Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS) Disability Law: Life’s Frenetic Pace

Is it any more than in times past?  Without an actual reference point, lacking in contrast to historical contexts, unfounded by knowledge no longer available — is the frenetic pace by which we live any different from previous eras?

Certainly, in times prior to the industrial revolution, before refrigeration was invented, technology as part of our accepted daily lives — the focus was more upon having food sufficient to provide for our daily needs.  In the modern era, the source of food is rarely a problem; rather, if it is a problem, the concern is one of how to afford it.

Access is different from availability.  Technology itself, of course, is always touted as time-savers; that by downloading this “App” or purchasing that gadget, you’ll be left with greater time spent in lazy leisures of accommodated peace and prosperity.  Life’s frenetic pace in modernity, of course, has a price — and that price is often the cost of one’s health because of the stress we are under.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition such that the medical condition no longer allows for continuation at the frenetic pace by which we live, filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS may be the best option to take.

Contact a Federal Lawyer who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and begin the process of paring down the frenetic pace of life.

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.

 

OPM Disability Retirement for Federal & Postal Employees: Purpose

Some questions are simply too big to tackle; it is most often the “Why” questions which are part of that larger group.  Why am I…?  Why did this happen?  Why am I here?

It is the question for the curious child, the inquiring teenager, the fresh entrant into college.  Religion, philosophy — a coherent community — once answered and satisfied such questions.  In an isolating society, a loss of community, a country without a coherent identity — such questions become more pronounced.

Traumas and crisis also prompt such questions.  Medical conditions which impact one’s career can further trigger the question: What is the point?  What is the purpose?  For, it is an “event” which queries a priority of what is important in life.

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 chosen career, contact an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and begin the administrative process of getting beyond the questions of “why” by filing for Federal Disability Retirement under FERS in order to consider a future beyond the immediacy of purpose.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Attorney

 

OPM Disability Retirement for Federal & Postal Employees: The Fade of Memories

The following statement is likely not a controversial one: 2020 is/was a bad year.  The pandemic; the economic devastation for so many; the contested national election; the various shut-down orders; the caution not to gather and celebrate with even family members; the isolation; the fear; the constant drumbeat of Covid-19 victims.

These are but a few.  Years from now, will the fade of memories give us a different perspective?  Will this past year — like other years in human history — be kinder in memory than in reality? Will words posited by historians in describing 2020 have adequate force, sufficient articulation and relevant linguistic constructs such that they convey the true sense of this past year?  We shall see.

The fade of memories is an important “talent” which human beings possess.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who are considering filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, isn’t that the whole point — of trying to reduce the stress, to be able to focus upon one’s health, and to attempt to regain some semblance of sanity; and so long as the medical condition impacts one’s ability and capacity to continue working, the devastation wrought by a medical condition will remain at the forefront of one’s daily living.

Contact an OPM Medical Retirement Lawyer who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and see whether or not the Fade of Memories will not only bring 2020 as a mere passing dream, but as well to obtain a Federal Disability Retirement annuity in order to help improve one’s quality of life.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement under FERS: This Day’s Trial

It is enough to contend with; this day’s trial, as opposed to tomorrow’s, or the day after that; or of constant rumination upon yesterday’s trial, or last week’s.  Life is complicated and challenging; to worry beyond the trials of today makes it almost too much.  Between obligations of work, family, taking care of one’s elder parents, fear of the pandemic, attempting to juggle the multiple demands coming at you from every which way — beyond this day’s trial is something that must be set aside until the next dawn’s light opens one’s eyes.

For those with medical conditions, of course, the trial itself is exponentially pronounced; for, the yearning for the time when the day’s trial merely contained all of that which has been described — but without the medical condition — would be preferred on any given day.  But that this day’s trial could be without the medical condition.

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, this day’s trial always begins and ends with the medical condition itself.  Consider filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Contact a Federal Disability Retirement Lawyer, and begin to minimize this day’s trial so that tomorrow’s trial is less of a burden than this day’s trial.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Disability Retirement under FERS: A Thousand Cuts

It is the classic question which allegedly reveals something about a person’s inner psyche: Of whether you would rather die from a thousand cuts, or quickly and instantaneously?  Of course, the third option is never allowed within the hypothetical, because to include it would defeat the whole purpose of the question: Of continuing to live, or even of a “middle” ground, where it is not quite a thousand cuts and not nearly immediately.

But implicit in the “thousand cuts” alternative contains the hope of surviving, anyway, doesn’t it?  For, presumably to inflict a thousand slashes implies that it would take a considerable amount of time, as well as agony, torturous pain and unimaginable cruelty imposed; but it is time of which we seek in order to have any chance of survival, isn’t it?

Time is what we seek; that tomorrow may be different from today; that a future beyond the apparent corner may be a destiny yet unknown; that, without tomorrow, there would be no flame of hope, and it is that flame — however weak, flickering or susceptible to extinguishment at any moment — that we guard because the looming shadows await to overwhelm and dominate, like the lurking stranger behind the facade patiently awaiting to pounce once the flame dies.

We can endure much, and the time of agony can be withstood so long as there is some hope for tomorrow; and it is when tomorrow offers no hope that then we might ruefully mourn the choices we made in suffering through the thousand cuts.

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 job, the endurance suffered can be liked to the torturous spectacle of being cut a thousand times.  Perhaps Federal Disability Retirement is that very flame of hope that will keep you going.

Consult with a lawyer who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law and seek that goal of maintaining the flicker; for, without it, the tomorrow we live for may be extinguished by the other alternatives unimagined.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Medical Retirement Legal Representation: The tangible

What are the criteria by which one lives?  Is there a singular, dominant principle, as in “A Criterion” or “The Criterion”, or multiple ones; or perhaps an overarching archetype with subsets of mini-components that are all in their aggregate subsumed by a greater Platonic Form, somewhat like “Goodness” that predominates, with subtexts of lesser categories?  Or, do we just blunder through life without them and arbitrarily bump into decisions, pathways that take us hither and yonder, and never quite escape the confusions of our own making?

Some people consider themselves to be “idealistic”, and look always for the good in others; still some, pure cynics such that they suspect the worst in everyone; and most, an admixture of the two extremes in a spectrum of choices.  There are, in philosophy, the “logical positivists” who declare that nothing makes sense unless validity of a statement can be established, and such a criterion normally involves the tangible.  That which we can see, feel, hear or establish by logical methodology comprises the entirety of one’s existential reality, and there is some truth to such an approach.

It is said that in youth, much idealism begins; in middle age, some waning of hope must by necessity be accepted; and by old age, a seeping cynicism inevitably prevails.  The tangible is that which we can embrace, feel, rest our hopes upon; otherwise, the cold icicles of other people’s indifference will ultimately become the obsession of our lives.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, where the medical condition has begun to result in tangible manifestations — i.e., use of LWOP has become noticeably frequent; performance ratings are anticipated to be questionable; supervisors and coworkers have begun asking questions; but most importantly, you yourself have begun to notice a deterioration in your ability and capacity to maintain the level and pace of working at the Agency or Postal facility — the “criterion” to be applied is quite straightforward: Are you still able to perform all of the essential elements of your positional requirements?

If not, then it is time to consider preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, to be submitted to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether you are under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset.  The criteria by which we live are often complicated; it is the tangible which brings everything back down to earth from the lofty heights of idealism, youth and folly.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Disability Retirement under FERS & CSRS: Life erasing

In youth and early adulthood, we add; in later years, life erases.  Kids grow up and move elsewhere; vigor depletes; living spaces are downsized; mementoes once meaningful are discarded into a trash heap of forgotten memories; and health deteriorates, with diminution of lives by incremental depreciation both in appearance, worth and human value.

Life erasing is the natural decomposition of matter; the energy that we expended in bringing up our kids has now been complete, and transference of that vigor has become a permanent fixture.

Somehow, what we gave never seems to be enough, and no matter how much we tried, loved, cared for and nurtured, that part of all has separated and journeyed away, never to be sought in unenlightened venues of thoughtless abandonment.  It is as if life reaches its pinnacle, as the arc of never-ending geometric feats of engineering and technological defiance; and then it tapers, becomes warped and disappears into the far horizon.  What ever happened to those youthful dreams once embraced, promised, forever committed to, and now a dash of trailing dust left behind like so many of life’s erasing features?

Medical conditions and deteriorating health tends to symbolize that; for, as one reaches the pinnacle of an incomplete life (is it every complete, even at the point of oblivion, and do we not hang on for a moment more?), the tawdry reality is that we fear the vanishing of all that we have surrounded ourselves with, because we do not walk about this world with a mirror to appease our own insecurities.

Isn’t that why people amass great wealth; invoke power-plays to demand and command loyalty; hoard possessions as if they reflected quantifiable worth; and apply every cosmetic trick into believing that appearance of youth is the same as easing life’s erasing by concealing the decay beneath?  Why is it that such a natural deterioration is fought against, when the peaceful calm of wisdom tells us that life erasing is the easing of burdens amassed in youth and adulthood, and thus to be enjoyed?

Life erasing means that responsibilities garnered previously have now been alleviated, but instead of accepting that natural digression, we buy into the advertising colonnade that age is merely of deceptive appearances and a “mind set” that can be averted merely by acting more foolishly, accepting cosmetic alterations by stretching the wrinkles away, and taking on greater obligations for self-aggrandizement.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who are beset with medical conditions which prevent the Federal or Postal employee from extending a career chosen, whether the Federal employee or U.S. Postal worker is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, filing for Federal Disability Retirement is actually an acceptance of the natural course of life erasing – by the proverbial course of “downsizing”, of recognizing the medical conditions impacting one’s life and pursuing Federal Disability Retirement so that life’s erasing can attain a level of focus upon a priority long ignored:  Health.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Disability Retirement: Benefitting from doubt

What does it mean to “give” one the “benefit of doubt”?  Is it something that is granted automatically, or must one “earn it” through labor, circumstances or sheer luck?  What are the elements that lead to it, and why are some people accorded such grace while others are treated with impunity of disregard?

Take the following hypothetical:  You are at a party with friends and acquaintances; you sit with a number of people, and among them are a very close friend and confidante, as well as a mixture of those whom you somewhat dislike and otherwise consider an “undesirable” of sorts.  Well, let’s be honest – you despise especially this one person, and hope daily that that individual will die a horrible death in a slow, agony-filled manner.  You may even daydream of torture and mayhem, and how your laughter at such pleas for mercy fills your inner soul with delight so devious that it even frightens you to consider your own meanness and ferocity of unsympathetic attitude towards this one subhuman miscreant.

During a lively conversation – we shall call the “friend” X, and the one whom you wish the horrible and slow torture ending in death, Y – the former (X) says something that refers to you in an obscure and somewhat polysemic context.  You pause and consider; then dismiss it; for, as a friend, you give the benefit of the doubt that the utterance was said innocently and without any underlying meaning of harm or tincture of criticism.  Then, later, Y says something as well –  perhaps a reference to you, your group of people or your team effort in a project – and with obvious sarcasm, says, “Yeah, right”.

Now, had X said the same thing, it might have been taken as a joke; but when Y says it, you burn with inner turmoil and it is just a miracle upon a hair’s breath that you don’t throw the contents of your drink across the circular gathering, right at the individual’s face.  For Y, you failed to give the “benefit of the doubt”.  Why?  Is it because such granting of unconditional grace must necessarily be encircled by a context of relational warmth, and lack of it provides grounds for withdrawing or withholding any such unilateral mandate?  Is the spectrum of doubt’s convergence and emergence correlated to the level and extent of trust and friendship already established, or can it also occur in the vacuum of dealing with strangers?  As to the latter – dealing with strangers – we often coin as an act of the foolish or resulting from innocence and inexperience, don’t we?

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers considering the option of filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through one’s Federal agency or the U.S. Postal Service, then on to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal worker is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, the issue of giving various individuals the “benefit of the doubt” will come up in numerous contexts and encounters – from discussing one’s medical issues with a Supervisor or Manager, to informing the Human Resource Department of one’s Federal agency that one intends upon filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits; and such encounters, by necessity, will often involve that nagging feeling as to whether to grant (or not) the benefit of the doubt.

In the end, “doubt” is more likened to an intuition – like the hair reflexively standing on the nape of one’s neck as a warning against impending danger – and has more to do with our Darwinian background than any societal conventions we deem applicable, and when dealing with Federal agencies, it is often prudent to not grant that ultimate grace of unilateral conformity – and, instead, to withhold giving the benefit of the doubt in almost all circumstances.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

FERS & CSRS Medical Retirement: The speechless silence of treachery

Treachery must by definition remain speechless; and it is in the silence of back stabbing in the cloak of darkness that one’s malevolent intentions become known.  In war, the act of such duplicitous betrayal is termed as an offense justifying execution; in business, the meter of rascality on a pendulum of public opinion ranges on a spectrum of embezzlement, insider trading or a keen sense of capitalistic endurance; and in friendship, it is merely the weeping vicissitudes of emotional upheavals.  It is the faithless double-cross of dual lives; of informants tipping the scale to the advantage of one’s sworn enemy and allowing for massacre of innocents to occur.

Where does conscience fit in, and where do scoundrels scurry to when the open light of day shines the revelation of actions deceitful like the snake in the grass and the insidious cannibalism of overturning honor, dignity and a snow-white heart of an eternally blackened soul?

To turn one’s back against friendships previously thought to remain inviolable and eternally of faithful concerns; to whisper secrets into corners blocked by history, hatred and enmity of ethnic cleansing; but to engage in such treachery requires a context of fidelity and honor without vice, where a society’s norms and conventions of acceptable behavior provide the fodder for allegations of misconduct; the question is, Do we have such constraining rules of engagement, anymore, to argue for a viable charge of treachery?  Or, has language subsumed all, and opinions are elevated to the level of moral equivalency, such that the speechless silence of treachery means nothing more than the din of cackling laughter reverberated down the hollow corridors of timeless dissent?

Rare is the person in modernity who holds to obligation more than to personal desire and self-satisfaction; and if profit for one’s own constitutes the sum total of a moral foundation, why not treachery?  But then, Why in speechless silence?  Or, is there something innately refutable, instinctively discernible, in an act of malevolent double-crossing, such that even by acts of Wittgensteinian language games where contingency of meaning of verbs and adjectives still rise above the linguistic gymnastics of twisted minds?

There are dangers in lives of duplicitous bifurcations; beyond the spy who comes in from the cold, for Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who begin the process of preparing, formulating and 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 often queried is:  When, and to Whom, does one confide?  The natural follow-on question is:  Of What, and to which extent?

It is peculiar how the administrative process of Federal Disability Retirement brings out into the open light the verbal distinction between “friends” and “true friends”; or, “allies” and the counterpart, “real allies”.  There are few rules to follow when considering the dangers inherent in the speechless silence of treachery, and preparing, formulating and filing for OPM Disability Retirement benefits almost always reveals that traitorous acts are not limited to the fields of war, and silence left speechless should never result from surprise attacks engaged from corridors left unsuspected by innocent utterances.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire