Federal Disability Retirement: The “Get-Through” Day

Everyone recognizes that Mondays are such a day — of a “get-through” day: Of survival; attending to each issue or problem without freaking out completely; of knowing that the day will be relentless, but that an end will also arrive, with hopes that minimization of residuals into the next day will allow for a better tomorrow.

The world has become, in many ways, more complex, of greater difficulties, encompassing a morass of problems to be solved.  It has become more difficult for many to “make a living”.  Once, a few generations ago, a single-income household could support a fairly comfortable living.  Today, a dual-income household is a necessity, and even that is often insufficient to attain the minimal accouterments of middle-class living.

Is it because more “stuff” is required?  All of those electronic devices and mechanical necessities — are we tacking on greater expenses in an endless cycle of consumption?

And so the Monday may pass, but it is when that “get-through” day becomes an endless summation of days after days after days such that the weekend merely becomes a short respite in order to recuperate for the next round of endless “get-through” days — when that happens, it may be time to consider filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS.

The human body — and mind — can only withstand a certain level of stress and turmoil, and when life become a mere haberdashery of endless get-through days where each get-through day cannot anymore be gotten-through, then it is time for a change.  For Federal Government employees and U.S. Postal Service workers who can no longer get through another “get-through” day, consideration should be given to Federal Disability Retirement.

Contact an OPM Disability Attorney who specializes in FERS Employee Disability Retirement Law, and consider whether or not you can continue to get through anymore “get-through” days, when each day has become an unending cycle of such days where you can no longer get through them.

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 Applications: Life in Bites

Life in its totality is almost always overwhelming and unmanageable; it is why we compartmentalize and take things in smaller bites; it is why we manage it by taking one step at a time.  There is, of course, another way — of simply shirking responsibilities, of having a “laissez faire” attitude; of living life with abandon without a care in the world.  But most of us are not like that.

Instead, we keep taking on greater and greater responsibilities; volunteering to help in this or that cause; trying to always make a difference and leaving an imprint of our existence upon this world.  We are given a specific allotment of time — whether for 50 years or 75, or perhaps even more — in order to make a difference in the universe we have been brought into.

No one ever asked to be born, but once here, we feel a responsibility to make a living, imprint some minor contribution, and exit this world with as little pain as possible.  But life is complex and complicated, and because of its complexities, it becomes necessary to take it in bites — of sizes which we can comprehend, embrace, and ultimately resolve.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition such that the medical condition becomes overwhelming, contact a FERS Lawyer who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and let the lawyer solve the bite-sized problems in preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

For, in the end, it is life in bites which results in the totality of a full meal to be enjoyed, and leaving the specialized field to an expert in Federal Disability Retirement Law is the only way to enjoy the rest of the meal — life after Federal Service.

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.

 

OPM Medical Retirement Benefits: Stoic Impassivity

Times are changing.  This is not a new phenomena — for, times always change.  Is it for the better?  Are we advancing linearly, or is history merely repeating itself?

The age of stoicism — that influence by Epictetus of recognizing Fate, Destiny, the things we have influence over and those things we do not — is replaced with this modern age of seeking happiness by controlling our feelings.  The “rational” part of our soul is no longer paramount; it is the “appetitive” side of our nature (borrowing from Plato and Aristotle’s distinctions) which we now allow to control the various aspects of our lives.

“Stoic impassivity” was once the norm — of the British “stiff upper lip” or the American “rugged individualism”, which are replaced with the “touchy-feely” normative imposition of society’s standards where rerouting one’s feelings may lead to greater happiness.  Likely, the pendulum swing from one extreme to the other will settle somewhere in the middle, where both the rational side of a human being and the emotional aspect are both recognized as equally part of Man’s nature.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who have worked through their medical conditions — stoic impassivity may actually work against you in preparing a Federal Disability Retirement application.

If you have “hidden” your medical conditions and continue to have great performance reviews, the U.S. Office of Personnel Management will likely question the validity of your Federal Disability Retirement application by saying, “Well, your Agency says you’re doing such a fine job — where is the evidence that shows that you cannot do your job anymore?”

To counter this, contact an OPM Lawyer who specializes in OPM Disability Retirement Law and map out a course of action which will be effective in preparing, formulating and filing a Federal Disability Retirement application which overcomes that stoic impassivity you have endured with your ongoing medical conditions.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Lawyer

 

FERS Disability Retirement from the OPM: Careful Planning

Is there any other type?  Do we ever plan, but do it carelessly?  Or, is it a redundancy to ascribe any planning as being “careful”?  Another question, of course, is the manner in which we determine the basis of such planning; i.e., is it only a retrospective judgment that is made after the fact?  In other words, do we ascribe the designated title of “careful planning” only after things have gone smoothly, and that of “careless planning” when things have not?

When the boss pats you on the shoulder and says, “Good job” and you turn and smugly respond, “Well, it’s just a matter of careful planning,” is such a response appropriate only because things had turned well?  And when it does not, do you just say: “Well, despite careful planning, there were some unforeseen circumstances that arose and all we can do is to counter them as best we can”?

There is, of course, such an animal as “careless planning” — where one has engaged in the motions of planning a future course of events, but has not taken the time to think it through, plan alternative avenues for “handling a potential conflict”, or otherwise did not meticulously prepare for the upsides and downsides of potential difficulties.  And that is the key, isn’t it — to consider the options, take into account the possibilities, and to plan accordingly?

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 position, careful planning in the preparation, formulation and submission of an effective Federal Disability Retirement application is a “must”.

We all engage in retrospective confirmation of our actions, and the single telling factor of careful planning in a Federal Disability Retirement application is when you receive an “approval” from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.  Of course, when dealing with a Federal bureaucracy, a denial does not necessarily mean that careful planning was not engaged in, but merely that further planning and careful consideration must be given in order to battle with, and prevail, against OPM.

Consult with an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law and begin to formulate the plans which will be most effective in obtaining your disability retirement benefits from OPM.

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

 

Federal Employee Disability Retirement: The fading sheen of respect

It happens over time; and, perhaps, in marriages where discovery of once-cute characteristics become irritants, when tics of unique personalities transform into obstacles, and the surface beauty of looks gradually morph into the reality of superficiality of egocentric psychosis.  But, then, a career is like a marriage, but lacking the intimacy of misguided warmth.

Disdain – does it develop instantaneously?  Does the remark of condescension and arrogance, cutting into the soul by drips and drabs, meter the suspicion that something is amiss, that someone has been whispering untold gossips of tidbits and tadpoles still swimming but lacking the croak of the frog disguised, and never to be kissed or metamorphosed into a princess of fantasy and fairytales?

When and how does loss of respect occur?  Is it in incremental clutches of shifting sand dunes, like the mirage which appears and when we reach it with thirst and desire, disappearing without but a trace of salivating want?  The scornful expression of familiarity; is there anymore a depth of intimacy the closer we become with one another, or does the essence of human depravity prevent such soul mates to bond?

Have we become cynical, to the extent that we no longer recognize the essence of human goodness, and instead – as the Darwinian paradigm of pure materialism has pervaded every crevice of our thoughts and beliefs – we have all accepted the maxim that life is but an insignificant blip on a linear scale of colossal vacuity, where the speck of life is but a mere comma in the breath of the vast universe, and how man is not just below the angels, but nothing more than mere fodder for predators to devour?

Does relevance, significance, and purpose of living – that composite and aggregation of teleological meaning – no longer apply in a world where essence is defined by material possessions and the quantitative quality of crassness of existence?

It is often asserted that respect is earned, not by mere ascription or claim to status, but by merit of behavior and ascension to knowledge; but in this day of modernity when all opinions are of equivalent moral value, and those with megaphones can drown out the quietude of truth and logical validity, the sheen of respect for all has been diminished by the mere devaluation of the essence of human worth.

A sheen upon an object is cared for and vigorously attended to; the fading of it means that the owner or caretaker has allowed it to slowly, incrementally and progressively deteriorate; and these things always lose their brilliance over time.  Not in a day, a month, or even over the course of a year, but by subtle carelessness of constant neglect.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, such that the medical condition has impacted upon the ability and capacity to shine forth like those days of yore when energy was unmitigated, future hope was always a reminder, and where the brilliance of each hour was still to come, the fading sheen of respect shown both by the agency one works for and the coworkers’ company one cherishes, may be on the downturn.

If so, that Federal or Postal employee may want to consider preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, if only because such loss of respect is reflective not merely upon the personhood of you, but upon the essence of human degradation.

In many ways, “moving on” to the next chapter of life beyond being a Federal or Postal employee is a step towards maintaining and guarding the residue still remaining of that respect which once was, but now fades in the sheen of devalued and obscured images of a person who once was, still is, but is seen as merely an object of derision, and not that worthy employee who forms the essence of a past now forgotten.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

FERS & CSRS Medical Retirement for Federal Employees: The Abridged Joyce

The extraction and extinguishment is done by unnamed others, sometimes in teams of unknown quantities, and certainly of dubious qualification of insight.  In a similar vein, writers have always complained of the artistic ineptitude of editors, and editors of the quaint verbosity detracting from the plot, narrative and captivating flow missed by writers in pursuit of “Art”; but is there ever a “middle ground” when it comes to the integrity of the soul?  But how can you cut away the content of the work, when the process itself is part and parcel of the substantive construct of the whole itself?

It would be like removing the heart itself, or perhaps even the human brainstem from the spinal cord, thereby violating the vertebral contiguity and effectively separating thought from movement, material from the spiritual, and soul from the activity which defines life itself.  Can Joyce, Tolstoy or even Scott Fitzgerald be abridged?  One can imagine the journalistic brevity of Hemingway, where incisiveness of narrative is reflected in the economy of words, but even to that, isn’t the stronger argument that the great Papa’s works are already so edited to the core that any further amputation would render the body functionally illiterate?

Yet, we accept the Reader’s Digest version of works for want of time saved and the capacity to declare a reading conquered; and others would quip, but surely it is better than just reading the Cliff Notes, isn’t it?  Not sure about that; as such cottage industries serve a different purpose — of understanding the content and context of a thing, as opposed to the enjoyment of the work itself.

But if quantity of linguistic captivation is so interwoven with the rhythmic balance of the entirety and aggregate of the whole, can an abridged Joyce be justified, ever?  Or have we accepted that, as life itself can be cut short without demeaning the relevant historicity of its linear heritage, so reading the partiality of an excised edition is just as good, somewhat as acceptable, and ultimately a pragmatic decision in terms of time saved and effort expended?

As Art reflects Life, so for Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers whose careers and lives are interrupted by a medical condition, such that the medical condition prevents the Federal or Postal employee from continuing in the chosen field and career, preparing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management allows for the abridged Joyce of a hyphenated accentuation.  For, in the end, the quip that Life mirrors Art is a limited proverb.

The Federal or Postal employee never asked for the interruption of the medical condition, but there it is — a bump in the pathway of life itself, with very little “art” to show for it.  But the narrative of one’s Federal or Postal career must be written in the Statement of Disability with care and collection of medical evidence to back it up, and the SF 3112A, Applicant’s Statement of Disability, is nothing but an artful way of deceitful cunning by a bureaucracy which attempts to subvert and deny at every turn, and the life of such a linguistic animal must be prepared well, formulated cogently, and submitted with confidence of purpose to maneuver into the maze of bureaucratic obfuscation.

The abridged Joyce will always be offered in this world of abbreviated concerns; filing for Federal Disability Retirement, whether under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, on the other hand, is the only option remaining for many Federal and Postal workers injured or ill during the Federal tenure of one’s life, and should be accomplished with the care of the expanded version, and not an edited parcel to be cut and sliced like so many narratives in the trashbin of society.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Disability Retirement from Federal Government Employment: Right Thinking

Thoughts are essentially neutral, until they interact with the greater community of ideas.  Once introduced before the judgment of others, the validity, rightness or fallacy of the substantive content can be challenged, and ultimately tested in the arena of reality.  Life can often present a harshness of consequences; ideas left in the insular universe of solitary contingencies, confined as unchallenged and ultimately deprived of consideration, are mere artifices of impotence otherwise lost in the vacuity of meaningless tropes.  “Right” thinking becomes so when thrown into the arena of a community.

The rightness itself is already presumed by the very introduction into the Wittgensteinian language game of challenging and challenged constructs; and the paradigms left in dusty drawers and closets never opened, remain as dungeons of worthless residues too timid to touch, too hesitant to open, and too afraid to reveal.  Wrong thinking, thought deprived of the fanfare of acceptance, may yet come back another day, and replace the outdated paradigms once considered paramount and of penultimate designation.

Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who need to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, often engage in the “wrong” thinking process precisely because of the inherent hesitation in changing course.  It is, indeed, a wonder and a befuddlement that the Species of Man has propagated so successfully, despite the wrongheadedness of the genetic latency as reflected by foolhardy artifices of thoughtless vacuity.

Some instances of “wrong” thinking by Federal and Postal employees:  “The medical condition will go away”; “My agency will work with me in accommodating my medical conditions”; “Tomorrow, or next week, or perhaps next month, my Agency or the Postal Service will do the right thing.”

Filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management is essentially a “neutral” matter, until the pragmatic steps of preparing, formulating and filing for the process of OPM Disability Retirement is actually engaged.  “Right” thinking is not a matter of political leanings, but of practical steps taken to secure the future of a Federal or Postal employee.  “Wrong” thinking is to think that actions necessarily follow by mere engagement of a conceptual construct.  For, remember that old adage of the philosopher who was so lost in “deep” thoughts upon the heavens above, that he fell into a cavernous ditch and died there starving under those very stars he maintained his gaze upon.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire