Disability Retirement for Federal Employees: This Failing World

If one listens too much to the din of daily news, you can come away with the interminable conclusion that this is a failing world.

It used to be a different conceptualization; we once called it a “fallen world”, and the term “fallen” allowed for a number of explanatory references which are for many no longer relevant today, to include: of a loss of paradise; of the consequences of Adam and Eve’s actions; of a connection to the Biblical narrative; of the consequences of sin, etc.

The Post-modern terms — of a “failing economy”; a “failing Congress”; a “failed presidency”, etc. — these no longer imply or infer a connection to a theocentric universe, but instead, puts the blame squarely upon our own actions or inactions.  We once had a central theme in ascribing blame; these days, we take care to point fingers at various and multiple sources of ineptitude, thereby ending up blaming no one.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition such that the medical condition no longer allows the Federal or Postal worker to perform all of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, the issue of “failure” in a failing world often comes to the fore: Failure of the body to cooperate any longer; failure of one’s mind to tolerate the everyday stresses of the workplace; failure of one’s Federal Agency or the Postal Service to accommodate one’s medical condition; and this “failing world” in failing to work with individuals with medical conditions.

Contact a disability lawyer who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law and begin the process of initiating an effective Federal Disability Retirement application.  For, in the end, you may find that even in a failing or fallen world, the success of your Federal Disability Retirement application may provide for a future of hope in this otherwise failing or fallen world.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Lawyer

 

OPM Disability Retirement under FERS: The Fear of Meaninglessness

Our relevance is determined by others; meaning, by ourselves.  Some fear irrelevance; almost all, meaninglessness.  Whether we are truly relevant in our communities, our careers, our personal and professional lives — that is a question which is dependent upon what others think and do about our interactions with them.

The fear of relevance is often felt to a lesser extent, for we can fool ourselves into thinking that we are more relevant than we actually are.  The fear of meaninglessness, however, is a different matter.  “Meaning” relates to our own inner lives; of how we think of ourselves; of what value we attribute; the interests we have undertaken; the purpose we have shown.  The fear of meaninglessness is what compels us to act.

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, the medical condition itself — in relation to one’s job — will intersect with questions of meaning and relevance.

Consider filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits — for, the fear of meaninglessness will become evident once you consider the priorities of your life, including your time remaining; the impact of your medical condition; what you want to do for the rest of your life.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Medical Retirement from Federal Employment: Concurrent Issues

Rarely is there a single issue, whether in life generally or within the esoteric arena of legal battles.  There are sub-issues; corollary issues; issues that appear to be minor footnotes that may later present greater problems deserving wider attention; issues that seem to pervade but of which no one ever directly confronts.  The proverbial “elephant in the room” phenomena is the issue that people avoid and try to ignore.  Such issues can be averted and circumvented for a time, but they often come back to haunt and interfere.

We all selectively choose the universe we want to operate in; the problem comes about whenever we interact and interface with others (which is almost all of the time), and the “other person’s” chosen universe clashes and contradicts the one in which you want to reside.  Conflicts of interest in business settings or financial transactions; differing dreams, hopes and plans for the future when two or more people get together; contradictory expectations and incompatible roles which cannot be accommodated; these, and many more, involve concurrent issues that cannot be easily smoothed or resolved.

In Federal Disability Retirement Law, there are often parallel legal issues that the Federal Disability Retirement applicant brings to the fore — of workplace harassment issues; Performance Improvement Plans; Suspensions and Terminations; do these and other concurrent issues have an impact upon a FERS Disability Retirement application?  It all depends.

Consult with a FERS Disability Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law and discuss the concurrent issues that might — or might not — intersect and interfere with a Federal Disability Retirement application.  It is best to go into the bureaucratic morass with open eyes and a good sense of one’s chances at obtaining a FERS Disability Retirement annuity, lest the elephant in the room suddenly rampages through the kitchen where the good china is kept.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Medical Retirement for Federal Government Employees: Age-based worth

That is the ultimate hub of it all, isn’t it?  Age is always a factor, whether a society enforces protective measures, anti age-discrimination laws, or simply deny the underlying existence of the subtleties that conceal the unfairness of it all.  What is it about age that compels people to judge the worth of others based upon it as the singular criteria that determines value?

If a person is expected to be at the “end” of one’s life — say, nearing 80 or 90 years old — is that person’s worth any less than the newborn who enters upon this world with the same expectancy as that old codger’s past remembrances?  Why do we consider it an honorable gesture if, on a ship that is about to sink, the older men make sure that children (and women) are the first to fill the lifeboats and rafts before considering themselves?  Are their lives not worth of any greater, equal or identical value as the young ones who benefit from such unequal conduct?

Perhaps, in modernity, such gestures of chivalry would no longer apply, and the more current perspective of “first come, first survive” would be the rule of the day.  In a society where criteria of worth and value have been cast aside and where each individual is considered without regard to age, race, ethnicity or origin, is perhaps the better approach — but is that true in all contexts and circumstances?  The fact that there should be no discrimination based upon age in the workplace — does it mean that the same rules should apply in the sinking-ship hypothetical?

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who are considering preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, to be filed with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS offset, age must always be a consideration because of the automatic conversion to regular retirement at age 62.  On the other hand, the time that a person is on Federal Disability Retirement counts towards the total number of years of service when the recalculation occurs at age 62, and so the extra percentage points will be of great benefit no matter how old a person is.

The laws seem always to favor the younger, and age-based worth is often a consideration in engaging any and every sector of life, and that is no different in considering filing for OPM Disability Retirement benefits, whether under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Medical Retirement: The Process of Decision-making

Have you ever wondered how decisions are made?  What is the process, and who determines whether or not the methodology engaged is the “right” one or the “wrong” one?  What data is analyzed?  How is the evaluative input assessed, and to what extent does “missing” information impact the process?

On a spectrum of decision-making, there is on the lower side of an imaginary graph the “process” of choosing a flavor of ice cream.  Most would agree that it is based upon a purely subjective, appetitive basis, where the foundation of the process of decision-making (if you can even call it that on such a rudimentary level) is based upon one’s taste for a particular flavor, and whether or not one has a present desire for the intended food.

Can other factors come into play?  Of course – for example, say you just read an informative article that all flavors in category X contain a carcinogenic compound, however slight in volume, that over time may cause harm, whereas all other flavors (“Category Y”) are exempted and are considered “safe”.

Now, how much of that data enters into the decision-making process of choosing the ice cream flavor?  For, in order for such information to enter into the equation, one must first engage in the prior decision-making process upon the article itself – i.e., is it factual or does it contain unfounded opinions?  How “scientific” is the evidence?  Does the author have a conflict of interest – i.e., is he being paid for writing the article, and by whom?  Perhaps the author works for the industry that produces all Flavors Y and wants to advance a competitive edge over all Flavors X by harming or destroying, or placing seeds of doubt into the minds of customers who might consider those other flavors?

Placing weight and credibility upon the article itself must first involve a process of decision-making; then, even after such a judgment on the information received, how much of it will impact upon the decision-making process of choosing a flavor of ice cream?  One might conclude, for example, that the article on carcinogenic ingredients is pure bosh and disregard it – but even in that instance, if you chose the category of Flavors Y, can you ever be sure that you discarded it completely, or perhaps in your subconscious mind you attached your allegiance out of fear and caution?  How will you ever know?

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, the process of decision-making in preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application can be a complex and complicated one.

One’s future is involved; one’s investment in a career; the health concerns, the deteriorating capacity to continue in one’s chosen line of work, and the increasing difficulty of hiding the medical condition – all, and so much more, must be considered before initiating the process of a Federal Disability Retirement application.

With all of this in mind, of the jumble of information and the complexity of the process itself, the best and first step is to consult with an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement law, in order to gain a balanced perspective, receive all of the necessary information, and to begin to gather the foundational data necessary in order to ultimately make the “right” decision in the process.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Disability Retirement: Carpet Bombing

It is an approach meant to saturate an identified area of enemy territory especially recognized as any and all potentialities related to the central target.  The antonym of such an approach is one of targeted precision, such as drone strikes represented by guided missiles upon a specific individual or area of identified combatants.

In either case, collateral damage can be expected; the difference is that in the former methodology, the invading forces remain unconcerned and unperturbed, as it is fully expected; in the latter, the term “precision” has its narrow focus, but with the real-world recognition that general public consumption likes to think that when a targeted focus is declared dead, the rubble of destruction didn’t extend to the entire block surrounding the individual’s living area, when in fact it did and almost always does.  The concepts thus have differing distinctions; in linguistic and semantical disputes, the issue often has to do with the methodological approach of effectiveness.

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 former approach of “carpet bombing” is often the preferred choice, as opposed to the latter perspective of “precision bombing”.  That is exactly why Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who prepare an OPM Disability Retirement application often attach a massive volume and compendium of medical reports and records, hoping to “hit the target” just by sheer coverage of length and width of evidence.

But the old proverb referring to the depth of a body of water, as opposed to the appearance of naked body surface, remains applicable and instructive.  And while the skin may be the largest organ of the human body, covering some 22 square feet in space, the loss of a great portion of it still allows for survival, whereas the heart of a man must remain generally intact, lest the flow of the essence of life becomes restricted or cease altogether.

Precision in every approach and methodological conveyance is almost always the preferred mode; and while systematic formulations in an OPM Disability Retirement case may involve greater input, expansive time and attention in properly preparing the effective Federal Disability Retirement case, the preparation spent in fine-tuning every Federal Disability Retirement application and its compendium of attachments will result in limited collateral damage, with the consequence of allowing others to survive another day despite living within the vicinity of the targeted point of attack.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

FERS & CSRS Disability Retirement: Cosmic Intransigence

The complaint is most often heard in a converse manner — that because of the minutiae and daily details required of one’s energy, focus and concentration, the “larger picture” fails to be seen.  But the reverse is just as true:  we often overlook the significance of the mundane, justifying such neglect by arguing that it is the cosmic and universal principles which are of greater relevance; mere human beings within the aegis of humanity, are but flies in a smattering of a decaying universe.

And while grand principles are indeed noble, and provide for paradigms upon which notable historical movements have been based, it is ultimately the monotony of hopes and dreams, as held and projected by youth in turmoil and wanting, which create the sprinkling of golden dust blowing by to sparkle the dreariness of daily toil.  The cosmic will always be intransigent; there is nothing to be done with it, as natural laws, the fate of karmic forces, and the ethereal foundations of the universe will continue to move history, economies and world events forward, with or without the input of ordinary people.

The world is a mere playground for the wealthy and powerful, and the gods which play with the cosmos are already intransigent in their own brutal way.  But that is precisely why the personal problems of individuals amount to so much more than the aggregate of a single life; the “greater picture” will always be there; it is the seemingly insignificant life which makes for beauty and worth.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who become disheartened because of the cosmic intransigence of the “greater picture”, it is precisely the focus upon one’s own life, family, future and time yet left for greater endeavors, which should be the focus of today, the dream of tomorrow and the concentrated efforts of past remembrances.  When a medical condition begins to impact one’s capacity and ability to perform the essential elements of one’s positional duties, the Federal or Postal employee needs to consider filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, precisely because the “larger picture” will always be there, but the smaller details of necessity call for one’s effort in securing one’s place in that greater context.

When one’s health is threatened, the fragile nature of one’s being, the sense of insignificance and loss of place and relevance in society, becomes overwhelming.  But it is precisely within that context that the importance of carrying the burden forth becomes all the more relevant; if not for grander principles, then at least for one’s own self, family, and friends who care.

Filing for Federal Disability Retirement through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management may seem like another mundane detail of bureaucratic life which one must pursue, but it is what one can do in the next phase of one’s life that will matter, while all the while the cosmic intransigence of an impervious universe coldly stares back with the laughter of fate and determination to destroy.  It is up to each of us to defy such willfulness of intransigence.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement: That Song That Won’t Go Away

There is that song, tune, jingle, etc., that sticks to the mind and refuses to go away; and the circularity of the anomaly is that, the more one tries to expunge the melody from one’s mind, the greater the force of staying power; it is only when we “give in” to the persistence, and “give up” trying so hard in suppressing beyond the subconscious, that there comes a time when we can give a sigh of relief and acknowledge, “Ah, it’s gone” — and upon that very instance, it comes right back!

Such persistence of pernicious placements in the universe of cognitive capillaries are not the only conundrums in life; the general rule to be extrapolated is that, the greater the resistance, an equal and exponential quantification of insistence will reverberate.

Thus, for Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who try to avoid, suppress or otherwise ignore a medical condition, such that the medical condition begins to impact one’s positional capacity to maintain productivity and a semblance of denial, the greater force by the agency to increase the pressure, and the further exacerbation of the medical condition itself because of the added stresses of the agency, the Postal Service, etc.

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, is always an option and alternative that needs to be considered, if only to prepare for an exit and avenue out of the constant morass which fails to let up.  Prioritizing of life’s challenges involves taking affirmative steps towards a resolution.  If you don’t do it, other forces outside of your control will.  When it comes to your own health and well-being, it is the Federal or Postal employee who knows well when the time is ripe to begin the long process of preparing, formulating and filing for FERS or CSRS Disability Retirement benefits.

In the end, the song that just won’t go away is merely a melody of irritation; when it comes to the nagging deterioration of a medical condition, however, the stakes are much higher, and comparing the two is fine for metaphorical purposes, but not for the challenges which must be faced before the universe of reality and pragmatism.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement Law: Avoidance

It begins with a subtle turning away, perhaps; reduction of contact, lessening of coincidental interactions, etc.  The fact is, in an office environment, or out in the proverbial “field” of employment, if a coworker or supervisor wants to get a hold of you, they normally can, and with aggressive intent, quite quickly.  But suddenly and in a spiral trajectory of avoidance, people begin to shun and shove aside.

It’s not like the medical condition is contagious, or will by some mysterious process of osmosis spread like a viral wildfire merely by standing next to you; but that is how it is perceived and attributed.  When a medical condition impacts one’s ability to perform the essential elements of one’s job, whether the person is a Federal employee or a U.S. Postal worker, the palpable sense of ostracizing begins immediately.

Loss of productivity; being placed on a PIP; developing a reputation for being on the wrong side of an agency’s favor; these are all of the ills which portend; and the greater the degree of avoidance by fellow workers, the increasing pressure of evidence to begin the process of preparing, formulating and filing for OPM Disability Retirement.  Federal Disability Retirement is a process which can take many months, and is ultimately filed with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset.

The inevitable is written in the rosters of future events; avoidance merely delays that which will come about, anyway; and procrastination exponentially compounds the cumulative problems aggregated by neglect.  Thus does avoidance work to wound, and rarely to enhance, the fragile future of the Federal or Postal employee in securing one’s financial stability, by filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through OPM.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire