FERS Disability Retirement: Overemphasizing the Wrong Thing

Different issues are important to various people.  We tend to think that if we believe Issue-X is important, then it is — or should be — important to everyone else.  With the shrinking globe resulting from technological connections fostered through social media and other means, people get caught up in shorter and shorter news cycles and attention spans heightened by the newness of the next issue, the most recent fad and the most up-to-date gadget.

In becoming enmeshed in the most recent issue of the day, however, there is always the danger of losing the ability and capacity for objective thinking.  To reach a level of “objectivity”, it becomes necessary to place one’s self outside of the self, and to gauge an issue not based upon one’s perspective, but upon a hypothetical third-person viewpoint.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, it is often difficult to view one’s own Federal Disability Retirement application with any sense of objectivity.  Overemphasizing the wrong thing often becomes problematic.  What to include and — more importantly — what to exclude, cannot often be objectively assessed.  Overemphasizing the origin of one’s medical conditions; focusing upon a Supervisor, an incident at work, an alleged “hostile work environment”, etc., may in fact be harmful to your case.

Contact an OPM Disability Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law and make sure that you are not overemphasizing the wrong thing — lest the “wrong thing” come back to defeat the very goal you are intending: An approval from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal & Postal Employee Disability Retirement: The Steps

There are many of them; throughout, even in a small village or town; steps to enter a restaurant; steps to get to the front door; steps down the back porch; then there are baby steps, giant leaps and small steps; hesitant ones and confident strides; steps that are loud and stomping; steps which are heavy, evoking images of a haggard day full of dashed hopes and downtrodden emotions.

Then, there are metaphorical steps — as in what steps you must take in order to “reach your goals” or the steps that have to be endured in order to “climb up the corporate ladder”.  Steps are many; some are few; and whether in a metaphorical sense or in a pragmatic statement of reality, they either take you up or down, and sometimes merely on a plateau of equilibrium where gravity and reality pulls at you in either direction.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who are considering filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, the steps you take at the initial stage of the process are important in establishing where you want to go, how you want to go about it, and whether or not you will make any progress in reaching your destination point — a receipt of an approval from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Consult with a Federal Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, lest the steps you take lead you backward, instead of forward, in the complex administrative process of Federal Disability Retirement.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

FERS Disability Retirement from OPM: A Lifetime

Isn’t that enough?  Shouldn’t it be?  Or, do we feel obligated to append a dependent clause, as in, “A lifetime of achievements,” “…of having accomplished X, Y and Z”, or even: “A Lifetime devoted to…”.  Must there always be the subsequent appendage, or isn’t living a lifetime enough in and of itself?

Was Aristotle right in depicting human beings (and everything else in the universe) as possessing a purposive reason for existence; or, as the French Existentialist had declared, does existence precede essence, and instead of being fated with a predetermined destiny and an inherent basis for being born, we can simply “make up” the reason for our essence and thrive in whichever direction we choose, in whatever endeavor we decide upon?

Is simply having a “lifetime” not enough?  Must we always have a reason and rationale for our existence?  Or, is it enough to have an ending, like Yasujiro Ozu’s tombstone which simply has the characters of “Mu” — “nothingness”?  Ozu certainly “accomplished” much; as a director, he is recognized for his quiet brilliance and insightful dialogues, as well as depicted scenes of serenity and human conflict.  In the end, it was merely a lifetime, and nothingness followed except in the minds of those whom he left behind.

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 his or her job, the “thing” that often compels the Federal or Postal worker into working beyond what the medical condition allows — i.e., of “working one’s self to death” — is a sense that having a lifetime is not quite enough.

There is the “mission” to accomplish, or the work that needs to be completed, etc.  But when it comes to the critical point of choosing between one’s health and such a perspective of accomplishments, there should be no indecision: Life itself is precious, and one’s health is the foundation for a life.

At that point, filing for FERS Disability Retirement makes sense, and consulting with an Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law should be the next step after realizing that a lifetime is, indeed, sufficient.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire