FERS Disability Retirement: Vanishing Point

It was a 1971 movie that had a cult following, about a drug-addicted war hero wagered to transport a high-powered vehicle within a specified period of time from point A to point B.  Whether the story had a discernibly rational plot or not was beside the point; the story entertained, and we gleaned from it whatever points we read into it.

That is probably one of the primary reasons why the movie gained in such popularity: people argued as to the “meaning” of the move and its ending, all the while never realizing that there was never a single answer.

Life is often like that, and perhaps that is why the movie itself gained so much attention.  The meaning we demand from our own lives is often a matter of our own lack of imagination; we ask too much of concepts which have too little to give.  As one of the character’s father stated in a Woody Allen movie, How can one know about the greater questions of the universe when “I can’t even get the can opener to work”?

For Federal and Postal employees who need to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, the “vanishing point” may differ from person to person.  What you do not want to do, however, is to let the Agency or the Postal Service to determine the timing, nature, place and context of the “vanishing point” of your career.

Consult with a FERS Disability Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and take control of your own “vanishing point” before a cult following you don’t even know about, develops behind your back.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Disability Retirement Benefits: Descending Into

Whether into the arena of the devil’s playground or into insanity, the metaphor always seems to include a descent, and not its opposite, an ascent.  Why heaven is above and hell is below has been lost for its context and underlying meaning; the perspective of “up” as opposed to “down” must somehow be relevant, but science has certainly diminished the metaphorical significance by debunking any notions about time and place.

We now know that the sun does not “rise” and “set” in the rotational movement of the earth; that from the perspective of deep space, there is no “up” or “down”, and that our place within the universe is but a small, insignificant pinhole within the context of a greater universe.  But the human story, regardless of the cold perspective provided by science of an “objective” world, is that we descend into madness, descend into hell, and descend into chaos.

Language is a peculiar animal in this way; it uses its ordinary sense within a culturally relevant context, but when that context disappears or is no longer “alive”, the old manners of usage become an anomaly of puzzles.  Yet, even with its loss of cultural significance, “descending into” somehow maintains its appropriateness when it comes to mishaps, tragedies and difficulties.

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, descending into greater chaos and difficulties may be mitigated by preparing and filing an application for disability retirement.

Consult with an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and begin the process of ascending towards another life beyond the Federal or Postal sector, thus preventing descending into a state of turmoil and possible termination.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Disability Retirement for Federal Gov. Employees: Something Less

This is a country that has preached abundance for multiple decades, a couple of centuries, and certainly for a lengthy run on the concept: Expect more, not something less.  It has been touted as the flagship of opportunity, a place where dreams come true and hope abounds.  There has never been a view towards something less, for something less is an unacceptable concept to endure.

Commercials and television ads tout that we can “have it all”; that with a pill, things will be better; that if you buy a certain product, magic occurs; and if you whiten your teeth, everyone will like you better.  But what if life occurs where something less must be accepted?

Federal Disability Retirement pays 60% of the average of one’s highest 3 consecutive years of service for the first year, then 40% every year thereafter.  It is something less than what a Federal or Postal employee makes, but certainly something more than “nothing”.  It then actually does allow you to make something more — for, on top of the 60% the first year and 40% every year thereafter, you are allowed to go out into the private sector and make up to 80% of what your former Federal or Postal position currently pays.

Of course, your medical condition has already made you realize that life has to be adapted to with something less — something less than your full health; but Federal Disability Retirement does allow for something more, as well: Of a career beyond the Federal government.

Consult with an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and obtain the counsel and guidance of something more in dealing with a medical condition which has already resulted in something less — in terms of health and your ability to perform all of the essential elements of your Federal or Postal job.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Employee Disability Retirement: The Flower and the Bee

From an objective viewpoint, they represent a disparate set of entities.  On the face of it, they have nothing in common.  Yet, it is the symbiotic relationship that allows for pollination and propagation, and the nexus between the two is a necessary relationship between the two in order for new seeds to be generated, and for a thriving environment to continue to flourish.

How that “connection” between two dissimilar entities is developed, is a natural order originating from unseen forces; but how we have come to recognize the nexus is through observation, experience and logical analysis.  Much of what we do, see and pass by are similarly connected, but of which we fail to recognize the intersections.

Filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through OPM is often like that — of being denied simply because we fail to see the logical connections.  We believe, for example, that submitting old medical records that date far back would show how long we have suffered, but fail to see the connection that it might also reveal the converse: That, despite the medical condition, we were able to successfully perform our jobs.

Consult with an OPM Disability Attorney who specializes in FERS Medical Retirement Law and recognize the nexus that must be developed; and like the flower and the bee, begin to develop the connections necessary in order to pollinate a successful Federal Disability Retirement filing.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal & Postal Disability Retirement: Proof of a Case

The standard itself is a criteria of inherent subjectivity; and, as with everything in life, it is the power of persuasion that must be employed.

Yes, of course there are a set of minimal, foundational “basics” of proof which must be submitted: Medical documentation establishing a diagnosed medical condition; the “nexus” with one’s Federal or Postal job; but beyond, there are “negative” issues which must be “proven” — of performance which has been diminishing or deteriorating; of an “essential” element of the job that has been suffering (don’t forget that being able to come to work on a regular basis is in and of itself an “essential element”, as well); of the fact that your Federal Agency or Postal facility is unable to “accommodate” your symptoms or the disability from which you suffer; and all of this to be proven by a “preponderance of the evidence”, which can vary in spectrums of subjectivity that must be taken into account.

For the Federal or Postal employee who is considering filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS, the proof of the case is many and varied, and you should consult with an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, lest the proof of the case falls short of what it takes to meet the eligibility criteria of a Federal Disability Retirement case.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

FERS Disability Retirement: Choices and Regrets

The two go hand-in-hand, although we may not necessarily see them as unalterable couplets forever ensconced and inseparable. Instead, we often make choices, then afterwards, express our regrets without having learned from the process of “choice-making”.

Choices available are often unanalyzed and nebulous; left to appear, remain inert and ignored; the “active” part of a “choice” is when we engage in the act of “choice-making” — of engaging our minds with an inactive but available “something” — a choice there, but lifeless until the activation of our choosing invigorates the inertia of indecision.

Regrets, on the other hand, are comprised by the dust of past choices made. Once settled, they remain in the hidden caverns of forgotten memories until, one day or hour, or moment of quietude when we have the time to reflect back, the unsettling of the dust collected is stirred and rises from the ashes, like the mythological Phoenix that appears with wings spread and ready for flight into our imagination and stabbing at the vulnerabilities of our inner soul.

We regret that which we have chosen; and like the past that haunts, such regrets are ever so painful when once we recall the choices available and the ones we made.

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 and position, the next steps taken — of choices being made in whether and how to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits — are important in determining whether regrets will follow.

Consult with an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, lest the choices to be made will result in regrets later recalled; for in the end, it is the choices that determine the future course of success, and not the regrets that harken back the past of lost opportunities.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

FERS Disability Retirement from OPM: The Task Ahead

We all talk in those terms, don’t we?  And when the future is no longer referred to, we begin to worry; for it is the notion of a future that keeps us alive in the present, while the past is merely a portrait of who we were and what made us today.  A person without a history is an enigma; of what we are doing presently informs others of where we are going; and of future plans — well, that reveals of character, ambitions and the motivations of “what” and “who”.

When two people meet for the first time, it is commonplace to inquire as to the other’s past.  Why is that important?  Do we glean from a person’s previous experiences the type of “character” one has?  Of the places a person has been to; of his or her upbringing; of the hardships and trials one has endured; of the relationships one has been entangled in; and of the schools attended, the education received, etc. — are these, in their aggregate, what reveals the “make-up” of a person?

Can one sweep one’s past aside and simply declare, “I have no past and nor do I want to discuss it.  However, let me tell you of my future plans — of the task ahead.”  Why wouldn’t that be acceptable?  Is it because anyone can say anything about the future yet to be done, and it is the past which remains the telltale sign of a person’s true intentions and motivations — that is, the sincerity of one’s declarations?

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 task ahead becomes clearer each day as one’s medical condition worsens: Filing for Federal Disability Retirement looms as a greater and nearer necessity.

Does the past matter?  Yes — as to the deteriorating aspect and its impact upon one’s present circumstances.  Does the present have any relevance?  Yes, to the extent of one’s current medical issues and the nexus to one’s ability and capacity to perform the essential elements of one’s job.  And what of the task ahead?  That is the true test — and for that, you should consult with an attorney who specializes in FERS Disability Retirement Law in order to prepare the most effective application for the task ahead: to formulate a strategy in order to pass muster with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

FERS Disability Retirement: Square peg in a round hole

You know the old adage; it is when a person is trying to do something that is frustratingly obvious that it cannot be done, yet persists in it despite the reality of resistance.  The truism itself by necessity requires one of three courses of action: You either cut off the edges of the square peg in order to shape it into a form where it can fit into the hole, or you smooth the edges of the circular hole and widen it such that the square peg can fit into it.  The third option is: You continue to try and force the issue.  And the fourth way is: You give up and walk away with obvious discontentment and frustration.

You want to remain friends with X, but X is a cad and no matter how much you try to change X, X will not change; and so you try and ignore X’s idiosyncrasies in an effort to extend the friendship, and remain frustrated at your attempts to change reality.  Or, you try and please everyone but end up angering all — you cannot shape the square peg or widen the hole, because there is simply too much resistance from both to alter its shape, size or essence of being.

Reality has its limits; that’s the beauty of the life we lead: virtual reality can be altered with a click of the button, but the reality of the real is that the quirkiness of life defies fullness of understanding, and the mystery of each individual denies total control.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who continue to struggle with a medical condition that prevents the Federal or Postal employee from performing one or more of the essential elements of his or her Federal or Postal job, the choices are clear: Stay and suffer; walk away and lose everything; or file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management. In such a case, this third option is tantamount to shaving the edges of the square peg in order to fit into the hole, as opposed to trying to stay when it is no longer medically advisable, or to walk away and abandon everything in frustration.

Old adages remain relevant for a reason; the truth behind the words is retained and, indeed, there is still a recognition that truth prevails.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

FERS Medical Retirement for Federal Employees: Odd man out

Medical conditions make one “feel” as the odd man out.  First, it is a sense of one’s self; something is not quite right, whether in one’s cognitive capacity, emotional upheaval, or through indicators of increasing physical pain.  Then, when it begins to impact one’s ability and capacity to perform all of the essential elements of one’s Federal employment or Postal position, that “inner” sense begins to impact upon the “outer” reality of interacting with others.

Others begin to notice the change, and over time, the inner sense of being the odd man out begins to be reinforced through the treatment by others, that indeed, not only is there an inner sense of being the odd man out, but you are treated outwardly as the odd man out.

Federal Agencies and Postal units work as collective organisms that act like unfettered packs of wild animals, leaving a version of a Hobbesian State of Nature to occur without remorse.  Fortunately for the Federal employee and U.S. Postal worker, there are laws that allow one to protect the years of service one has accrued, by filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

If you — as a Federal employee or U.S. Postal Service worker — have come to recognize that your sense of being the “odd man out” is no longer merely a subjective state of mind, but has clearly become ascertained through unbearable and persistent harassment, unfair treatment and insistent application of rules to abide by applied in a targeted manner, all because of a medical condition that is suffered through no fault of your own (or even if there can be fault attached, it is irrelevant, as an OPM Medical Retirement does not consider causality as an issue for eligibility determinations), then it may be time to consider preparing, formulating and filing an effective FERS Disability Retirement application through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

For, in the end, the odd man out is merely a recognition that it is the world around that has failed to adjust to the cruelty that accompanies an unavoidable medical condition.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Disability Retirement: The prerequisite of thought

What constitutes “thought” and fails to satisfy the allegation that one has not engaged in it?

Take the following example: A young man who is courting a young woman buys a bouquet of flowers on his way home, but stops by at her place just to say hello.  She — seeing the flowers — declares, “Oh, how thoughtful of you.”  He sheepishly smiles and nods his head, but in reality the flowers were to spruce up his own apartment.  He explains this to the young woman, and she turns a smile into its opposite — a frown — and reverses her opinion, telling the cad how “thoughtless” he is being.

In reality, he had done no such thing — he had, in fact, “thought” about it, only not in the sequence that the young woman had desired.  Yet, he is charged with being “thoughtless” — and one could argue that such a charge is applicable in that he should have “thought about it” before stopping by her place, and instead should have gone ahead and followed a route straight home.

Or, of another example: Say you are debating a point with another individual, or a group of individuals, and someone during the course of your monologue says, “It is clear that you haven’t thought about it.” What, precisely, does that allegation mean and imply?  Would it have made any difference if you had previously taken yourself into a corner, sat for an hour or two reflectively posed like the famous statue by Rodin’s “The Thinker”, chin upon knuckle in a reflective pose of self-absorption — then come back to engage in the discussion?

What if your contribution to the conversation included as great an expanse of idiocy as if you had not “thought about it” — but the mere fact that you had sat for a couple of hours, or perhaps a weeklong sojourn of contemplative solitude — does it make a difference?  Isn’t “thinking about it” often done in the course of give-and-take, during the conversation engaged, as opposed to being lost in one’s own mind?

Further, isn’t singularity and isolation of “thinking” often the wrong approach, inasmuch as you may be missing something, have inadequate information, illogical in the process because of selfish interests unrecognizable, and therefore the best kind of thinking often involves debate, countering opinions and other’s input, as opposed to the isolationism of “The Thinker”?

Would it make sense to ask a dozen or so physicists to “solve the mystery of the universe” by gathering them together, then making each sit in a corner and “think about it”, as opposed to engaging them in a “give-and-take” brainstorming session?  Isn’t much of thinking “done” by engagement with others, as opposed to a soliloquy of isolationism?  If so, then why is there too often a prerequisite of thought?

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who have “thought” about 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 first and most important step in making the “right” decision may not be by engaging in an isolationism of “thinking about it”, but by consulting with an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement law.

There is no prerequisite of thought in picking up the telephone and having an initial, free consultation with an attorney to discuss the particulars of your case, and engaging in the thoughtful exercise of considering OPM Disability Retirement by actively participating in the productive modality of thinking.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire