OPM Disability Retirement under FERS: The Long Slog

Whether impatience is a uniquely American characteristic (a flawed one?) or is merely something inherently inseparable from the human species generally is a debate for anthropologists and similar academic theoreticians to engage; but in any event, it does appear to pervade the American character in pervasive plenitude.

We are impatient about almost everything — and appear to be willing to abandon all “old ways” in favor of the “new”.  This leads to some disastrous results — as in our impatience for conflicts that last too long and our quick willingness to abandon our efforts because our goals were neither quickly nor easily achieved.

The Long Slog is always problematic for the impatient — for, it means that we must commit time and resources for periods beyond a murky, endless timeframe.  How long something takes cannot always be clearly quantified, and often the anticipated length must be ignored and, instead, achievement must be measured not in terms of time, but in light of merely remaining and showing a steadfast commitment to honoring a timeless commitment.

This is often difficult because other thoughts begin to intrude during the endless lull — Are we wasting our time?  What if we are throwing away good money after bad (a very common thought);  What if we never achieve our goal?  And many more such concerns, besides.  How do we counter the natural concerns of the Long Slog?

First, by clarifying at the outset one’s commitment to a process, and recognizing that the stated goal can only be achieved without regard to time, and Secondly, to accept that any timeframe anticipated should be multiplied by a factor of 10.

Commitment is a difficult value to uphold, and that is why a marriage covenant is so often broken — for, who can even conceive of honoring a promise “Till death do us part” without knowing the particulars of what a lifetime will entail?  All that goes into a “lifetime” — of joys and sorrows, of happiness, suddenly overshadowed by sickness and tragedies unforeseen — in short, the normal history of all of mankind.

Thus do so many people end in divorce and, similarly do long-term commitments become abandoned and forgotten human detritus.

Likewise, when a Federal or a Postal employee decides to engage in the process of preparing, formulating, and filing a Federal Disability Retirement under FERS through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM), one must mentally prepare for the Long Slog.  It is a long and arduous, complicated bureaucratic process involving potentially 3 stages, and with an “almost certainty” of an initial denial from OPM no matter how well-crafted and fully documented the initial filing is composed.

Contact a FERS Disability Lawyer who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and begin to prepare for The Long Slog.

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.

 

Medical Retirement for Federal Employees: Loss of Continuum

How does a child know where the neatly-packaged meat displayed on a store’s shelf come from?  Or the clothes which hang on a mannequin displayed behind a plate of glass; or even of the glass itself?  And what about the old man who shuffles by with a cane and a bent back?

The child walks by and the old man staggers, and what question does the little girl ask or does the old man disappear after the two pass by — poof!  Like magic.  Yet, the old man — and the little girl — each have a life beyond the mere passing; of a childhood one has and the childhood the other will yet have; of a home, a hearth, a heart full of memories harkening from here to there, or perhaps to nowhere.

In a village of yesteryear, the continuum of each life is known because everyone shares in the life of each other as a community of interconnected lives.  In modernity, we give lip-service to “caring” and the continuum of life, but the reality is that we have no relationship with the person who stitched our clothes; nor do we know which animal from whence the meat came; or the farmer who grew the tomato in the produce section, let alone the life and problems of the person who stacked the Nestle cookies on the shelf so neatly.

The loss of continuum is how we live, and that is true of the Federal or Postal worker who suffers from a medical condition and goes into work — more often than not, none of the coworkers know the circumstances of the individual except that he or she is a “shirker” because he or she fails to “carry his own weight”, anymore.

Filing for Federal OPM Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management is often a step towards regaining the continuum previously lost — at least for the individual whose career in the Federal Service is no longer appreciated in a community which has been dispersed with the loss of empathy and loss of continuum.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

FERS Disability Retirement: The Inevitability of Change

It is a tautology; for, “inevitable” encapsulated and embraces the term “change”, and one presumes that, in applying and comprehending the word “change”, there is a sense of inevitability contained within it.

Thus do we assume certain truths which naturally follow: If you don’t like the weather, just wait a moment (for, the natural course of the universe dictates that the weather will change over time); if you are dissatisfied with your life today, ride it out (for as circumstances appear static for the moment, time will resolve many of the uncertainties faced today); and similar dictums of sagely advice.

What we are not told, however, is that which we have already accepted by experience:  That “change” is too often a negative component, and that is why we believe that things almost always change for the worse.  That is the byline for the pessimist, of course: That good things never last; everything changes for the worse.  The optimist, on the other hand, always tries to squeeze the good out of anything that worsens, and tries to see the glass as half full, instead of half empty.  Whether you are an optimist or a cynic, both accept that change is inevitable; the difference is merely in how one perceives the change.

Then, of course, there is the human element — of affirmative actions taken by an individual or a multitude of individuals in performing acts that contain or otherwise alter the course of change.

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, change is inevitable.  Whether by being placed on a “Performance Improvement Plan”, or the increasing harassment perpetrated by the Federal Agency or the Postal Service — or in the inevitability of a termination — the medical condition itself will normally and often dictate the need for change.

The “human element” is the action taken by the Federal or Postal employee in preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, where the affirmative intervention of actions taken may change the ultimate outcome of life’s trials.  Yes, the inevitability of change is a given; but how that change will come about and what outcome is to be determined will depend upon the Federal or Postal employee who recognizes both the inevitability and the need for change, but moreover, of how to go about initiating the process.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement Benefits: Pretzels of Arguments

Anyone with a thought can argue; of a voice which is louder, more aggressive; of incoherence in an age where logic has been abandoned and rationality of methodological proof is unnecessary, but where one’s “feelings” or whether one belongs to this or that victimized class in and of itself validates the propriety of an argument’s perspective.

“Pretzels of arguments” is a concept which evokes an image — a metaphor of sorts — where one has had to engage in a series of linguistic contortions in order to get from Idea-A to Conclusion-Z.  In modernity, however, the metaphor fails to define the illogical structure of an argument, for methodological soundness is no longer applicable: That is, one need not worry about the missing “middle term” in a syllogism or a necessary nexus between sentences in propositional logic precisely because in today’s methodology (if one can identify it as such) of logical discourse, there are no rules which apply.

Yet, pretzels of arguments still confuse us.  There are those who intentionally aggregate the conflate multiple arguments in order to confound; or, others who simply cannot restrict one’s thoughts into a coherent conciseness and therefore must speak in paragraphs where a couple of sentences will do quite nicely.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who 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 Federal or Postal job, a necessary condition in preparing, formulating and filing a FERS Disability Retirement application with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management is completion of SF 3112A — Applicant’s Statement of Disability.

Some applicants provide an abbreviated annotation to the questions on SF 3112A (which is probably not a great idea), while others provide a voluminous account in response to the questions, going on for pages upon pages in pretzels of arguments that can confuse and lead one into a morass, lost in a forest of language (also not a great idea). SF 3112A should be completed with thoughtful precision — of providing enough information for an approval of a Federal Disability Retirement application, while leaving out unnecessary and confusing information.

Leave the pretzels of arguments for friends and family when holiday gatherings need some confusing diatribes in order to avoid the two rules of pleasantries: leaving politics and religion — those two subjects where pretzels of arguments are most needed.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

 

OPM Medical Retirement Legal Representation: Coordination

Lack of it brings out the awkwardness of disjointedness; sometimes, it can be compensated by height or other attributes, but even then, it results in lack of efficiency, at best, and a danger to self or others at its worst.  Coordination is necessary not only for efficiency, but for effectiveness, as well.

Try and remember when you first began learning how to operate a motor vehicle: the need to coordinate one’s panorama of visual stimuli from all directions; judging the speed, distance and predictable behavior of other vehicles surrounding; of “putting it all together” in steering the vehicle, maintaining the proper speed, of determining the distance between yourself and other vehicles, how much pressure to exert upon the gas pedal and the brake pedal; and thank the stars that in modernity the “clutch” is no longer a common device on most vehicles, lest trying to get the car moving on a steep hill after the engine has stalled should again become the test of adulthood as it was for everyone in past generations.

Coordinating varying efforts, elements, components and the “thousand little things” that we now take for granted, was not such an insignificant encounter when we first learned to drive.  The simple task of adjusting the mirrors in coordination and in conjunction with the position of one’s seat was an exercise that once required thought and foresight, as one found it a bit more trying if you found out that you couldn’t see the other cars while traveling on a highway where speed limits were considered mere ornaments with irrelevant numbers on wooden posts to be summarily ignored.

Now, of course, everything is easy — coordination of all of the elements becomes a thoughtless exercise of taking things for granted.  For, with a push of a button, you can “reset” the previous coordinates already stored in the car’s computer memory bank.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who 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 Federal or Postal job, it may become necessary to begin preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application for filing with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset.

It may, for many, seem like trying to learn how to drive all over again — of the need to coordinate all of the elements, including the medical reports, treatment records, office notes; of preparing a legal memorandum that is persuasive to OPM by pointing out how the medical evidence is supported by the legal precedents which have previously determined a successful outcome; of formulating the Applicant’s Statement of Disability in conjunction and in coordination with the medical evidence and legal argumentation following; and of coordinating all of the various evidentiary components that comprise the “Federal Disability Retirement Packet” that is to be submitted.

And like the driver who avoids the vehicle on the road that has the big-lettered sign saying, “Student Driver”, we all know that the reason why we steer clear of such vehicles is not because of the teacher accompanying the novice driver, but because of the lack of coordination that might ensue.

That is why consulting with an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law is an important component in preparing an effective Federal Disability Retirement case, because like the student driver just learning, it is the expert who teaches how to arrive safely from beginning-point A to destination B that coordinates the necessary operatic touch between stage and reality.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Employee Disability Information: Favoritism

There was an interesting article the other day, where certain public schools were attempting to banish the use of the term “best friend” from the ordinary and daily usage by students.  Now, the immediate reaction by some would be:  Uh-oh, here comes another “politically correct” movement that is based upon the foolish idea that social engineering can be attained merely by manipulating language’s daily discourse by simply expunging the vocabulary we engage.

That is what Orwell’s point was, isn’t it — in that part in his novel, 1984, when there is the discussion of the New-speak dictionary that would be coming out in the fictionalized society of Oceania — of a dystopian world that determines thought by controlling the available words we use?  By expunging and extracting, diminishing and destroying certain words, phrases, concepts, etc., we then limit the ability of an individual to engage in certain thoughts — thereby restricting and ultimately erasing any capacity to discuss and communicate such conceptual constructs.

Some positive idealists would believe that human creativity would somehow remain victorious over such totalitarian methods, and find ways to communicate, then create “new” ideas — newer than the anomaly and counter-insurgency of New-speak — and still come up with alternative words and phrases to replace any such attempt at erasure and extinguishment.  But even Orwell doubted the success of such an endeavor, no matter how hard we try; and thus the dark ending to the novel, 1984.

But back to “outlawing” the references made on the playgrounds all across the country or, likely, across the spectrum of the world — would two or more children still engage in the behavior of “best friends” regardless of the expungement of the language identifying it as such; and if so, what would be the purpose of extinguishing the language if the underlying act itself continues to remain?  Won’t children on playgrounds the world over engage in favoritism and concomitant exclusion because unexplainable attraction is the natural order of the universe?

Of course, social engineering initiated at an early age has a purposive direction which can be seen in later life — as in the Federal employee and U.S. Postal worker, where favoritism prevails no matter how many laws, statutes, regulations etc. are imposed and upheld.  Fiefdoms of every kind will always exist, and totalitarianism will often prevail.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition where the medical condition begins to prevent the Federal or Postal employee from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, the concept of “favoritism” — growing out of the tender years of “best friends” but taking on another name and form — begins to take on greater meaning.  For, its opposite — disfavor — begins to be applied for the Federal employee or U.S. Postal worker who is no longer “as productive”, not fully a “member of the team”, and shows signs of slowing down; and then the harassment begins, just like when we were children and the pecking order always favored the bully and disfavored the weakling runts of the world.

At that point, it may be time to consult with an experienced attorney and begin the process of initiating a Federal Disability Retirement application, to be submitted to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset — sort of like going and “telling” on that bully.  Maybe so — but it is a necessary next step.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Medical Retirement from Federal Government Employment: Terms

Language is a malleable vehicle.  There have been times in the history of language, when the staid and stodginess period of loss of vibrancy became the rule, followed by epochs of radical vicissitudes, upheavals and counter-conventional revolutions in the medium of language games.  Whether this encapsulated slice of linguistic alteration, upending traditional forms of communication because of electronic media and the hype of language abbreviated by Twitter, Texting and Tablet Titillations, will last the short life of technological innovation and obsolescence, is yet to be determined.

For example, the time of Shakespeare’s linguistic explosion of experimentation and expansive usage became in retrospect a richness of entering into connotative language meanings from which we benefit to this day.  But steadiness, continuity and conditions of stability are also important in order to take the proverbial breather to accept, embrace and assimilate (a term widely used for contextual purposes in modernity applied to immigration reform, as well) the linguistic revolutions that become incommensurate with meaning, communication and conveyance of terms.

Terms are important, both in common usage and in technical application.  In the arena of Federal Disability Retirement Law, different words are splayed about, sometimes without regard to proper application, especially when the “law” often requires a greater attention to precision of meaning.  Some simple and common crossovers of linguistic confusion involve:  “medical retirement” and “disability retirement” – do they mean the same thing?

If reference to either term involves the submission for an early retirement to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, then the answer is “yes”, they do mean the same thing.  Federal Disability  Retirement is identical to “Federal medical retirement” if by such words the query is referring to filing for an early retirement based upon the Federal or Postal worker’s inability to perform one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal position, and therefore the intention is to access an early annuity because of one’s early retirement based upon the medical condition, and submitted to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Some other terms often confused or conflated:  “On-the-job injury” or “pre-existing condition”; these terms are often used in the language-arena of Worker’s Compensation issues, and rarely have any import – or applicability, at all – in the context of a Federal Disability Retirement application.  For, in a Federal Disability Retirement application, whether the applicant is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, it matters not whether or not one has been disabled “on the job” or away at a skiing accident; instead, what is important is the impact of the injury or disease upon one’s ability and capacity to perform the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal position.  As for a “pre-existing” condition – that, too, is more likely appropriately defined in an OWCP context, and rarely in filing a Federal Disability Retirement application.

In any event, “terms” are meant to be used within a context-appropriate content of filings, and in preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, it is important to clarify and conform to the applicable statutory mandates in defining and using the terms which are most appropriate and effective.

For, in the end, the explosion of language during the era of Shakespeare and the Elizabethan Age reverberates with critical linguistic richness to this day; yet, if we were to have a conversation with a bloke from that era, the terms employed would not only confuse us, but confound us with a profound sense of despairing lack of cogency despite our self-aggrandizing declarations of superiority and advancement in the modern parlance of greater self-esteem.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

FERS & CSRS Disability Retirement: Pipe Dreams

The origin denotes an unsavory history of imperialistic exploitation and deserved degeneration of culturally unseen and unforetold consequences; of an encounter between foreign soils bridged by greed, necessity and inevitable destinies, but where the conqueror reaped more than what it sought.  In the opium dens which followed and the devastation of addictions ensuing, the phantoms derived from the processing of a plant which otherwise concealed the deadliness of its essence, beautiful in its floral toxicity amidst the sweet aroma that diffusely pervaded an unsuspecting population — dreams, indeed, of unreachable heights and great expectations otherwise squandered.

It is from that 19th century term — of the wafting scent of doom combined with the forgotten troubles of an industrial age, when repressive measures could be meted out by colonial strength, and insulting terms denigrating the humanity of an entire population could be thrown about by the lowliest of the low, and yet with superiority by race and ethnicity merely because one nation conquered and took advantage of the subservient nature of a quietude yet open to a coming storm.

In the end, who were the victors and what vestiges of the vanquished remained — only the untold stories of unmarked graves, whispering by twilight of plunder and portage of cultures; for, is it the country which invaded, or the one who imported the pipe dreams which subjugated the populace to an addictive essence?

In modernity, of course, the term itself has been shed of its subjugated past, and merely connotes an unrealistic expectation, a pursuance of a dream devoid of pragmatism, and a picture of flightiness attached to those who express such creative dimensions of unconstrained exuberance.  Children and the insane have them; and perhaps, still, those who partake of illicit moments of addiction and self-abuse.  But reality is always where we meet again, and the loss of time, efforts and futile exertion of wasted energy ends up back to the proverbial “square one”; what we squander in labor, we make up for in foolishness.

For the Federal employee and the U.S. Postal worker who must daily be challenged not only with the workplace hostility of repetitive annoyances, but further, work with a medical condition which progressively deteriorates and diminishes the Federal or Postal worker’s capacity and ability to perform all of the essential elements of the Federal or Postal positional duties — pursuing a pipe dream that it will all just “go away”, or that tomorrow the medical condition will miraculously heal itself, or the day after the harassment will cease:  these are mere phantasms of a hope diminished by reality.

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 an acknowledgment that the Federal or Postal employee is no longer relying upon a pipe dream, and has taken a pragmatic step towards facing the reality of one’s situation.

In the end, a pipe dream need not be a mere vestige of a lost culture steeped in the wayward historicity of timeless depravity; for, as the past continues to haunt both individuals and the greater society, so the words which follow may describe a regeneration of that which was once forgotten, but still remains in the residue of unvanquished sins.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

FERS & CSRS Medical Retirement: The Question of Worth

Whether animals consider the question or not, they certainly make judgments based upon prudence, calculation and quantification of effort involved; but perhaps not in some conceptually systematic approach.  “Worth” can involve multiple meanings: of time expended; monetized value; quality; but always involving the evaluative process of comparative analysis.

It is this latter process which is important for the Federal employee and the U.S. Postal worker in determining whether to proceed with preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset. The comparison may be on different levels, and pitted against and between various elements: priority of values (health versus continuation and persistence in present circumstances); current financial condition in contrast to future reduced benefits; the penalties imposed by taking an early retirement as opposed to a Federal Disability Retirement; the length of the process in contrast to one’s age and cost of hiring an attorney; and many such similar factors to be analyzed.

Perhaps the only comparative analysis which need not be engaged is the one which the Agency implicitly compels: The worth of self, derived from the manner in which the agency or the U.S. Postal Service treats the Federal or Postal employee once it becomes evident that the Federal or Postal employee has a medical condition such that it prevents him or her from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s job, and thereby consideration must be given to filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Other animals never ask that question of self-worth, as survival and Darwinian principles prevail and overtake the inherently nonsensical nature of such a question; it is only the human being who ever questions the worth of self, and only within the greater context of a society which places a premium upon questions unworthy of consideration.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Benefits for Federal and Postal Workers: Clarity of Purpose

Most of life’s events are characterized by coincidental stumbling; of chance meetings, of happening upon something that one is good at; or of taking on a job thinking that a couple of years of steady employment will allow for time while one tries to “find your direction”, as if compasses determined by magnetic fields will reveal the mysterious paths of life’s unsympathetic gaze.  It is rare that one begins with a purposive mind, commits to it, shows a continuum of unwavering direction, and declares at the end that there was never a doubt throughout.

Such can be, of course, for specified projects, or in making a late-stage career move; there, clarity of purpose is required. Traumas, major life-changing events, and sudden dawning of revelatory consciousness; these are the ingredients of an awakening from slumber.  It is tantamount to the famous quip attributed to Admiral Yamamoto after the attack upon Pearl Harbor, that the event served to “awaken a sleeping giant”.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, such that the medical condition requires more than temporary measures of palliative effect, consideration in 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 often referred to as an “awakening event”, and one which is compelled by a clarity of purpose.

That clarity of purpose, however, must not only be in the determination of preparing, formulating and filing for Federal OPM Disability Retirement benefits, but should by necessity be conveyed to OPM in both purposive effect and clarity of persuasion. Filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits is not just a matter of gathering some medical documentation and submitting them; nor is it sufficient to sign a release with the doctor’s office to forward such information to “see if” one qualifies.

No, it is an affirmative action where chance should be made into a limited luxury, and the odds should favor an approval.  For, in the end, clarity is not one of those occurrences which arises through chance, and purpose by definition is not revealed through happenstance; and while “e-harmony” may entice some with claims of scientific algorithms touting success rates defying the statistical dismay of current divorce rates, it is clarity of purpose which will determine the successful outcome in preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire