OPM Disability Retirement under FERS: The Value of Effort

Employers will often declare that merely “showing up” is half the battle; if so, showing up on time will more often than not complete the victory of that metaphorical battle.  The value of work is likely a “learned” response; in human beings, it does not appear to be an innate, natural gene which dominates.

In the animal kingdom, one often sees the male lion lazing around while the female of the species goes out and hunts for food.  The female lion — or “lioness” — appears the more athletic and quicker; somehow, that large mane and overdone hairdo seems to slow down the guys in the bunch.

But as necessity is the mother of invention, those documentaries of the wild sometimes capture the males putting in the effort when hunger pains prompt the value of such expenditure of stamina, blundering about in a sudden spurt of energy previously reflected with flies buzzing around the eyes of a sleeping giant.

Yes, there is value in effort, and for Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition such that the medical condition no longer allows you to continue in your career of choice in the Federal Government, it is often the case that the U.S. Office of Personnel Management will attempt to subvert that effort expended in trying to obtain a Federal Disability Retirement.

The question then becomes a contest between two entities expending effort: On the one side, the vast bureaucracy of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management in trying to deny you your benefits, and on the other side — you.  The value of effort — then of greater effort — may be in retaining the services of an OPM Disability Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, where the value of effort is seen in the knowledge, application and citation of the relevant legal precedents which need to be invoked in order to fulfill the value of effort.

Contact a FERS Disability Lawyer who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and see whether or not the value of effort can be concretized in the proper recitation of the law.

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 Medical Disability Retirement from OPM: Meaning

There are singular meanings, in words of individuation, separate and apart from conceptual, compound meanings; of phrases, some which may be comprised of various interpretive constructs; of entire sentences, with subsets of meanings; then of a narrative as a whole, where there may exist a wider, perhaps more “universal” meaning.

Does it exist independently of the person with whom it is encountered?  This brings up the 60s sense of Zen-ness — of whether, if a tree falls in the middle of a forest without someone to witness it, did it make a sound?  Of course, one can transpose one’s imagination and argue that there are squirrels and other living beings who would have, might have, likely did, hear the tree falling; or even of the lush plants, trees and other fauna which apparently have the capacity for memory.

It is then, the problem which Kant brought to the fore in his philosophical analysis — of the structural input we provide with out encounter with Being, where we as humans bring meaning to the encountered objective universe.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from an injury or disease and where the injury or disease impacts the ability and capacity to continue in your choice of careers, contemplation of filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the Office of Personnel Management, under FERS, is a serious step towards “switching” the meaningful apparatus of your life.

In order to prepare an effective and meaningful application for Disability Retirement as possible, you may want to contact an experienced attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law; for, in the end, it is only for a meaningful endeavor which allows us to continue down a path of meaning.

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 with Disabilities: The Inevitable Choice

We resist, and yet we know; we avoid, even though we realize; and we procrastinate, despite all indicators to the contrary.  It becomes the inevitable choice because there is really no other option to embrace.

Federal Disability Retirement is never the first choice; it is not something people wish for, dream for, accept easily; instead, it is the choice of last resort.  For, not being able to continue to work in pain or despondency, the other options are foolish ones at best and, at worst, detrimental to our own self-interest.  You can wait to be fired; you can resign and walk away with nothing; or, you can choose the inevitable choice — file for Federal Employee FERS Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Perhaps you still hold out for some miracle cure; or maybe your doctor is unwilling to complete any paperwork; or you simply are not ready to “retire”, yet.  Nevertheless, when you have run out of all other options and Federal Disability Retirement is the inevitable choice, you need to contact an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement, and begin to exercise the option of the inevitable choice, lest even that choice becomes a non-option.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill
OPM Disability Lawyer

 

Federal Employee Disability Retirement: Toughing it Out

That is what most of us do, because that is what we are expected to do.  It is a concept which is gender-neutral, in these days of modernity.  Yes, there was a time past, where the female species was given somewhat of a “pass” if she showed weakness or lack of endurance; that, somehow, and for whatever reason, our ancestors referred to women as the “weaker” gender.

No longer.  Women are just as capable (was there ever any doubt of that?); women are just as strong; women are just as X.  And so, the result is that women are also expected to “tough it out”.  Whatever the context of such an expectation, the problem with always trying to tough it out is that it can be a self-defeating proposition.  It is not always in one’s best interest to tough it out.

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 position, toughing it out may actually be harming your case.  Consult with an OPM Disability Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and consider whether or not you might want to consider an exception to the societal expectation of always “toughing it out”.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill
Federal Disability Lawyer

   

Medical Retirement for Federal Workers: The Essence of Relating

How is it that a human being — an entity quite unique among species that cannot relate — can understand, comprehend and even become comfortable with the anomalies of life’s encounters?

Other species seem to weave among and amidst their surroundings with familiar repose; certainly, intelligent dogs recognize a new couch, an unfamiliar visitor or a different dog food introduced; but in the wilds, it is the familiarity of the surroundings that make for comfort in life.

For human beings, how does one relate to the strangeness of an entity — of an alien; of a science fiction novel that introduces a world beyond; of another culture that defies every normative structure of one’s own world?  It is, more often than not, by analogies and metaphors, is it not?

We begin by “discovering” the similarities — that something is “like” the thing we know because they share characteristics x, y or z; and it is through the familiarity of similarities by which we begin to formulate an idea of understanding, then of comprehension, and finally of a feeling of comfort.

Similarly [sic], how does one convey the idea of pain to another person who has had very little experience of it?  What if that “other person” has never experienced pain?

Yes, yes, the rebuttal would be that everyone has experienced it — even if it was a scratch, a dog bite, a paper cut, etc.  But as pain is subjective, there are certainly those who have had limited experiences of a subjective phenomena, and certainly many who have never experienced a spectrum of excruciating, debilitating pain.  Or how about psychiatric conditions — of Major Depression so overwhelming, or Anxiety so paralyzing, or panic attacks so debilitating that the condition itself prevents a person from being able to perform one’s work?

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition such that an application for Federal Disability Retirement through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management becomes a necessary next step, it is the essence of relating — of how to formulate ones narrative in the Applicant’s Statement of Disability (SF 3112A) — that becomes of foundational importance in the success or failure of the application itself.

Consult with an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law before moving forward; for, the essence of relating requires not only the existence of a medical condition and its impact upon one’s ability or inability to perform one’s job, but more than that, it requires the ability to convey an understanding of the facts, the law and how the two intersect.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

FERS Disability Retirement Benefits: Lives that matter

It is a trite truism to acknowledge that, If everything matters, then nothing matters; for, in the end, if all X is Y and all Y is X, then there is no distinction between X and Y.  That is the “rub”, though, isn’t it?  It isn’t just that “All X is Y” that can stand alone — for, if some of Y is Not-X, then a distinction can still be made between X and Y, whereas if there is even a scintilla of Y that is Not-X, then X neither subsumes Y entirely and Y doesn’t lose its identity completely.

Put another way, if everything is meaningless, then meaning itself loses its very applicability.  We can get lost in such hypothetical tropes, but when it comes to human beings, it is the individual that matters, the singularity which evokes relevance and the relationship itself that solidifies what “matters”.

Thus, the recent “controversy” about whether or not certain groups of individuals “matter” in contradistinction from the greater group of the whole will always rise to the level of contentiousness and conflict so long as there lacks a “connection” or relationship between individuals.  Individuals matter only so long as there is a relationship — the “I” to “thou” connection, as opposed to a perspective of subject-to-object.  That is, in the end, how mass murderers and genocidal extermination processes engaged by nations and groups are allowed to occur — by the treatment of individuals not in the “I-thou” relationship, but as individuals treated as objects that do not matter.

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, it becomes apparent pretty quickly that the lives that matter are those who are “productive”, and the very “meaning” of one’s life is determined by the Federal Agency or the Postal Service based upon your productivity and capacity to work.

When that realization comes about, it is time to prepare, formulate and file an effective FERS Disability Retirement application, to be filed with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, and the first step in that process is to contact and consult with an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, lest the perspective of lives that matter continues to be undermined by the attitude of a Federal Agency or the Postal unit which treats the lives that matter as mere objects, and not as valued subjects.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

FERS Medical Retirement: Meeting the basic requirements

As with any endeavor, meeting the basic requirements is the minimum standard.  For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who are considering filing a Federal Disability Retirement application, it is important to understand the basic eligibility requirements in order to qualify for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset.

Here are a few: The minimum Federal Service requirement (18 months); of having a medical condition during the tenure of one’s Federal Service that prevents the Federal or Postal employee from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal position; and an inability by the agency to provide reasonable accommodations or reassignment; and some further factors to be considered, as well.

Beyond the basic requirements, of course, are the technical issues that have developed over many years and decades, primarily through statutory interpretation as expounded in court cases and decisions handed down by the U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board and the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals.  There are, moreover, legal refinements and interpretations that go beyond the “basics”, and while meeting the basic requirements is an important start, it is critical to understand the technical legal refinements which have evolved over the years. “Always start with the basic requirements; and from there, consult with an expert for further details.”

Such is the sage advice often given before involving oneself in a complex process, and Federal Disability Retirement Law is one such administrative endeavor that should take such counsel into account.

Start with meeting the basic requirements — of the minimum 18 months of Federal Service; of having a medical condition such that the Federal or Postal employee is no longer able to perform one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job; and from there, seek the advice and counsel of an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law — another “basic requirement” in preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire 
OPM Disability Retirement Attorney

 

Legal Representation on Federal Disability Retirement Claims: Plans

We all make them; whether for an anticipated journey or vacation; of a future date far in advance or nearby in time; or merely for an afternoon get-together with an associate, coworker, friend or family member — plans are essential to the coherence of a person’s daily life.

We have “planners” that we carry with us everywhere, and “planned vacations”, “planned playtime” for our kids; a “planned evening out” and meals planned well in advance even before our appetitive natures begin to rumble with echoes of hunger and delight.  There are “coordinated planned attacks” by terrorists, and “exit plans” before an assault is waged upon the enemy.  Then, there are life coaches who help to plan one’s future decisions, counselors who plan for college entrance exams and therapists who assist in planning this or that major decision.

From the moment we realized that simply reacting to the world around us was no longer an efficient methodology in maneuvering through a complex world, where the prey had become suspicious and did not stick around to remain as out next dinner course and predators began planning for counterstrategies to man’s wily peculiarities, we began to plan for the future.

However, the one thing that we have no plan for is the unexpected jolts of life’s servings that come upon one without warning or predictability, such as a deteriorating health condition that was never planned for.  Dreams that spawn plans are easily destroyed by life’s tumults that come in waves of unpredictable surges, just when we think that our “plans” are being realized.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, where the medical condition impacts and prevents the Federal or Postal worker from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, it may become necessary to alter one’s long-term plan and goal towards retiring upon reaching the “regular retirement age and time-in-service”, and instead to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS, through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset.

Medical conditions are often the one set of goal-stopping issues that skewer one’s plans; it is normally unplanned for, and is a plan-modifier that requires not only a change of plans, but a new set of plans that should include a plan to prepare, formulate and file an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, to be planned for submission to OPM, and should also include a plan to seek to counsel and advice of an attorney who specializes in such planning.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Legal Representation for OPM Disability Retirement Claims: ‘To’ and ‘For’

What would be the difference if, in the title of Willa Cather’s novel, “Death Comes for the Archbishop”, she had instead chosen to use the word “to” in replacement of “for”?  Would empires have fallen, world wars have been averted or earthquakes and other natural disasters have been delayed?

Likely, not; but would the countless minds that have encountered the novel, enjoyed its beautiful prose and admired its humanity and warmth in the telling of a tale of a time long past and a period now gone — would anyone have even noticed?  Is there a difference with a distinction: “Death Comes for the Archbishop” as opposed to “Death Comes to the Archbishop”?

Some might dismissively declare, “In any event, the Archbishop died, didn’t he?”  The subtlety of distinction — should it even be brought up?  Would that the title was of the latter instead of the former — would anyone have even noticed?  Is there a grammatical point of difference; is one “more” correct than the other?

Certainly, the “sense” that is employed exists — where, the “to” has a much more objective and distant, impersonal “feel” to it, whereas the “for” personalizes it, gives it warmth, almost as if “death” is a person as opposed to an event, and the “for” makes it a personal possessive as opposed to the “to” that connotes an arms-length relationship between the object and subject.

Are the prepositions interchangeable?  If a person is stricken with grief over a tragedy and a close friend arrives to provide comfort and says, “I came for you”, it would be a statement that would be considered heart-warming.  If, under the same circumstances, the person instead declared, “I came to you” — would we, again, mark the difference or even notice?  It is, certainly, a statement of objective fact — the person objectively traveled and arrived at destination Point B from origination Point A.

Again, the subtle distinction — the “for” connotes a greater personal warmth as opposed to a simple statement of fact.  It is, in the end, the subtle differences that sometimes makes the entirety of a distinction that makes the difference.

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 distinction between “to” and “for” is often the difference between living a life worthwhile and one that remains cold and impervious.

Human beings are often careless in their personal relationships; and the test of such caring or uncaring attitudes will often surface when a person is going through a trial or tragedy, and preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the complex and impersonal administrative process of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, will often test the workplace relationships because of the self-interested motives that exist with agencies and the Postal Service.

Some coworkers, supervisors and others will distance themselves immediately, and they will remain in the category of the “to” people; while other coworkers, managers, supervisors, etc., will surprisingly be there “for” you.  Willa Cather chose the preposition “for” over the “to” because she was an excellent author, and it is the excellence of a human being that is revealed in the subtle differences we often overlook.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Disability Retirement Representation: Comparisons

We all make them.  We may deny doing so, engaging it, silently participating in the informal sport of it all, but we nevertheless join in — that judging eye for the look, the appearance, or maybe sometimes even the substance.  Comparisons are performed each and every day of our lives — by ourselves; by others; publicly or in the insular universe of private thoughts.  Appearance; demeanor, voice inflections; vocabulary used; kindness offered and actions interpreted; there are multiple and almost endless criteria upon which they are made.

Is he boring?  In comparison to what and whom?  If there is no “other” to compare X to, how can one ascertain the value, worth or interest; for it is precisely “against Y” that X can have any comparative value.  Does my dog behave better than other dogs, most dogs, some dogs?  Does my husband act in a kind manner, a polite way, with a gentlemanly pose, in comparison with X, Y or Z?  Does my house look presentable or an eyesore in comparison to others in the neighborhood?  Is the performance of X superior, outstanding, minimal or marginal — and if so, or of fitting any of the categories, in comparison to what or whom?

When a predator looks for a prey, is not the first instinct to observe the comparisons before the chase begins — of vulnerability; of weaknesses displayed or quickness revealed; of exhaustion, a limp, an indicator that it may not outrun as quickly as the others in the sprint for life?  And of human predators who prey upon children, the sick, the elderly — why do we focus so much upon the characteristics of the criminal as opposed to the archetypal manifestations of personalities that reveal the underlying weaknesses often unobserved but clearly and comparatively obvious?  And why do we feel good about ourselves when we compare our misery to another and find ours wanting?

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 position or job, the act of engaging in comparative analysis is an inevitability.

Comparing yourself to who you were a year ago, two years, a month or a day; comparing your physical or cognitive decline and deterioration to the ghost of past remembrances of that figure who was full of vitality and vigor; and comparing what you accomplished 6 months ago, a year, and projecting hence into the future and determining that the chronic medical condition cannot for much longer endure the inconsistency with the positional duties required by your agency.

And don’t think that your agency, the Supervisors and Managers aren’t doing what we all do — making comparisons.  And it is based upon those comparisons that the predator acts and pounces, when the vulnerable least expect it and often feel secure within the insularity of their own ignorance.

That is why preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, to be submitted to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, is important to consider early and systematically, lest the comparison made by others becomes the basis for a PIP or a subsequent termination.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire