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

 

Disability Retirement for Federal Government Employees: Unrequited

It is the feeling of that which is not returned; often involving “love”, but it can also encapsulate a sense of appreciation or adulation.  Love itself is a peculiar concept; of the strength of it, whether it must by necessity involve a physical nature; of the relationships involved, and the complications that arise when it is unreturned.  Unrequited love is a state of emptiness; and of anything unrequited — whether of appreciation; of engagement or involvement, leaves a sense of dissatisfaction.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition such that the medical condition no longer allows the Federal or Postal employee to continue in one’s Federal or Postal career, the feeling or sense of being unrequited grows daily.  The greater effort expended to extend one’s career no longer has any corresponding “return”.  It is then time to consider filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS.

Consult with an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement benefits, lest the unrequited effort expended results in a termination because of excessive leave or poor performance.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Employment Disability Retirement Benefits: At Least…

At least I have my dog; at least we all have each other; at least it wasn’t a complete loss; at least I have my health….  Is it because of the base-line of life’s fortunes that we may maintain our sanity and allow for hope to thrive?  And if we were to ever lose the “at least” — is that when life becomes too unbearable to withstand, or will we simply find another replacement “at least”?

Take the following hypothetical: A tornado or other natural disaster destroys a home; everything is lost; the person who survived stands with his or her dog and says to the reporter, “At least I survived”.  The next moment, the survivor suffers a heart attack and is bedridden for the rest of his remaining days.  Once the “at least” was taken away, was there a replacement?  Is the final “at least” the one which goes thus: “At least I am still alive”?  And when that is taken away and silence follows, is that the answer to the question: Is there anything beyond the last “at least”?

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 job, the question of “at least” is an important one.  For, when the medical condition strikes, the “at least” question is not: “At least I still have my health”, but might rather be, “At least I still have my job”.

It is the latter concern — when the medical condition begins to impact one’s ability and capacity to perform all of the essential elements of one’s job — that may lead to consideration in filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, ultimately leading to the further “at least” declaration: “At least I have my Federal Disability Retirement annuity.”

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Retirement for Mental or Physical Incapacity: Of persuasive effect

What does it mean to possess “of persuasive effect”?  If a person argues in a debate for endless hours, and at the end of it all, various people from the watchful audience turn aside to one another and declare, “Well, he sure was persuasive, but I’m still going to vote for the other guy” — what can such a statement mean?  If an acknowledgment of persuasion nevertheless results in an opposite conclusion, can one still maintain that there existed any degree of the very element which was supposed to modulate otherwise?

And legal precedents which must be applied — say, in a Federal Disability Retirement case, where the U.S. Office of Personnel Management is “required by law” to consider certain elements, such as under the Bruner case or the Simpkins case and subsequent case-law holdings which “mandate” that OPM consider the proffered evidence as cited by a Legal Memorandum — do they necessitate a certain outcome, or is it merely “persuasive but not determinative”, and what does that mean?  Is it that the level of persuasion was just “not enough”, and while it might have come somewhat close, it just didn’t have that final “clincher” to put it over the goal line?

And if we know beforehand that “persuasive effect” won’t necessarily result in a “determinative impact”, do we just not try at all, or is the mere possibility of “tipping the balance in one’s favor” enough to try and attempt to persuade?

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, and where preparing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application becomes necessary, the impact of a Legal Memorandum — prepared and submitted along with the Federal Disability Retirement “packet” — is like traveling with Google Maps guiding one into unfamiliar territory.  Without it, the reviewing “specialist” at OPM will simply be presented with a stack of information with no indexing or cover sheet.

With it, the importance of persuasive effect is there to guide the OPM reviewer into seeing what is relevant and what is not; of the legal cases that are impactful and persuasive; and of the mandated requirements in applying the proper legal criteria, and not merely of empty arguments that seemingly possess of persuasive effect, but lead to conclusions otherwise left without direction.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Medical Retirement under FERS & CSRS: What we have to do

In once sense of the phrase, it denotes a duty or obligation; in another, the foundational basis of a practical, pragmatic nature – of that which we do, simply because it needs to be done in order to survive, to maintain a certain standard of living, or because we believe it is the “right” thing to do.  Each individual must decide for him or herself, of course, as to the criteria by which to determine that which we have to do, and the “what” will often be placed on a wide spectrum of moral ends that are meant to justify the means by which to proceed.

What we have to do – it is also a phrase that is said when shaking one’s head, as in the whispering to one’s self in gritting one’s teeth or biting our tongue and engaging in a soliloquy of thoughtful silence, saying, “What we have to do.”

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, despite the medical condition beginning to prevent the Federal or Postal worker from performing one or more of the essential elements of the Federal or Postal position, it is a familiar refrain – of working through the pain, of trying to endure the paralyzing panic attacks or the heightened anxiety and depression that pervades, and to try and hide the medical condition and do what we have to do in order to economically survive – until it reaches that crisis point where the medical condition cannot be controlled, cannot be hidden, and comes bursting out like NFL players running through the tunnel from the locker rooms of one’s mind and body.

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, is just one of those other things that can be characterized as what we have to do.  For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who have a medical condition that begins to impede and prevent the Federal or Postal worker from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, the filing itself of an effective Federal Disability Retirement application is what we have to do, especially if the alternative is to stay at the job or walk away with nothing, which are actually no choices at all.

What we have to do – a familiar refrain for the Federal or Postal employee, and a necessary next step if you suffer from a medical condition that impedes or prevents you from performing one or more of essential elements of your job.  After all, you’ve been doing what you have to do all of your life, and this is just one more instance of it.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement: Requisite Sense of Control

Most of us require a semblance of self-determination, if only to conceal the inadequacies and keep at bay the disasters which portend, or pretend, whichever the case may be.  By controlling circumstances, we believe that we can maintain prevention of crisis, pre-determine the outcome of expectations, and squirrel away the hesitations and insecurities controlling us in our lives of desperate needs.  But life has a way of defying the macro-minutiae of the limited universe within our reach and immediate control.

Mastery of life is difficult to attain; just when we thought we had grasped the foundational principles of life and living, old age sets in, and the youthful vigor dissipates, like the ethereal dust of residue left behind by the flight of angels.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers, it is that sudden onset of a medical condition which nags and refuses to go away, which becomes the harbinger of things to come.  Agencies and the Postal Service tend to be “meddlers”, and once a particular Federal or Postal employee becomes the trigger-sighted individual, the stray bullet that travels is normally not too far behind.  Loss of control, or the abandonment of a requisite sense of control, is derived when agencies target, and when adverse actions are issued, a PIP is imposed, and leave restrictions commanded.

Filing for Federal Disability Retirement is an option which is a viable avenue to pursue, precisely because it attains and reasserts that requisite sense of control, by securing a needed annuity for some semblance of financial security and stability.  OPM Disability Retirement is also a means of re-focusing one’s life upon the priorities which matter — such as one’s health and well-being, so that the harassment and hostility at work will cease.

But the long road in preparing, formulating, filing and waiting upon a Federal Disability Retirement application, filed ultimately through, and decided by, the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, is another bureaucratic morass which — for a time, at least — will feel like entering another and surreal universe where one’s destiny is in the hands of another:  OPM.  But in life, as in the parallel universe of the absurd, one must first lose control in order to gain the requisite sense of control.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement Attorney: Farmer’s Market

They have cropped up everywhere, and have become popular sites where suburbanites can sense a closer connection to the food they put on their tables.  But as with all seasonal exchanges, the level of interaction is based upon the changing environment, the availability of produce, and the trending nuances of health, life and manner of living.

In the wintertime, the abandoned stalls and the empty inventory tells of a change of seasons.  We walk, observe, pick and choose, and if the color of the tomato doesn’t quite seem right, we pass by with nary a nod, or word of silent question mark.  Which side of the Farmer’s market are we on, in any given day?  Are we the seller of produce, or the buyer of selective goods?  Do the seasons change, and the temperatures ebb and flow, and are we malleable like the sea breezes that touch upon a morning surf?

Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers often feel the interchangeable position, and the vulnerability on any given day, based upon the changing of seasons.  Federal and Postal employees who suffer from a medical condition, such that the medical condition impacts one from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s job, are likened to Farmer’s markets which come and go, and who set up stalls for selling of goods and produce, or were once like visitors looking for something different than the frozen foods at the chain supermarkets.

Once, the sense of being in control prevailed — whether in displaying one’s produce as the seller, or as the consumer choosing based upon the look of the fruit or vegetable.  Then, suddenly a medical condition comes into play, and options seem to diminish; whether from the perspective of the merchant, or of the buyer, you can’t seem to last the season in either role.

The option of 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, is something that becomes a necessity for the Federal or Postal employee who suffers from a medical condition which prevents one from performing the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job.

Like the changing of seasons, it brings to the fore the availability of one’s “product”, and makes of one the onlooker who doesn’t purchase, as well as the weekend merchant who tenders at the local Farmer’s Market, only to get back to one’s “real job” of toil and turmoil, like the rest of society who must contend with the forces of nature’s changing seasons.

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