application, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, the feeling that one is about to leave the Federal workforce or the Postal facility just when there is a party to be thrown, is an understandable abyss of a feeling experienced, a sensation touched upon and an angst still to be faced.

But know that the party never thrown is a mere nothingness, like the man who falls asleep, dreams of a butterfly that awakens thinking that the butterfly dreams of a man who fell asleep, awakens and wonders if it is the butterfly or the man who is dreaming at all.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Medical Retirement from Civil Service: “Well, at least…”

Admittedly, any substantive insight into such a conceptual proverb used in everyday life is attributable to the eloquent thoughts of Yiyun Li, in her recently published collection of essays.  Such insights are so deliciously stated, with linguistic content so deftly conveyed, that the undersigned cannot refrain from grasping, grappling and attempting to add onto that which cannot be improved upon.

Well, at least plagiarism is no longer anything more than a forgivable sin, and not even a venial one at that.  The concept goes to the heart of comparing misery and quantifying misfortune.  When faced with a catastrophe, we minimize by comparative qualification:  Well, at least…  As if contrasting a lesser misfortune on a spectrum of possible calamities will pull the pendulum away from the pain and sorrow it has reached, and compel a more balanced perspective and diminish the weight of heartache.  Does such a diminution of personal failure by reducing it to a lesser quantity concurrently minimize the sorrow felt?

To a grieving parent whose oldest child has passed away, while sparing the lives of another sibling or two; Well, at least…  At what point does such an insight fail to achieve its goal?  Would it carry the same weight if 5 of 6 children perished?  Could you still get away with saying the same thing?  What if she is the lone survivor?  At what point on the spectrum of human calamity does such a statement retain any semblance of empathetic import and meaning?

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 the positional duties occupied:  Well, at least he/she can file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits…

The fact is, for almost all Federal and Postal employees, that option is the last one they want to initiate; for, most Federal and Postal employees want to continue to maintain, extend and excel in their chosen careers.

In the instance of Federal and Postal employees, however, such a phrase has further significance, in the following manner:  the availability of an alternative in the event that all other avenues of choices become unavailable.  Thus, in such a context, it is not a quantification of sorrow or comparative analysis of choices presented; rather, for Federal employees and U.S. Postal Service workers, whether under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, it is a mere recognition that, in that unwanted event where a promising career needs to be cut short, there is at least the option of preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, to be filed with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.  Well, at least…

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Medical Retirement Attorney: Formulating the Effective Case

Is it inherently presupposed that a case to be formulated is one which should be “effective”?  By the insertion of that term, of course, it immediately implies a retrospective vantage point — an “ends” to “means” view of an outcome-based approach.

If a Federal or Postal employee who files for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, whether under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, receives a denial from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, one assumes that the case was not “effectively” formulated.  On the other hand, if an approval is received from OPM, one need not consider any such issue, but merely moves on to the “when” phase — as in, “When am I going to get paid“?

Outcome-based formulation of a case is never an unwise approach; but the mere fact that a denial is issued by OPM after reviewing a given Federal Disability Retirement application, does not mean that the case itself was not originally “effective” in the formulation and submission.

There are OPM “administrative specialists” who systematically deny cases; certain others who require a higher standard of proof beyond what the law mandates; and even those who extrapolate clear evidence in a denial which establishes eligibility for Federal Disability Retirement, but nevertheless concludes with a disapproval.  Such arbitrary outcomes may seem unfair and unwarranted, but it is a reality which must be faced.

In light of this, the positive outlook to embrace is the fact that Federal OPM Disability Retirement is an administrative process with multiple stages for appeals and additional bites at the proverbial apple.

From the outset, it is always a good idea to carefully prepare, formulate and file an “effective” case; but the mere fact that the first attempt fails to achieve the outcome desired, does not diminish or extinguish the positive assessment reached at the outset when first the OPM Disability Retirement packet was submitted; rather, it just means that additional proof and evidentiary addendum must be forthcoming to satisfy the bureaucratic process of further effectuating the efficacy of an already-effective case.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire