Tag Archives: fed employee medical retirement for ptsd

FERS Disability Retirement: Just the Right Word

It is a terrifying thought that major events — some of which can lead to calamitous results — can turn on a word.  Diplomacy depends upon it, as well as marital harmony and a host of other circumstances.

Words possess the power of persuasion, and their salutary impact is seen by the consequences which follow.   One sees It in the faces of diplomats following lengthy discussions behind closed doors — whether certain words have really averted a crisis or have merely prolonged an inevitable consummation of intentions otherwise provoked.

Did “just the right words” avoid the breakup of a marriage, where the expectant looks of a child’s hope depended upon the soothing effects softly diminishing tempers’ destructive costs? It is the intemperate reaction in the heat of the moment which compels remorse of conscience and the recognition of the power of words.

For Federal Gov. employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from an injury or illness such that preparing, formulating, and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management under FERS becomes a necessity — or, if already filed and a Denial from OPM has already been rendered and a Reconsideration response is required — understanding that the entire administrative process is a “paper presentation” to OPM and is therefore dependent upon “just the right word” or, more accurately, multiple and voluminous words — is a daunting thought.

And furthermore, the words chosen must necessarily involve various areas of specialized disciplines — not the least of which (obviously) should include conceptual constructs of legal cases previously decided.

As such, in filing an application to OPM or in responding to an OPM denial and needing to file a responsive Reconsideration legal memorandum, it may be necessary to consult with a FERS Medical Retirement Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law to help in choosing “just the right word.”

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 from OPM: Presenting the Best Case

You can only work with the facts given; you cannot make it up; you cannot fabricate it; you cannot try and obfuscate — and in the end, it is often the case that presenting the best case is “enough”.

In life, with few exceptions, we learn how to “make do” with what we have gotten:  Whether of our birth, our looks, our talents, our personality, our charm, our brains, our so-called “gifts and talents”, etc.  Some possess a great abundance of whatever is needed; others, a paltry pittance.  A short period of “overcompensation” may produce, every now and again, a 5’6” basketball star, or a scrawny football player whose talents can compete with the best of them; but for the most part, “effort” cannot exceed “limitations”, whether of a physical or an intellectual level.

And so the rest of us are relegated to live in a perpetual milieu of mediocrity, despite our best efforts to conceal it, or for however long the glow of our parent’s constant accolades to furnish us with self-esteem beyond the reality of our true talents will last, reverberating in the echos of our memories — “You’re the best”;  “You can be anything you want to be”;  “Don’t worry, you’ll do better next time”.  Indeed, Americans are known to have a high degree of self-esteem in comparison to other countries, but concurrently lag behind in test scores for the “hard sciences”.

For Federal Gov. employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition such that this medical condition prevents the Federal or Postal worker from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, sometimes presenting the best case possible is all that can be done.  Pain is subjective; psychological conditions are likewise not amenable to “objective” diagnostic testing; and perhaps you don’t have a fully-supportive doctor — and yet you simply cannot continue to work, anymore.

Sometimes, all that can be done is to present the best case, and if may well be that it is “enough” to get you past the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.  Contact a FERS attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law and begin the process of initiating, preparing, formulating and filing the best case possible of a Federal Disability Retirement Case.

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.

 

Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS) Disability Law: The Arbitrary Discount

When it is to one’s favor, of course, the arbitrary discount is a welcome benefit.  Every now and again, it happens — more often in an independent store, where the owner will say, “Well, you’ve been a great customer; I am going to give you a 10% discount just because…”.  Just because what?  No reason — just because it is Saturday; just because you are pleasant; just because I wanted to, etc.

That is the nature of an arbitrary discount.  However, what about an arbitrary discount when it is not in your favor?

In a Federal Disability Retirement case, the OPM “Medical Specialist” may deny a Federal Disability Retirement application with the following reasoning: “Your treating doctor is not a specialist in treating X.  The restrictions placed on you are therefore invalid and you have not shown that you are disabled.”  WHAT?  And yet — it is just another arbitrary discount — the discounting of your treating doctor as a valid person to make reasonable medical decisions; it just so happens that such an arbitrary discount is not in your favor.

Even though, of course, the law supports you in every way and even though OPM’s opinion should be discounted entirely.  But hey — OPM is the independent owner of the “store”, and they can do what they want, right?

Contact an OPM Disability Retirement Attorney who can and will fight against such arbitrary discounts.

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 Benefits for Federal & Postal Workers: The Approach

In every endeavor, there is what is termed “The Approach”.  It is not any single thing, but a variety of issues comprised of the preparatory work which is engaged; the manner in which a case is developed; the sequence of work that is implemented; what part the client is expected to do; what the cost is; how accessible is the attorney to the client on a regular basis; to what extent the attorney him/herself actually engages in the process, etc.

Different law firms have different approaches, and it is important for the potential client to assess and evaluate which approach works best and why.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition and can no longer perform all of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal position, consider the “approach” of a potential lawyer you intend to hire — and evaluate, assess and determine the best “fit” for your particular situation and circumstance.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Lawyer

 

Federal & Postal Medical Retirement: The Mistakes We All Make

Are they correctable?  Are they irredeemable?  Is there some office at the local government building marked, “The Department of Corrections” — No, not the one that runs the prison facilities, but another, more important one: An Agency that can correct the mistakes we make in life.  Such a Department, if it exists, might have the following conversation:

“I need a mistake corrected.”
“Take a number and have a seat.”
“But it’s an emergency.  I need the mistake corrected immediately.”
“Emergency mistakes are handled by the Department of Emergency Corrections just down the hall.  Take a left out the door, then the 2nd right, and the third door after the right turn.”
“Can they correct all mistakes — even ones that seem to be stupid ones?
“If it is a stupid mistake, then that is taken care of by the Department of Stupid Mistakes.”

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, consult with an attorney who specializes in Federal and Postal Disability Retirement Law.

Even if you have already begun the process, it is important to make sure that your Federal Disability Retirement application is as “mistake-free” as possible; and while there may not be a “Department of Corrections” of any sort, a FERS Disability Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law comes as close as you can get in responding appropriately to such an inquiry.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal & Postal Disability Retirement: Standard of incompatibility

How does one “prove” a standard of “incompatibility”?

Physical injuries often allow for a medical opinion to impose certain restrictions:  No lifting more than X-pounds; no standing more than 2 hours within an 8-hour period, etc.  These, then, can directly “prove” that a Federal or Postal employee is no longer able to perform one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, by comparing such restrictions as against the positional requirements of a given job, and “showing” that the standard required can no longer be met.

The “other” cousin of the standard, as reiterated by cases represented by Henderson v. OPM and related precedents, allow for a “different” type of proof, where one may show that there is a general incompatibility between the entirety of one’s position and the medical conditions one suffers from.

It might be argued that such a standard is more “nebulous” and “harder to prove”, but in fact, the opposite is often true: specificity on a 1-to-1 ratio between a given medical condition or symptom and an element of one’s positional duties no longer becomes necessary.  Rather, a general showing of incompatibility between the “type” of job and the “nature” of a medical condition is enough to qualify for Federal Disability Retirement.

The trick, of course, lies in the manner of “proving” it, but it should be of some comfort to Federal and Postal employees that there is another type of standard beyond the 1-to-1 ratio standard that applies generally for “physical” duties; for, in the end, many psychiatric conditions can only meet the “incompatibility” standard, although some specificity of inability to perform a particular function of the job may be present as well.

To meet either standard is a burden of proof that must be shown by the appellant in all OPM Disability Retirement cases; to understand, apply and satisfy such standards, it is best to consult with an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Attorney Representation for OPM Disability Claims: Trials of error

Normally, of course, the common usage of the terms involve the combination with a conjunctive — of trial and error, implicating a process whereby the latter term triggers the former (i.e., the “error” forces us to engage another round of trials, which then may lead to further errors resulting in further trials, etc.) into a potentially lengthy repetition of attempts, each with the advancement through possession of greater knowledge gained from the errors identified and witnessed.

The concept as it stands, however, implies something further:  of the experience of each error and the process within such error and what the error may implicate.

Human beings have an expansive capacity to “move on” quickly beyond errors made, and perhaps that ability of adaptability is an evolutionary advantage for a species that makes a fair number of errors that, in other contexts and within other species, would spell the extinction of the species itself.

Errors compounded go beyond the experience of the trial itself; sometimes, errors lead to other errors, and thus the “trials and errors” in their aggregate allow for greater knowledge and adaptability depending upon the nature of each error and of many trials.  But it is the trial of the error that often needs to be paused, and allowed to ponder upon, before going on to the next trial, lest the lesson from any one error has not been sufficiently learned before a further trial is engaged.

Sometimes, of course, the trial of an error, if not sufficiently comprehended and reflected upon, is the very reason why further errors of judgment follow, precisely because not enough time has been spent upon the nature of the error 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 satisfactorily performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, it is important to recognize the trial of an error — for, with a Federal Agency or the Postal Service, one is encountering a behemoth of intransigence when attempting to garner any sympathy or loyalty.

Medical conditions themselves are “trials” enough, and when a Federal Agency or the Postal Service begins the process of punishing the Federal or Postal employee for taking too much SL or LWOP, or even invoking FMLA rights, the “error” is not so much the trial of patience, but rather, in thinking that the Federal Agency or the Postal Service was ever on your side to begin with.

While a Federal/Postal Disability Retirement application may not be a strictly “adversarial” process, one must always consider whose “interests” are being looked after in each trial encountered:  the interests of the Federal Agency or the Postal Service, or of one’s own?

The trial of error often begins with a mistaken identification of a more fundamental error on the part of the Federal employee or U.S. Postal worker, and for the Federal or Postal worker contemplating filing for Federal OPM Disability Retirement benefits, whether the Federal or Postal worker is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, the first step in preventing the greater trials of multiple errors is to consult with an experienced attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Disability Retirement for Federal Employees: Life wears

The doubling of words is always an interesting endeavor; for, almost always, the linguistic connotations erupting from such coupling is rarely limited to the combination of the two, but a plenitude that proves Aristotle’s declaration that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.

For, in the concept that “life wears”, we gain an understanding of multiple ideas, depending upon the tonal emphasis one places upon accents of consonants, verbs or whether the first in the sequence, or the last: that, the turmoil and challenges of life wears upon the soul; that there are varying experiences that are presented in the course of one’s life, such that the entirety of a spectrum in a person’s mortal existence “wears” different clothing to exhibit to the world; or, even that life itself has predetermined sets of wardrobe such that in different stages of a given life, such manifestation of colorful or drab garments may be that which simply must be accepted in the karma of living out such lives; and, likely, multiple other meanings and shades of ideations that this author is not perceptive enough to reveal in their hidden connotations and implied meanings unrevealed by the dullness of one’s lack of creative energy.

Whatever meanings may be derived, it is always of value to combine isolated islands of concepts, words and linguistic paradigms in order to fathom a greater comprehension.  For, ultimately, that is the challenge of daily life.  If human beings are unique in any gifted sense, it is in the capacity and ability to bring together combinations of analogies otherwise not thought of, in order to gain a greater insight into a world which is persistently incomprehensible and obstructed by our myopic view seen through lenses of a Kantian universe inaccessible but for the structural categories we impose by postulating predetermined paradigms of impediments.

Life wears many garments; life wears, in that the constant struggles and turmoil we must bear leaves us profoundly exhausted after each battle; and the fashion show that life presents to us each day is as plentiful as the Paris runways that dawn with each new season, and yet we must somehow endure it all.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, such that the medical condition becomes an obstacle where life wears upon the depleted energy reserved for daily struggles, preparing, formulating and filing an effective 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, is often another metaphor of a garment well-worn that nevertheless must be contemplated.  Perhaps the thought doesn’t wear well; or, the future contemplated is one of multiple “life wears” that you must consider; or, maybe your life wears a thought process which must incorporate the new paradigm of a Federal Disability Retirement.

Whatever the conceptual output from the combination of disparate islands of thought-processes, the plain fact is that in pursuing an OPM Disability Retirement annuity, the Federal and Postal worker must recognize that life’s challenges always wears throughout both a bed of roses as well as a crown of thorns.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Disability Retirement for Federal Employees: Understanding

The Master asks one of his two dogs, “Where is ___?”  If the second pet wags her tail, looks quizzically at the owner, then proceeds to go to the far end of the next room and locates the wandering misfit and barks to you that she has found him – do we disbelieve?  If the same question were to be asked of one’s child in reference to a sibling, and the identical result occurs where the first child goes into another room or runs up into the attic and locates the lost soul, would there be any doubt?

Same circumstances, identical behaviors, concurrent results; merely different mammals within the genus of species, and yet we disbelieve because of arrogance and pride of self-worth.  Why is it that we refuse to attribute understanding to non-human entities despite clear evidence to the contrary?  Is language defined by grammatical rules of construction retrospectively applied, and does that constitute a basis for refusing to allow admittance into the colony of intelligence “clubs” of exclusivity we have created based upon rules of comprehension we have paradoxically constructed?

The rules constituting grammatical comprehension and technical application came subsequent to language itself; for, no one believes that Man sat down eons ago and decided to set down rules of linguistic conveyance, upon which the growing population then began to follow.  No, conformity to such constricting paradigms were initiated, instituted and concretized when society recognized that there were differences in parochial intonations, and those who had nothing better to do decided with arrogance and ivory-tower nose-lifting that correct idioms of speech needed to be recognized, applied and adhered to.

And what of animals?  So long as the working paradigm consisted of our self-image as just below the angels and above the burdens of beasts, we refused their eligibility to the elite of elasticity in language and comprehension.  Yet, despite all of the convoluted attempts at avoiding acknowledgment and recognition that “to understand” is nothing more than the behavior following an utterance of speech, the pragmatism of daily life refutes our own methodology of exclusionary conduct.  For, in the end, it is merely the impact of speech upon behavior in a given society, whether that indicates a “human” world or a “dog” universe.

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, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, the question of “understanding” before “acting” often becomes a vicious circularity resulting in non-action:  The complexity of the legal tangles in Federal Disability Retirement law tends to make the Federal or Postal employee pause; failure to act in preparing, formulating and filing a Federal Disability Retirement application serves to exacerbate one’s condition, which leads to greater stress and turmoil; non-action results.

The key is to recognize that “understanding” – not even “complete understanding” – is necessary.  Rather, it is often the subsequent initiation of acting following a verbal commitment that is the only real test of understanding.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Employee Disability Retirement: Rhymeless Poems

When did it happen?  Certainly, by the time E.E. Cummings came upon the scene, with his oddity of typographical stream of consciousness, the acceptance of it had already come to fruition; or, perhaps it was in the translation of foreign such vehicles of linguistic amalgamations – when the first frustrated translator threw up his hands in disgust at a Japanese Haiku or a German verse of too numerous a compendium of throat-clearing consonants, that the advent of the rhymeless poem reached its fulfillment and pinnacle of public acceptance.  Or, maybe we just ran out of words.

Words are funny vehicles of communication.  With facial expressions, the scent of another, the movement of body or a sense of fear, anticipation and the adrenaline of life, one can discern an endless eternity of subtleties that, in their inexhaustible divining of messages sent and received, can further be conjoined, compounded and confounded by the essence of human complexity.  But words are limited to the meanings of each; and in the finite world of vocabularies existent, the rhyming words are that much more delimited.

It is not, as Wittgenstein would point out, something that we can just create out of whole cloth; for, there can be no “private language game” of one, as the very essence of it would be lost in the creation of a singular language game – communication, which is the purpose and teleological livelihood, cannot be justified if no one else understands the word, the greater concept, or the linguistic artifice intended.

Sure, sure – words are created everyday, especially in order to accommodate the growing technology of Facebook, Twitter, Snapchat, etc.; and the abbreviated forms of linguistic devices necessitated by text messaging, as well as the diversity of communicating through emoticons, etc., only prove the point:  All such such inventions and convoluted conventions of acceptability have a finite basis in any algorithm created.  In the end, we are just left with more words, and the inability to find that perfect rhyme in a verse of poetic need.   And that is the point, isn’t it?

For the Federal employee or U.S. Postal worker, having a medical condition is similar to reaching that point in writing a poem, when the rhyming word can no longer be found.  Life itself is like an endless verse of poetry; we flow along and rhyme from word to word, with a cadence found in maturity of experiences; then, one day, a medical condition develops, and the rhyming verses suddenly pause.  We don’t know what to do.  Search as we may, we cannot find that perfect word, or that acceptable cadence of living life.

Filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, may not be that discovery of the perfect word to end the silence of a rhymeless poem; it is, however, the last word in the verse of a Federal or Postal employee’s career, which may save the day from leaving the empty space blank, and instead, allowing for the next cadence in this continuing drama of verse-filled experiences, to take a leap into a future of security and new beginnings.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire