FERS Disability Retirement from the OPM: Win to Lose

It is an anomaly, a contradiction, and sometimes even a bit of hypocrisy.  Often, it is definitionally bifurcated and described in metaphorical terms, as such: You win the small battles, but lose the greater war.  You hide the pain, slough off with a shrug the days you had to take off; and when asked by coworkers how your weekend was, you respond with vague statements which fill the pablum of meaninglessness with volumes of words without substance of content.

Of psychiatric symptoms, you mask them well, resisting treatment, hiding the days of despondency and tear-filled panic attacks, going out into the hallway or staying in the bathroom until the sweaty hands can be washed with cold water or the wrenching paralysis can be calmed.  Then, there comes a critical point where it can no longer be hidden; the private battles boil over into public symptomatologies; further advance cannot be had.

What to do?  For the Federal or Postal employee who can no longer perform one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, and who needs to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, the problem comes about because you have been “winning” all of this time — great performance reviews, maybe even awards and accolades.

But by “winning”, you are losing — both in terms of your health, as well as any evidence of deficiencies in performance.  And so OPM will look at that and say, “You’ve been able to do your job, so what’s the problem, here?”

Consult with a disability attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and begin to formulate the foundation which turns about the “win to lose” approach to a “win to win” or even “lose to win” progress forward.

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: The “I” of Tomorrow

The “I” of yesterday is not the same “I” of today, and the “I” of today is vastly different from the “I” which will walk about tomorrow. Of course, “vastly different” is a relative concept; others may not perceive the differences, and thus might say to a friend after an encounter, “Oh, that Harry — he’s always the same, isn’t he?” And yet, the cellular structures have altered; a full day’s experiences have been encountered; and in a person’s personal life, how and what do we know of the traumas incurred?

We judge based upon appearances; and it is appearances which Plato, Aristotle and the entire line of Western Philosophical approach has fought against, in order to get to the “essence” of things and “first principles” of all matters. Unless we see person in a cast or bandaged throughout, we presume that “good old Harry” is the same today as he was yesterday, the day before, and the day before that. Yet, the “I” — that insular self who engages in soliloquies unheard and asides undetected — is the only one who, beyond appearances to others, may have undergone transformational changes. Perhaps of a death in the family; of a love forsaken; of financial ruin or challenges; of a personal loss so traumatic that one wonders — upon learning about the tragedy — how “Harry could possible endure it”.

Medical conditions, as well, have a way of imposing alterations. Perhaps you hide it; you avoid it; you try and simply endure through it — until it comes to a point where you can no longer conceal the impact and effect of the medical condition itself.

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 all of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, it may be time to consider filing for FERS Disability Retirement benefits.

Consult with an attorney who specializes in FERS Disability Retirement Law and begin to learn about the complexity of the process in order to try and regain some of that “I” who used to be you before the medical condition began to overwhelm you, so that the “I” of tomorrow is a recognizable semblance of the “I” of today and yesterday.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

FERS Disability Retirement Benefits: Truth and Credibility

One normally presumes that the two go hand-in-hand: That if something is true, then it is credible.  But doesn’t the origin and source of it, at least in a subjective sense, matter?  If a known lier makes a truthful statement, could we assert that, “While the statement made by X is true, the fact that X made it results in my questioning its credibility.”  Does that even make sense?

How about a person who is a known philanderer who has had multiple affairs and has married and divorced multiple times — but then travels around the country lecturing at public schools on the subject entitled, “The Importance of Marital Fidelity”?

Let’s assume that everything contained in his lectures rings true: That marriage vows are important to uphold; that happiness comes from remaining faithful; that the temptations of society should be avoided — etc., etc., etc.  Everyone, including all of the elementary, middle and high school students and their parents all agree and are in complete consonance with the lectures and their content; and yet…. Somebody, during one of the lectures, stands up and points out that the “personal life and behavior” of the person giving the lecture is somewhat — ahem — “questionable”.

The “opinion camps” form into a bifurcated line of argumentation: Camp A argues: “The man has no credibility and is just giving us a bunch of bull.”  Camp B argues: “It doesn’t matter who says it — truth is truth, and what the guy is saying is true.”  Who is right?  Can truth and credibility be bifurcated?

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition such that the medical condition begins to prevent the Federal or Postal employee from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s job, preparing, formulating and filing a credible disability retirement application with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management may become necessary.

Will it have to be “truthful?”  Yes.  But “Truth” and “Credibility” are two distinct concepts, and while every Federal Disability Retirement application must be based upon the truth of a medical condition, the issue of credibility — of compelling OPM to view your FERS Disability Retirement application seriously — is a separate matter, and one that may really need an experienced attorney to represent you in filing a credible and truthful Federal Disability Retirement application with OPM.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM FERS Disability Retirement: Nothingness comes from flattery

It is what Cordelia recognized but which her father could not foresee, and the ruin of a kingdom, the loss of order and the crumbling of relationships resulted all because of the failure to recognize sincerity from entreaties based upon hidden motives of greed and the concealed hand of evil; and of the truism of ex nihilo nihil fit — that nothing comes from nothing — even Parmenides could not warn us of the consequences.

It is because flattery is nothing but — but an insincere cover for motives unrevealed; but a superficial sweetness that can never satisfy; but a swamp of words without substance that will sink into the muck of sycophantic drivel; but of nothingness.

Flattery is the most dangerous of invectives spewed precisely because the sugar that sweetens is that which energizes, but lasts for only a brief time before the reality of bitterness that is sure to follow cannot but hide the reality of a life hidden.  The starkness of reality is often too cruel to withstand, and so we invite the nothingness which comes from flattery.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition such that the medical condition is about to end a career, the reality of the medical condition itself is what is often that which we wish could be covered by life’s sweetness.  We wish for X, but life has given us Y.  We thus hope for flattery to lessen the impact, but the reality of harshness refuses to lead us down into the pathway of nothingness.

Federal agencies are harsh entities; they may have flattered us in the past by making us think that we are invincible; that we “matter” to them; that we are part of a greater team, etc.

When a medical condition begins to prevent the Federal employee or U.S. Postal worker from performing the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal position, then suddenly the sugary voices of flattery become replaced with harassment, hostility and adverse actions. It is then time to prepare, formulate and file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, to be submitted ultimately to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, where the greatest flattery of an approval of one’s Federal or Postal Disability Retirement application will reveal that, indeed, nothingness comes from flattery when a person has taken for granted that which is the more important element: one’s health.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Employee Disability Retirement: Simplicity revisited

We all yearn for it, though we defy the very thought of it by living in its corollary.  Simplicity is what we preach, that of which we dream and for which we strive; but, in the end, the clutter of life’s misgivings always seems to overwhelm, dominate and ultimately destroy.

Do people still run off in a crazed dash and join a monastery in order to escape the complications of life?  Are there such places, anymore — of a monastic order that welcomes strangers who have “lost it” and receive them as fellow “brothers” who will spend the rest of one’s days tilling a small garden, praying together, shunning material wealth and chanting deep into the night with echoes of lonely voices dripping like so many raindrops pitter-pattering upon clay shingles when once a career of complexity overwhelmed?

Or is simplicity merely a mirage, a dream never to be fulfilled, a yearning in the heart of man that remains forever a hole, a chasm never to be reached and a well of such depths as to never draw water?  Does the desk that reflects clutter represent a mind that is just as diseased?  Does accumulation of “stuff” make us happy, and when the king at the end of his life waves goodbye, is it the golden chalice that he hugs in the bedsheets of decay, or of a wife forlorn and forsaken because of mistresses left weeping?

Life is complicated, and simplicity, whether yearned for or revisited, is something that is sought in the hearts of all men and women.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, such that 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, the complications wrought from a medical condition cannot be denied.  The question is: How can simplicity, revisited, help?

Filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management is not an uncomplicated process; however, it is the end-goal that is sought, which will hopefully simplify the complications abounding, by allowing for a singular focus beyond work and financial insecurity: One’s health.

But that life itself were so unfettered, perhaps some of the stresses that incurably surround us might be lifted; but for the Federal employee or Postal worker who needs to at least untether the nexus between work and worry, preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, whether under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, is at least a first step towards simplicity, revisited.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Disability Retirement from Federal Service: By what right?

It is a question often posed in the dead of night by those who would undermine an assertion based upon an instinctive sense of fairness, but perhaps not able to be articulated in comprehensible form.  By what right do you enter these premises?  By what right do you express that opinion?  By what right do you think you can do that?

It is, as with many questions, one that has a sadly contextual background of a negative past – for, whenever a person, a populace or a segment of a greater society begins to assert a “right”, it was generally preceded by a breakdown of community and caring.  For example: A violation of another’s property where a fence has not yet been placed should be resolved by two neighbors discussing the infraction or infringement without resorting to a higher authority.  If that “neighborliness” cannot resolve the conflict, then a fence may be built and the right to build such a fence can be asserted by the fence-building-neighbor as a “right” of property ownership.  No one would, or could, dispute such a right to do so, but the mere fact that a fence had to be built is evidence of a preceding breakdown of the unspoken rules of a community, where resolution of a conflict could not be accomplished by discussing, caring, understanding and compromising for the sake of a community’s greater good, but instead results in a declarative reference to one’s “right” to do X, Y or Z.

Rights should have the insipid connotation of negativity to the extent that asserting them is something of a last resort and the last bastion of scoundrels and suspicious individuals seen in an unfavorable communal light; but in modernity, shouting out one’s “right” to do this or that, or standing on a soapbox and pontificating about how we (why does everyone assume that he or she has a “right” to speak on behalf of that undefined “we” in the first place?) have every “right” to be here, do this or that or be “in your face” because of the proverbial “catch-all” – the “Bill of Rights”.  By what right?

For Federal and Postal employees who are considering filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, it may well be that asserting one’s right to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits was preceded by a context of negativity – of the Federal agency or the U.S. Postal facility failing to, refusing to, or otherwise not showing effort for, accommodating one’s medical condition, illness or disability, and that is when the assertion of declaring one’s “right” to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits becomes the inviolable pathway to an exit out of an untenable workplace situation.

To that extent, preparing, formulating and filing a Federal Disability Retirement application, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, is somewhat akin to building that “fence” between your property and the next-door neighbor’s, whose dog keeps coming into your yard, digging up the freshly-planted bushes and vegetables, pooping all over the place and attacking your cat, and cares not a twit to try and resolve the issue; that, in many ways, is the Federal agency or the Postal facility you work for.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement under FERS or CSRS: Intrinsic Value

There is, at the outset, a question as to whether such metaphysical distinctions of esoterica have any relevance, anymore.  The ivory towers have all lost their sheen; civilizations have now embraced the comfort of relativism in the West, excepting those outliers who cling to antiquities of thought believed to merely be vestiges of a prehistoric era; and all such bifurcations of minutiae are considered mere word games designed to enhance and promote the ability and capacity for further social engineering.

Perhaps in the pragmatic world of options trading, there remains a definitional need to distinguish between “intrinsic” value and “extrinsic” value; where the nature of the option being traded constitutes the former, and the circumstances and previously-unknowable factors impacting upon the value of the trade itself defines the latter.

In real life, the philosophy of pragmatism itself has dissolved the principles once touted; the Aristotelian differentiation of ascribing value based upon its inner sanctity, as opposed to a derivative preciousness contingent upon other entities or circumstances, was once accepted as a given.  But such metaphysical distinctions have been cast aside upon the trash heap of historical irrelevance, and one rarely hears, anymore, about such highfalutin concepts, as they are now considered outmoded, irrelevant, or worse, pompously presumptuous in a world where only the politically powerful, the super wealthy, or the “beautiful” people are allowed such exemptions of conversational engagements.

One might still argue, in this present age where the force of logical argumentation has been replaced with the volume of vociferous condescension intolerable to auditory quietude, that a great work of art has intrinsic value recognized intuitively, no matter the extrinsic cirumstances.  But if a dystopic universe prevailed, and there was but one person left to visit the last burning embers supporting a museum left as a testament to humanity’s former greatness — but, where, no food was left, and starvation was the remaining mechanism for death of this last poor soul — would the salvaged Rembrandt have any “intrinsic” value, leaving aside the issue of extrinsic worth (of course, human nature being what it is, such a sole survivor may still have the imaginative inner strength to recognize that there may be a future still, and scurry off with such masterpieces in the hope that the future may hold a better day).

Metaphysical principles which once held some meaning, significance and defined linguistic purposes, have now given way to daily blatherings of “I feel” and “I sense”, where, in each such utterance, it is the “I” which defines intrinsic value, and the subjectivity of sensing and feeling enhances the contingency of external worth.  It is, in many ways, a sad loss for all of us, that we should rely upon such subjectivity of an objective-less concept.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, of course, such that the medical condition prevents the Federal or Postal employee from performing one or more of the essential elements of the Federal or Postal positional duties, the loss of any meaningful discussion between the intrinsic worth of X, or even the differentiation from the extrinsic value of Y, results in a universe where we are all treated as “means” to an end, and never just an “end” in and of itself.

That is why protective laws are necessary — precisely because we have lost any semblance of viewing one another as worthy because we belong to a greater principle called “humanity”.  But that is the practical world in which we live, and to which we must abide.

Filing for Federal Employee Disability Retirement is the best option left, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset.  Thus, preparing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, to be submitted to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, is the pragmatic course for future security.  It is in that, where intrinsic value will be found, in the consolation of a future security otherwise lost in the extrinsic void of an unsympathetic universe.

Sincerely, Robert R. McGill, Esquire

Federal Employee Disability Retirement: Tolstoy unedited

To read his works often entails utilization of descriptive metaphors, such as “tackle”, or “spend the summer” doing it, or even, “It has taken me a year to reach the midpoint”.  To have read Tolstoy’s major works is a kind of initiation into the upper echelons of cultivated sophistication; how many fakes and phonies there are, can only be guessed at, but some would estimate that nearly half of those claiming to have read “War and Peace” or “Anna Karenina” either failed to complete the rite of passage, skimmed or skipped major portions of either or both, or simply studied carefully the Cliff Notes in the secluded corner of nefarious midnight travails.

But consider the original, unedited version; what the Editor of such works must have had to contend with, just to get it sorted, compiled and drafted into a coherence of acceptability — all before the time of computers, cut-and-paste buttons, and leaving aside the untenable temperament of the author for whom suggested changes meant a challenge to a duel and likely emitting as a response a stream of unedited vitriol spiced with torrents of epithets unheard of in polite company.  But even Tolstoy must have known that his own works required further care and attention, like a child soiled and helpless in self-care; that no form of Art — regardless of its egomaniacal source and unmatched brilliance of the narrative creativity — could be stomached without correction, crafting and splicing of untethered verbosity.

Tolstoy, left unedited, would have required greater metaphors than those we already adopt, and perhaps would have been thrown into the dustbin of untranslated works stored in the vast warehouses of uninterpreted voices.  The parody to a life lived, of course, reflects a parallelism which everyone recognizes, but few undertake.  How one lives a life, also, requires constant perfecting, further editing, and persistent splicing.  The unedited version of any life would be left with an undisciplined mess, unfettered calamity and unconstrained egomania of purposeless vacuity.  Meaning can always be discovered in every life, but it is the cultivated perfection of a disciplined self which constitutes the essence of human uniqueness.

But there are interruptions in living, beyond the control of one’s will and fated determinism; a medical condition is one example, and for the Federal employee and the U.S. Postal worker who suffers 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 Federal or Postal job, preparing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application becomes of utmost importance.  However, one must take care in preparing, formulating and filing an effective SF 3112A — Applicant’s Statement of Disability — as so many people believe that the Tolstoy format of an unedited diatribe is as effective as the abridged version of a work of Joyce.

There is always a balance and a “middle ground”, whether in Life, Art, or in the effective submission of 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.  Art often reflects Life; Life is too often lived in an unconstrained fashion; but in either case, in preparing an OPM Disability Retirement application, it is important to recognize that Tolstoy unedited is as onerous an undertaking as a Federal Disability Retirement application left unfettered by purpose, application, and the careful compilation of meeting the criteria of law and life itself.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Postal & Federal Disability: The Depersonalized World, Sans the Sacred

It is the personal encounter, the direct engagement, that many seek to actualize in hopes of fulfillment.  “If only I could speak to the person”; “If you knew the real me”; and, indeed, it is that depersonalized universe which undermines and tempers.  Somehow, if we are merely one among many, like the little girl in the red dress in Schindler’s List, the singularity of the living entity shouts at us for relevance, significance, and a chance to distinguish.  It is in the personalization of the deep chasm reaching down from the inertia of life, from which the sacred emerges.

There is the daily monotony; the repetition of costs, conversations and couples coexisting; and then suddenly an idea conflicts, an encounter entangles, and life itself takes on a meaningful menagerie of sounds and magnified explosions of signification.  Sans the sacred, the inertia of living would prevail.  That is the true crime of a bureaucracy, and the administrative process which life imposes upon us.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who must file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, it is the sudden clash and inevitable tension between the depersonalized and faceless bureaucracy which one must face and submit one’s Federal Disability Retirement application to, and the sacredness of the most personal information being forwarded, which gives magnified rise to the anxiety of life.

That is the conundrum and anomaly; to formulate the most personal of narratives involving one’s medical condition and its impact upon one’s professional and personal life, and then to have the depersonalized experience of a faceless bureaucrat make a decision on one’s life without ever a direct encounter or face-to-face plea of persuasion.  And the form which one must pour out such sacred information upon — SF 3112A, the “Applicant’s Statement of Disability” — reflects the depersonalized character of the entire administrative process.

In the end, however, one must always keep in mind the goal of the endeavor.  Achievement is to reach and fulfill the intended goal.  Filing for Disability Retirement benefits through OPM must by necessity involve the avenue of a faceless bureaucracy.

To reach the destination of purposive intent, the Federal and Postal employee must recognize that it is not the depersonalized world which will finally define one’s existence, but the recognition that a universe sans the sacred will manifest its humanity only through small steps of personal encounters, and that can be accomplished when once the Federal or Postal employee gets beyond the present circumstance, obtains Federal OPM Disability Retirement benefits, and moves forward with life into another vocation, another stage of life, and a further contact with the sacred nature of one’s essence.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire