Federal Employee Medical Retirement Law: The Murakami Watch

Perhaps, with the success of the movie, Drive My Car, he will finally be honored with the last accolade withheld: Nobel Prize for Literature.  Each year, thousands in his home country await with bated breath, expecting his rightful claim.  He has won every other prize; pronounced as the writer who should be honored with the highest literary acclaim; but each year, the despair felt by Murakami watchers is palpable.

Will he get it next year?  Abdulrazak Gurnah “stole” it this past year.  Sigh.

And what will the thousands who gather each year, hoping that this will be the year — what will they say if again he is robbed, left unrecognized, unexplainably ignored, shunned aside, left empty-handed, perennially stripped of the dignity which would cast him with the eternals like Hemingway, Sinclair Lewis, Pearl Buck, T.S. Eliot, Faulkner, Camus, Steinbeck, Morrison… but where is Willa Cather, the quintessential writer who wrote about the heartland of America?

There have been many, many deserving authors who never won that most coveted of prizes, and that is merely a reflection of life itself — that we don’t always get what we believe we deserve, or of what others may deserve, and it is interesting how the thing we do not have is what we yearn for most.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal Service workers who suffer from a disabling 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 Murakami Watch is probably a mere nuisance of an issue.

Health, in the end, is more important than whether or not any given author should or should not receive the pinnacle of literary prizes; and health is the one thing that, when lost, itself becomes the coveted item.

Contact a disability lawyer who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS, and while a Federal Disability Retirement annuity may not in and of itself give you back your health, it will give you the time to try and recuperate and regain that most coveted of prizes.

As for the Murakami Watch?  Sit back and enjoy it from both sides of the spectrum: If you don’t like Murakami’s writings, relish the yearly denial; and if you love his writings, wait with bated breath for this year — and the next.  At least you can enjoy the camaraderie of shared despair and loss.

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 Application: Dignity

What is it?  Is it something bestowed upon others, or that which is possessed by oneself?  Is it earned, or naturally and inherently born with?  Is there anything we must do in order to retain it, or will it always remain regardless of our action, inaction or irreverence towards it?

Is dignity a natural state of being, or is it like a cloak — the outer covering of ourselves, somewhat like the skin we live in — which can be lost over a period of misuse, abuse or neglect?  Can we apportion it, give part to someone else, have too much of it, or can it even be quantified?  Do we, in modernity, even care about preserving it, or do we just barrel through life nowadays without a care in the world?

What does it even mean, anymore, to say of someone, “He/she is a very dignified person”?  Or: “She carries herself with great dignity.”

Concepts and meanings change over time; read a play by Shakespeare without an “updated” modernization of the language used, and you will be constantly reading the footnotes to even understand the dialogue of that time.  Over time, the meaning of words evolve; “dignity” is a word rarely used in modernity, as the public display of countless indignities are exponentially multiplied on social media, where that lost concept is likely unrecoverable.

For Federal employees and Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition such that the medical condition prevents the Federal employee from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, maintaining one’s dignity in the face of a progressively debilitating medical condition is often fraught with futility.

Contact a Federal attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law and see whether or not preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal or Postal Disability Retirement application under FERS, to be submitted to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, may extend that age-old concept of both a dignified exit, as well as a future filled with an intact semblance of dignity defined.

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 Application: Appropriateness

Wives insist upon it; youth ignore it; the old display it without thought because that is the way they were brought up.

Often, people don’t even know that there is such a thing as “appropriateness”, thinking in this age of modernity that anything and everything is acceptable.  It used to be that foul language was appropriate only in bars and Sunday get-togethers for football games; nowadays, we think its cute when a toddler emits long dissertations of 4-letter words like a dog vomiting following a feast of eating leftover scraps from the garbage bin.

If you say to your spouse, “I put the scissors away,” the appropriate response to expect might be, “Thank you”, or even, “Where?”  But as spouses always confound, instead, the question might be, “When did you put it away?”  Now, the excitement of marriage is that one’s spouse should always keep you on your toes, and the inappropriateness of the question is only a reflection of that, so long as the context is misunderstood.  For, the question, “When did you put it away” is a puzzling one, and mystery is the foundation of excitement when it comes to a marriage.

However, if you query back with: “Why did you ask that, as opposed to the appropriate counter-question, ‘Where did you put it away?’”  And the answer back: “Because I looked for it an hour ago and it wasn’t there.”  Context is important in appropriateness.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition such that a Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS must be filed by necessity through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, appropriateness is a factor which always must be considered — the appropriate tone to convey; the appropriate case-laws to cite; the appropriate arguments to make, etc.  For, the cousin of appropriateness is “effectiveness”, and that is the goal to focus upon, unlike the spouse who asks the mysterious question of “when” as opposed to “where”.

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 Disability Retirement Application: Mistakes Made

Obviously, it is better to not make a mistake before the mistake is made than to have to correct the mistake after the mistake has in fact been made.

Mistakes are peculiar animals.  They come into existence out of nowhere; everyone who makes them disavows ownership; yet, like the tiger in the jungle who quietly and suddenly appears from the thickness of the vegetation, once made, it roars at you with a frightening rush and threatens to devour you before you can react.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition where the medical condition necessitates the filing of an effective Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS, the U.S. Office of Personnel Management is looking for that “mistake” which will be the basis of denying your OPM Disability Retirement application.

Best not to make that mistake; best to avoid the mistake before it is made.

Contact a FERS Disability Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and follow the obvious rule of life: Best to not make a mistake before the mistake is made; however, if you have already made the mistake, better not to make the mistake worse, and best to contact a lawyer who can correct the mistake before the Bengal Tiger devours you as the next noon meal.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill
Federal Disability Lawyer

  

Federal Disability Retirement Benefits: Toxic Associations

At some point, the “distancing” begins.  First, a subtle move — not saying “hello”; not answering a phone call; avoiding the places where the usual meetings once took place.

Then, perhaps the prefatory denials: “We weren’t really friends” (an adverb to enhance the denial, but a form of grammatical insertion which is more telling when used than not applied at all); “Oh, I didn’t know him hardly at all”.  And then the final nail to the coffin: “Who?  The name is not familiar.”  Well…how about these photographs which show that you were with him/her multiple times?

Toxic associations can range from the blatant to the subtle; but once the toxicity becomes apparent, the rats begin to abandon ship in droves.

Federal and Postal employees who suffer from a medical condition are often treated as such associations — “toxic” to the extent that they are looked upon as plague-filled individuals who are no longer a member of the “team”.  When those allegedly toxic associations begin to be felt — of coworkers ignoring you; of supervisors looking at you with suspicion, etc., it is time to consider filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits.

Your medical conditions are often viewed as contagious — not in terms of transmitting diseases, but in terms of no longer being useful to the Agency or the Postal service.

Contact a Federal Disability Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement benefits and begin to disassociate yourself from the toxic associations — theirs, not yours — and file an effective Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Lawyer

 

FERS Medical Benefits: Avoiding Bumps and Potholes

Can one tell the difference between the two?  Perhaps if you concentrate upon the jarring experience — of the sudden rise and fall, however short in the millisecond of time when the bump is encountered where the vehicle is lifted up and suddenly jolted with a sudden crash, as distinct from the unanticipated crunch of a pothole and the jarring rise when the tire groans and the shock absorbers tremble at the strain of calamity; and then the sigh of relief that the vehicle survived the impact.

Potholes go down and up; bumps go up and down; and in the split second when either are encountered, the difference felt is minuscule and essentially irrelevant, inasmuch as the concern is not as to the “type” of calamity encountered, but the consequences of that encounter.  And that is true of most difficulties involved — our interest lies not upon the initiating sequelae, but upon the problem itself, in order to attend to correcting, fixing, resolving, etc.  In other words, whether a bump or a pothole, we have to make sure that the damage done is repaired.

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 “repair” is in the application for Federal Disability Retirement, and the “pothole” or “bump” is in the manner in which the Federal Disability Retirement application is prepared.

Whether at the initial stage of preparing and formulating one’s case, or at the denial/reconsideration or the MSPB stage, it is important to avoid the bumps and potholes by consulting with a lawyer who specializes in FERS Disability Retirement Law.

Call and consult with an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law today, if only to avoid the bumps and potholes of a complex bureaucratic morass through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Disability Retirement Information: Action after words

Does the failure of an action to succeed a string of words make it automatically into a lie, or can it merely indicate a delay between thought and action, spoken words and action, or misinterpretation of words followed by non-action?  Are there phrases and afterthoughts that undermine and negate the initial statement of promised and anticipated actions, such that they “justify” the non-action?

For example, if a person says to another, “I will meet you at X restaurant at noon tomorrow,” but upon showing up at the place, the other person never appears; later, you bump into that same person and inquire about his non-appearance, and he states, “Oh, I became too busy and couldn’t come.”  Does that succeeding statement negate the previous statement; does it “explain” it; does it “supersede” it; or was it merely a statement that tells you that the person making it is rude, a bore, and someone to henceforth be suspicious of and mistrusting towards?

What if the same person had said some other things, like: “I thought better of it” or “I decided that I didn’t want to go out to lunch with you”.  As to the former, one might conclude that the person was somewhat odd; as to the latter, that he or she was unfriendly and did not deserve further consideration.  But what of the following statement: “I am so sorry. My mother was taken to the hospital suddenly and I completely forgot!  Please accept my sincere apologies!”  This last admission, of course, is the one that “justifies” the breaking of the prior commitment, and can be seen as the one where “forgiveness” and further consideration is accorded.

In every case, the action which follows after words determines the future course of how we view the person who spoke the words; yet, context and content do matter.

Take for example another scenario, where the person says, “I may be at X restaurant at noon tomorrow, or I may not.”  You show up at the place at noon and the person who made the statement does not show up.  Later, when you “bump into” the person, you say, “Why didn’t you show up at X restaurant,” and the person responds with, “Oh, as I said, I might have, but decided not to.”  Was there a broken promise?  Did the actions performed fail to “meet” with the words previously spoken?  No, and not only that – one could even argue that the person was quite true to his “word”.

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 connection between “action” after “words” is always an important consideration to take into account, for there will be many steps through the administrative process where compatibility between the two will have to take place.

Will your doctor support your Federal Disability Retirement case when the “crunch time” arrives?  (The doctor will need to).  Will your Human Resource personnel do as they say? (Likely not).  Will your supervisor timely complete the SF 3112B? (Hmmm…).  Will OPM “act upon” the Federal Disability Retirement application after “saying” that they will? (Again, hmmmm…..).

Action after words – the foundation of sincerity.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Medical Retirement for Federal Employees: Perspectives, now and then

We all have them; and, like opinions and other discarded detritus unworthy of further consideration, we can replace them with others.  It is what Plato warned against in his allegorical narrative about the shadows against the Cave walls, and how the true form of reality was presented only after we were unshackled from our lying eyes.

Perspective, now and then, or “now” as opposed to “then”, can change.  It is the “now and then” and how you interpret that dependent clause that often matters.  Is it something that comes along once in a blue moon, or a changed, modified and altered perspective that differs now, as opposed to that obscure “then” – perhaps in youth, in early adulthood or in middle age?  When does a perspective remain constant, wise, worthy and consistent with reality such that we can grasp a hold of “it” and never let go? Or, are perspectives changeable, mutable, subject to reality’s compelling of alteration based upon the fluid circumstances of life’s misgivings?

In law school, there is the classic lesson taught in Criminal Law 101, where the professor has two actors come into the class all of a sudden, struggle, argue, then a loud “bang” is sounded, and one of them runs and the other falls dead.  Then, the students are asked to write down what they saw.  The notoriety of eye-witness accounts being so unreliable is quickly shown by the disparities revealed.

Nowadays, of course, with body cameras and video mechanisms running nonstop , we are subjected to a replay of scene after scene, and perspectives can change – except, of course, as to camera angle; what is actually seen no matter the constant replay; and of when the “record” button was pushed and how much contextual evidence had been left out before, or sometimes even after.

Medical conditions, too, alter perspectives.  Sometimes, when “subjective” medical conditions such as chronic pain or psychiatric conditions of depression and anxiety are never noticed until the severity became too great to bear, the other side of the perspective has to do with believability and veracity of acceptance.

Remember that there is always a difference between having a medical condition, and proving it.  That is why in preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, the Federal or Postal employee must take into account the differing perspectives, now and then (in whichever form and whatever context) of your medical condition, how others see it, how it is proven, how your agency or the Postal facility views it all – in other words, perspectives far, wide, now and then, in preparing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

FERS & CSRS Medical Retirement: The Negative Interest Rate

In periods of economic stagnation, where mass hoarding by depositors results in a slow-down of commercial activity, rising unemployment and deflationary returns on value-for purchase in all sectors, the idea that depositors must not only deposit, but further, pay regularly to keep their money with the bank, would at first glimpse appear counterintuitive.

Perhaps that was initially the brain-child of some half-crazed Economist — that one with the frizzy hair appearing on Sunday Shows who had won the Nobel Prize for Economics many decades ago because no one quite understood what he was talking about, and believed that such insanity was either too brilliant to bypass or, more likely, to fail to appear as if one understood it would be to reveal one’s own ignorance and mediocrity (remember Schopenhauer’s adage:  “Talent hits a target no one else can hit, while genius hits a target no one else can see”).  And so it goes.

The problem with unworkable theoretical constructs, however, is that the rest of us have to live with the consequences.  In reality, the concept of “negative interest rate” is one which most people have to live with, anyway.  For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers, this is a daily occurrence — especially for those who have a medical condition, such that the medical condition impacts the Federal or Postal employee’s ability and capacity to perform all of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal positional duties.

For, like the concept of the negative rate of return, the Federal and Postal worker must not only go to work, but continue to pay for it with their deteriorating health.  Additionally, the increasing harassment, adverse actions and diminishing joy in working with hostile coworkers, managers and supervisors, must be borne with a smile and silent acquiescence, as if the feudal backdrops of self-flagellation must be enjoyed within the caverns of psychosis in suffering.

The negative interest rate for Federal and Postal employees is thus nothing new; it is a theoretical model for all Federal and Postal employees who suffer under the suffocating malaise of a deteriorating medical condition.  The real question is:  At what rate of negative returns does the Federal or Postal employee withdraw the deposit?  For, in pursuing this analogy, it is precisely that critical point where money-kept and money-lost reach a pinnacle of insufferable choices, when the Federal or Postal employee with a medical condition must consider 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.

For, when the interest charged begins to eat away at the very principal which is invested, and the rate of return negates the benefit of remaining, then it is indeed time to withdraw the deposit, and begin to prepare, formulate and file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through OPM, lest the negative interest rate which once, long ago, began as a theoretical construct in the basement of a mad economist, but which now pervades the ivory towers of polite academia with echoes of reverberating laughter once resounding from the insane asylum next door, begins to infect the four corners of a civilization which has lost its way.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire