Tag Archives: federal employees and postal service issuing proposed medical removal actions

FERS Disability Retirement: The Scroll of Life

The concept of a scroll is a fascinating one — with the anticipation of unfurling deep mysteries as the contents slowly reveal themselves, unraveling the words of ancient wisdom kept hidden within the curled papyrus, seeing the light of day for the first time in centuries.

We often imagine that such an object exists for each of our lives, kept in a pigeon-hole compartment, awaiting the unraveling in parallel fashion as future events are foretold.

The scroll of life, of course, is in reality within ourselves — in the actions we contemplate, the giving of ourselves to others, and the meaning we bring to this world — in short, the works we do in the world, within the allotted time we are given.

It is no less a mystery than the actual scrolls which were written upon and stored away in deep caverns where future generations would rediscover them and read them with renewed eyes, and when discovered, are viewed with sacred awe and treated with reverence.  But that human beings, who are the living scrolls of life, should each be treated with such reverence.

For FERS Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a chronic injury or illness and who believe that their scroll of life has been impeded and interrupted because of a medical condition, it is important to understand and recognize that life is not predetermined in a hidden  scroll, already dried with the ink of predestination but is still being written every day.

What you do and how you do it is still to be determined.  As such, if a Federal employee or Postal worker needs Federal Disability Retirement for future security, you should contact a FERS Disability Pension Lawyer who specializes in Federal Medical Retirement Law, to guide and assist you in writing upon the next page of the scroll of life.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill
Attorney exclusively representing Federal and Postal Service employees to secure their Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

 

FERS Medical Retirement from OPM: Internal Turmoil

A man walks out early in the morning to retrieve the newspaper thrown onto his driveway; from across the street, you see him; he looks vibrant, confident, self-assured; you think to yourself, “Why can’t I be like him?”  A woman, well-dressed, punctual, competent, with always a smile; a sure “go-getter” who will climb up the corporate ladder with ease; you think to yourself, “Some people are just successful and happy.  Why can’t I be like her?”

The calm before the earthquake; the tectonic plates which are invisible and the above-surface topography which has been undisturbed for centuries; then, one day, the calamity occurs, and buildings collapse and countless lives are buried and lost.  What happened?

It is always the unseen, internal (or beneath-ground) turmoil which is the “true” essence of a life, a geographical location, or an entire population which masks its veiled soul.

Plato and the entire history of Western Philosophy were based upon unmasking the essence of Truth by digging beyond the appearance of Falsity.  Human Beings, particularly, have a great knack for hiding the internal turmoil which is the truth of what we are.  The smile which masks the saddened eyes; the outward appearance of confidence which is a facade for the depression and sadness within; the quiet steadiness of nature before the convulsion of the volcanic eruption; all, the internal turmoil, hidden by the falsity on surface’s artificiality.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer form a medical condition such that the medical condition can no longer be masked, it is always the internal turmoil which cannot be contained, restrained or curtailed forever.  It may be time to prepare, formulate and file an effective Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS laws, through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Contact a FERS Lawyer who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and begin the process of quieting that Internal Turmoil before it erupts like the quiet volcano waiting to reveal itself from behind the facade of contained quietude.

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.

 

Long-Term Disability Federal & Postal Employees: The Discouragement Factor

It is the sense of dispiritedness which paralyzes — of the loss of enthusiasm for something.  It is a palpable loss, one which can be discerned and calibrated, and is as real as the tree which cracks open upon being struck by lightning.  It can happen within a wide spectrum of issues and individuals — to the optimist as well as the cynic, to the perennial happy warrior and the pessimist; no one is spared.

Marriages can be destroyed by it; youthful vigor can be constrained and dampened; the tyranny of depression can be exacerbated by it; in the end, the discouragement factor often plays a greater role in failure than we often give credit for.  It can come by word or tone; by a look or a lecture; and when fragile egos are involved, the quiet face of silence in a storm of enmity may be the sullen face of discord not told.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who receive a denial from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management for a Federal Disability Retirement application, or for a termination of benefits already previously approved, contact a lawyer who specializes in FERS Disability Retirement Law.

Don’t let the discouragement factor overwhelm you.  OPM’s intention is deliberate: They want you to be discouraged, and to give up the fight.  But fight on you must, and the best strategy is to contact an attorney who specializes in FERS Disability Retirement Law.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Lawyer

 

OPM Medical Retirement for Federal Government Employees: On Hold

It is a frustrating time; that moment when you have finally reached a “real person”, and the voice quickly says, “Let me put you on hold for a moment” — and the sudden silence which ensues, or the supposedly uplifting background music that blares.  “But I —” you attempt to quickly interject; but the finger punching the button for “hold” is quicker than the “but” with which your voice tries to override, and the further frustration is again postponed as you wait silently in growing rage.

Or of a career “on hold”; or one’s life in general.

Much of being placed on hold is because of circumstances beyond your control; for, contingencies rely upon the actions of third parties, and until the dependent clauses are satisfied, movement of the primary sentence structure must remain in place, lest the comma that encircles the dependent clause fails to complete the thought that follows.

For Federal and Postal employees who suffer from a medical condition such that the medical condition prevents the Federal or Postal employee from performing all of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, the feeling of being placed “on hold” is a familiar one: Medical conditions tend to do that.  It places one in suspended animation, not allowing you to move forward with your life until there is some resolution.

Consult with an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and consider whether or not filing and obtaining a Federal Medical Retirement annuity might be the best next course of action in order to move on with your life and get beyond the “on hold” status of your present situation.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

FERS Disability Retirement: The words we never use

Are they like scraps of papers left in one’s back pocket, or in the vast chasms of oversized purses that seemingly have no bottom and certainly reveal no corners?  Do we keep them in our wallets, reserve them for special occasions, or otherwise allow them to float in the ethereal universe of unclaimed inventions?  Is there a Lost-and-Found Section within an agency entitled, “U.S. Department of Words” (or, should there be) that deals exclusively with ones that are never used?  And in a pragmatic society where utility is the key for relevance, applicability, value and worth, is there any sense to pointing out that which is never used, never recalled, rarely regurgitated and almost certainly never thought of even in the privacy of soliloquies left unstated?

The words we never use can be categorized into: A. Ones we’ve never learned about nor looked up, B. Ones we once knew when once we were serious-minded students who diligently looked up every word we knew not the definition of because we wanted to better ourselves, sound more intelligent and appear with greater utterances of sophistication at cocktail parties we were never invited to — therefore, we once looked them up, memorized them, tried to use them in sentences, and then promptly forgot them, or C. Ones we never came across, have now no interest in using them because we have become old and lazy.

There is a fourth possibility — that we “know” them but “fear” that the mere utterance of them will make a nightmare of a reality we want to avoid.  “Divorce” is one such word for kids who watch their parents fight, and wonder about their own security in the universe of unstable families; “Chronic” or “intractable” are two others — for those with medical conditions who do not want to hear their doctors talk about the consequences of certain disabilities which have developed over the past couple of years.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition where such medical conditions have now come to the point of being chronic and intractable, and thus prevents the Federal or Postal employee from continuing in his or her career with the Federal government, it is time to consider another set of words which were previously never used: Federal Disability Retirement.

Avoiding the use of words will not undo the reality surrounding the conceptual paradigms encountered; and procrastinating the thought, initiation or formulation of an effective Federal or  Postal Disability Retirement application will not make such words go away; they will remain, even if they are words which we never wanted to use.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire
OPM Disability Retirement Attorney

 

OPM Disability Retirement: If life were a story

Could the First Chapter be changed?  Who will write the final chapter?  Does memory serve the dictates of truth, or does a bit of “fudging” occur as with every narrative told, taking liberally the artistic license to its extreme?  Will it be a Dickensian opening or a Salinger’s scoffing of the details of birth?  What genre would be encompassed: Fiction; autobiography; Science Fiction; a Narrative Poem, perhaps?  Can fact and fiction be interwoven, and will the middle parts include characters long forgotten, and some individuals be left out deliberately just out of pure spite?

But that we could write the ending to our own story — of dreams that were fulfilled, loves that embraced, regrets that could be erased.  To that extent, every life would then be a work of perfection, where each chapter being written as the experience of this encounter with the world became an undifferentiated reflection of a phenomena encased in self-fulfillment: As life is lived, the story is written; as the story is told, life follows upon the very telling.

Isn’t that what “virtual reality” is; or even of being lost in one’s daydreaming, and wishing for things beyond the bubble of real life?  If life were a story and we were the authors, every dream would be fulfilled, every fantasy satisfied, every thought completed, and every sentence punctuated with exactitude.

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, the “life” that becomes the “story” is the completion of SF 3112A — Applicant’s Statement of Disability.

That is the narrative, or the slice and portion thereof, that the U.S. Office of Personnel Management will be reviewing and analyzing, and perhaps even “picking apart” if it is not told persuasively, punctuated punctiliously, and provided with clarity of purpose.  It is, indeed, the story of one’s life — a slice thereof, but one which must be a narrative in response to specific questions posed by SF 3112A.

Consult with an attorney before formulating and narrating; for the next chapter beyond, after the Federal Disability Retirement application has been filed, will be determined by how one tells the story of one’s medical condition and the nexus with one’s employment capacity.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Legal Representation on Federal Disability Retirement Claims: Proof

What constitutes it, and how do we learn of its sufficiency or relevance?

Take the following scenario: A group of boys are gathered together along with Billy, the “town bully”.  A discussion of sorts ensues — who is the toughest kid in town?  Some of the boys offer that “Dave” from across town is the meanest and toughest — a black belt in Hapkido, a state wrestling champion and a middle line backer for the high school football team.  Some others counter that Dave was once beaten up by Joe back in February, and doesn’t that “prove” that Joe is the toughest?

Then Billy suddenly stands up and everyone else becomes quiet.  He starts slowly and deliberatively pounding his right fist into the open palm of his left hand, and juts his prominent chin out in an intimidating manner, and says, “Okay!  Enough of this talk!  How ‘bout me?  Which of you weaklings says that I’m not the toughest guy in town?”

There are multiple sounds of gulps and fearful drops of sweat begin to trickle down the backs of each, and one of the other kids — a skinny little weasel with thick, black-rimmed glasses, suddenly shouts, “That’s proof enough for me!”  Following was a loud and unequivocal consensus of unanimous agreement.

In such a scenario, two things occurred: One — Billy “proved” that he was the toughest kid in town, and Two — all of the other kids took the lesson to heart that the proof of a physical presence and the threat presented was “sufficient” proof, as well as relevant as all get-go.

Thus are all of the components necessary to establishing verification of a propositional truth established: the town bully’s declarative utterance, backed by the force of a metaphorical persuasion (for one would argue that no overt coerciveness was used, but merely an innocent act of pounding one’s fist into the open palm of one’s other hand, and if asked whether Billy “threatened” anyone into declaring him as the toughest kid in town, he would and could innocently declare that there is “no proof” of any such accusation established or verified), and further reinforced by the scientific consensus of his peers and fellow students.

Proof was offered, considered, and accepted in full by a persuasive methodology of a succinct and effective form.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who are considering filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, the systematic and methodological “proof” which must be gathered and presented to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management in establishing the Federal or Postal employee’s eligibility and entitlement to Federal Disability Retirement benefits must, of course, be somewhat more sophisticated than the rudimentary — but effective — amassing of proof portrayed by Billy the Town Bully.

Of course, some of the characteristics may still be relevant — of what constitutes “effective” proof; of what works as “persuasive” proof; of what is comprised of proof itself.  But the difference is that, while proof that leads to an approval from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management should last for the lifetime of the Federal or Postal employee, “proof” for the kids who agreed that Billy was the toughest guy in town lasted only so long as the threat presented kept everyone convinced.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement Help: The Applicant’s Statement

The SF 3112A is the focal point of it all; without it, the entirety of the Federal Disability Retirement application would be incomplete, inconsequential and insidiously irrelevant.  The U.S. Office of Personnel Management can make a decision on a Federal Disability Retirement application — theoretically — without full answers or incomplete answers of the “other” forms, such as the Checklist, or even the Supervisor’s Statement; but as for the SF 3112A, The Applicant’s Statement of Disability — well, there is no getting around the fact of its prominence, importance and position of significance and relevance.

The Applicant’s Statement of Disability puts everything in its proper perspective; it tells the narrative of one’s medical conditions; it provides (or, at least should) the nexus between one’s medical condition and the essential or basic elements of one’s job, tasks, duties, positional requirements, etc., and gives a key and insight into the very foundation of the legal criteria for OPM to either grant or deny a Federal Disability Retirement application.  That being the case, why would a Federal or Postal employee leave such an important component as the content and substance of an SF 3112A up to one’s own self?

The person who suffers from the medical disabling condition can hardly be the one to properly, adequately or completely describe the key components of one’s medical condition and its impact upon one’s positional duties; for, the one who suffers by definition is the very.same person who is divorced from having an objective perspective.

Remember, always, that Federal Disability Retirement is a medically-based administrative procedure — one which must encompass and encapsulate the objectivity of medical documentation, the meeting of a legal criteria that has evolved over many decades, and an aggregation of the two combined in order to persuade the U.S. Office of Personnel Management that the compendium of one’s documented evidentiary findings rises to the level of a preponderance of the evidence presented in a coherent manner to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Does such an endeavor appear consistent with the Federal or Postal employee who is too sick to work the essential elements of one’s job?

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire