Federal and USPS Disability Retirement: Change within Flux

The anomaly is that change occurs only within the context of constancy; for, if everything was perpetually in a state of flux, the very concept of ‘change’ would lose its meaning.  It is similar to the argument often made in philosophy where one posits that everything we perceive ‘is merely a dream’; yet, one cannot even arrive at a concept of dreaming until and unless we first acknowledge the reality and existence of a mind which dreams.  We therefore often confuse that which comes after by forgetting the preconditions which are required for positing the subsequent argument.

Ultimately, what is necessary is the foundation of any argument, in order for the flurry of changing activities to flourish.  But a balance must always be sought, and it is when change itself becomes a constancy, and overtakes the undergirding of stability, that one’s life becomes one of chaos and turmoil.

Medical conditions tend to do that to people.  The lack of relief from constant pain; the upheaval of psychiatric conditions, of panic-induced attacks and racing minds; of insomnia and non-restorative sleep; of medications which are necessary but have serious side effects; and the interruptions from stability by the necessity of doctor’s appointments, loss of time at the job, etc.

All appears to be in flux and turmoil.

For the Federal and Postal employee who suffers from such a treadmill of turmoil, consideration should be given in filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.  It is offered to all FERS & CSRS employees.  Where work was once a column of stability, during a chronic and progressively deteriorating medical condition, it can become the source of increased stress and anxiety because of the lack of understanding or empathy from coworkers, supervisors and the agency in general.

Preparation of a proper and effective Federal Disability Retirement application is essential; flux, turmoil and change should be the intermission, and not the main event.  As such, reversal of course in order to establish the principle of life should be the goal:  of stability first, and changes thereafter.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

CSRS & FERS Medical Disability Retirement: Inside/Outside

Visiting another institution, community, neighborhood or business often evokes an initial response of envy or dismay; first impressions abound, and floods the channels of opinions based upon a comparison of one’s own life.

It is an interesting phenomena to view the perspective of an “outsider”, and it is always important to recognize that the private information known only by an “insider” is simply inaccessible to those who are not residents of a given community, or who have not been a member for a sufficiently long-enough period of time.  It is not so much that such information is a secret; rather, it is often the case that certain types of knowledge can only be gained through being a part of the whole.

On a microcosmic scale, then, the turmoil which an individual experiences because of a medical condition is a life which is rarely understood in full, and less so by certain types of predisposed personalities.   Sympathetic individuals have become a rarity; as we become more and more disconnected through virtual reality and the impersonal conduits of the internet, electronic mailing, etc., human capacity for empathy diminishes.

For the Federal and Postal Worker who must consider filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether under FERS or CSRS, the problem is further exacerbated because of the nature of a large bureaucracy.  Bureaucracies are by definition impersonal; starting off as another insider (within the Federal Sector), but in essence always remaining an outsider (because of the impersonal nature of the environment itself) often portends a lack of empathetic response by supervisors, co-workers and the organization as a whole.

Having the proper perspective throughout — of effectively and persuasively proving one’s Federal Disability Retirement case to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management — is the best and only course of success.  How to go about it often depends upon balancing the proper insider/outsider perspective, as is the case for all of us.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

CSRS & FERS Medical Disability Retirement: The Proper Balance

The Office of Personnel Management has sent out a number of denials in recent weeks, and the undersigned attorney has had multiple opportunities to review many of the cases which have been submitted at the Initial Stage of the process, by Federal and Postal workers who are or were unrepresented by an attorney.  

The spectrum of the quality of the applications vary; some have obviously engaged in some research, and attempted to put together a Federal Disability Retirement application by following some guidelines which have been put forth.  But in most cases, there is still the problem of an “imbalance” — of not reaching the correct median between the subjective and the objective; of an inability to stay away from the workplace issues, of harassment, of complaints about the Agency, etc.  

Remember that this is first and foremost a medical disability retirement application, and the operative term which should always be focused upon and emphasized is the “medical” aspect of the formulation.  While there is ultimately no formulaic Federal Disability Retirement packet (precisely because the particular medical condition which is unique to each individual resists any such attempt to package a Federal Disability Retirement application in a generic sort of way), nevertheless, there are certain key points which should be addressed and emphasized, while other “non-key points” should be avoided.  

Put in a different way, in proving that a medical condition prevents a Federal or Postal employee from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s job, one must include multiple “essential elements” in meeting the burden of proof.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

Federal & Postal Service Disability Retirement: The Workplace

When a Federal or Postal employee is considering filing for Federal Disability retirement benefits under FERS or CSRS, there are many and varying conflicting responses, wrapped and bundled in emotional turmoil, reactionary and concerned viewpoints, etc.  Stories of a “hostile work environment”, of discriminatory actions, harassing supervisors, etc., are often part of the “narrative” of a person considering filing for Federal Disability Retirement. 

One must be careful, however, that when the affirmative decision to file for disability retirement is made, that only those relevant aspects of the narrative be included in the final disability retirement packet.  Things which do not provide a compelling basis for proving, by a preponderance of the evidence, the necessary criteria for meeting the legal standard to be approved for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS or CSRS or, just as importantly, things which will harm a disability retirement application– they should be left out of the final narrative. 

Such issues surrounding a “hostile work environment” or a harassing supervisor — such perspectives or narrative formulations which come close to the dangerous precipice of showing that one’s medical disability is merely a “situational” disability (those medical conditions which are specifically confined to a specific situation in a specific agency’s office environment) — should certainly be left out of the final narrative.  This brings up a further point, which I have touched upon many times in the past:  a person without an attorney to formulate the narrative in filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits is often too close to his or her own case, and cannot objectively present the proper narrative to the Office of Personnel Management.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire