OPM Disability Retirement Law: Place in the World

It is one of the hardest things to find.  The old metaphor of “finding a needle in a haystack” is easier than finding your place in the world.  What education to attain; of finding a lifelong partner to share your hopes, dreams and disappointments; of what career to choose; of which relationships to foster, and those to sever; and of activities worthwhile, others to abandon; these, and the global compendium of present choices and future conduits to embrace — these all, in their aggregate, result in one’s “place in the world”.

Modern life makes it difficult.  It used to be, half a century ago, that if you walked into an ice cream parlor, you had 3 choices — Vanilla, chocolate, and maybe a third.  Nowadays, there are so many flavors that it makes for paralysis of thought.  Part of the problem, beyond the infinite range of choices, is that the transience of life is available everywhere and opportunity to break the mold of generational stodginess is no longer an obstacle.  The antiquated idea that the children of X would “follow in the footsteps” of X — by tradition, by custom, by limitations of choices and “just because” — is no longer even considered.  Does anyone know what it means, anymore, to “follow in the footsteps” of your father?

Transience is to modernity as the horse & buggy was to the modern-day car, or as it is today, the EV, or electric vehicle.  It is difficult, these days, for a child to find his or her place in the world, precisely because there is no longer any stability of choices, along with an endless array of choices.  As multiple philosophers have stated many times, if everything is available, then the very concept of “everything” becomes a nothingness.

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, “finding one’s place” must be revisited, even in later life, because one’s place in the Federal or Postal job is in danger of becoming lost.

To find “another” place in the world, you may have to file an effective Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, precisely because one’s medical condition has meant a loss in your place in the world, and discovery of a new place may be a necessity.

Contact a Federal Disability Attorney who specializes in OPM Disability Retirement Law, and begin the new process of finding another place in the world before the availability of such places becomes a place of nothingness in this world of everything.

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 Employee Disability Retirement Benefits: Getting There

Where is the “there”?  What is the mode of “getting”?  Normally, we don’t even think about it, and in modernity where we rely upon a GPS tracking device, the mind has no concept of non-mechanical means of devising a pathway.

In centuries prior, whether by the direction of the sun or the constellation of the stars; or, more recently but of antiquated methodologies, we could competently use a compass or a Rand McNally map which folds out and where numbered and lettered graphs could pinpoint the roads and highways most efficient for travel.  But Google maps and other similar devices have changed all of that.  We barely give consideration to the question, “Do we know how to get there?” — other than the reflexive response of, “Oh, I’ll just punch in the address into my Smartphone”.

Yet, because of such thoughtless approaches which lull us into passivity and a false sense of security, we have become trained into become drones of monotonous routines, unable to think about the basic questions which can become complicated affairs in a different context.

“Getting There” — is an important consideration for Federal and Postal employees who are considering filing for FERS Disability Retirement benefits from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.  What needs to be done?  How does one prove one’s case?  What constitutes sufficiency of evidence?  What is the legal criteria in proving one’s case?  Is it as simple as “all that”?

Consult with an experienced attorney who specializes in FERS Disability Retirement Law before and during the process of filing for Federal Disability Retirement.  For, in the end, if you don’t know the pathway for getting there, you will likely end up lost in the morass of bureaucratic complications within a neighborhood of denials and disappointments.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement: Answering the question

What constitutes “answering the question”, and more importantly, how does one determine when its opposite occurs — NOT answering the question?  Does the former occur if the questioner fails to follow up, and does the latter become an issue if the person asking responds with, “That doesn’t answer my question,” or some such similar declarative assertion?

Take the following hypothetical:  Person A asks Person B, “So, where do you come from?”  Person B answers, “The skies of Normandy were grey on that June day in 1944.”  Now, Person A could have various responses to such a statement, as in:  1.  “No, no, I asked where you came from.” 2. “Are you telling me that you come from Normandy, France?”  3.  “That doesn’t answer my question.”  4. Or, silence, with no follow-up.

Person B, of course, could similarly respond in variegated ways, as in:  A.  “I just told you.”  B.  “Yes” or “No” (in response to the follow-up question, “Are you telling me that you come from Normandy, France?”).  C.  Silence, or “Yes it does.”  D.  Nothing further.

It may be that Person B simply has a poetic bent, and from his perspective, the mundane query was answered in a metaphorical, literary manner.  More to the point, however:  Who determines if a question has been answered (leaving aside the further query of whether the answer itself has “sufficiently” or “fully” been responsive to the question) — the one who asks, or the one who answers?

In a normal conversation, of course, the issue rarely comes about; in an argument where one or the other side, or both, are trying to get answers and defeat the other side, the heat of the moment may determine the answer to the question; and the penultimate paradigm of the question, “Who determines whether the question has been answered?” occurs in the highest form during a deposition or cross-examination in the legal arena.

Observing what occurs during a court proceeding is an interesting experience of human behavior; of the back-and-forth between counsels and the witnesses being deposed or examined, as in:  “You didn’t answer the question.”  “Yes, I did.”  “I asked you…”.  “Asked and answered.”  “Objection, the question has already been asked and answered.”  And on and on until a singular point is pursued to an exhaustive level ad infinitum and ad nauseum.

Is the issue of what constitutes an answered question somewhat akin to the question or “original intent” — i.e., that just like an author’s original intent as to the meaning of a written document is what should rule, similarly, the person who asks the question has the sole power to determine whether or not the question asked has been answered, and moreover, adequately and sufficiently answered?

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who are beginning the process of 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, these questions concerning the “answering of questions” will and should come to the forefront when confronted with the questions asked on SF 3112A, Applicant’s Statement of Disability.

Inasmuch as the U.S. Office of Personnel Management has promulgated the questions in a carefully-crafted manner, there are some inherent pitfalls and dangers in what constitutes an adequate response, a sufficient answer and the complete delineation that rises to the level of a satisfactory statement.

SF 3112A is replete with unanswered questions within the very substance of each question, and the answers you provide are best guided by an attorney who has had the experience of legal encounters previously, and who specializes in the Law of Federal Disability Retirement.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Employee Disability Information: Accuracy

How important is accuracy?  The converse of such a query, of course, is:  Is inaccuracy significant?  One would immediately posit:  It all depends.

Take the following 2 hypotheticals:  An archeological dig is conducted, and it is believed that the site of the ruins is of relevant importance concerning a time-period of “recent” history — say, during the American Revolution.  Given that scenario, the “dating” of the site should be ascertainable within a year succeeding or preceding, such that if the Lead Archaeologist declares that the event in question occurred in 1778, “or possibly in 1779, maybe as early as 1777”, we know that — given the time period in question (1775 – 1783) — such a statement conveys a fairly accurate historical context.

Now, take the same hypothetical, but this time [sic] concerning some form [again, sic] of a fossil that is deemed at least 500 million years old.  If the Lead Archaeologist declares with some hint of irony, “Give or take a few million years more or less” — what would our reaction be?  Is such a “find” just as accurate as in the first hypothetical?  Can a declaration that is numerically off by a few million years (i.e., looking at it in quantifiable terms of 24 hours in a day times 365 days in a year times 2 – 5 million years equals how many hours for those who want a graspable perspective) be called a “science” in any meaningful usage of the term?

Of course, one could argue that even within the first hypothetical, given the limited range of years that comprises the American Revolution (1775 – 1783, or a mere 8 years), to be off by a year or so is also quite an astoundingly inaccurate assessment.  But which is “more accurate” — the one that is estimated within a year, or the one that quantifies it in terms of “millions” of years?  Can one even ask the question of “more or less” accurate, when the very concept of accuracy itself denotes precision and pinpointed, undeviated marksmanship?

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who are considering filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, the question of “accuracy” can be a crucial one.  How “accurate” does one’s Statement of Disability need to be on Standard Form 3112A, Applicant’s Statement of Disability?  What “precisely” does the treating doctor have to include in the medical report?  How detailed (and therefore, accurately) does the nexus between the medical documentation and the Applicant’s Statement of Disability does it have to reflect?

In all such questions, “accuracy” is a goal to attain in preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, to be submitted to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

For, while the Archaeologist may be “off” by a quantifiable sum of years in a site-dig and suffer little to no consequences, the Federal Disability Retirement applicant must depend upon the accuracy of the law in determining benefits to secure a future yet uncertain, and such an administrative endeavor is likened more to the accuracy of the arrow that is shot towards an apple resting upon the head of a young boy, than of a declaration made that is off by a few million years, give or take, more or less.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement: Those intersecting connections

We hear all the time about the shrinking world, the smaller universe, the global village – all metaphors to help and understand, to comprehend and be able to withstand within the insanity of a world that continues to intrude, intersect and impose itself upon every corner and aspect of lives lived and daily interrupted.  It is a way for people to cope with the fact that we can no longer avoid the reality of those intersecting connections from worlds, cultures and universes that make up the daily reality of our walking lives.

The newspapers globalize each and every issue; the television and cable news outlets care little for local news unless it, too has some national consequences; and so we live with the anomaly that the only time you might hear about your own hometown is if some horrific event occurs that other people in other towns might care about.  And, even when a story is reported about an event that occurs just around the corner from the news station, headquarters or whatever manner of identifying the central place where all of the equipment, studios and personnel gather to emit their airwaves of newsfeeds, they act as if it is occurring in some distant county or country, with perhaps a bit of weeping as an afterthought with a statement like, “And it makes it all the worse because it happened just in our own neighborhood!”

The world is indeed one comprised of intersecting connections, and we voluntarily allow for those connections to make our own perspectives molded into “theirs” by inviting various cable channels into our living rooms.  Do we really have a choice?  Can we just remain ignorant and ignore the reality of the global economy, the extended village and the universal concerns of the day?  How do we live with the complexities of intersecting connections, when we can barely deal with the local problems that beset us within the cocoon of our own lives?

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, such that the medical condition begins to impact the daily ability and capacity to perform all of the essential elements of the Federal or Postal job, the microcosm of intersecting connections may well be magnified to a level where it competes with what is occurring on a more global scale.

Suddenly, the Federal Agency is moving to put pressure on you – like those competing foreign companies you hear about in the world economy.  Or, the Supervisor is no longer being cordial – somewhat like the world leader who doesn’t return calls to the President.  Coworkers no longer treat you as an equal – like nations that suddenly go rogue without explanation.  You have to file a complaint – like submitting to a U.N. vote for sanctions.

We have all been groomed and prepared to think in terms of intersecting connections, but for the Federal and Postal employee who suffers from a medical condition such that preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application becomes a necessity, it all comes back to a more local and personal connection: one’s health, and the need to focus upon one’s personal life.

No matter how global the world has become, never forget that it is the personal life of close connections that really only matters in the end.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Lawyer Representation for Federal Disability Retirement Claims: The image we hold

What picture do we carry?  No, not in one’s pocket or wallet, but in the eye of one’s mind.  Is it one that has been frozen in time; an imprint from a bygone era, a specific day in one’s past where childhood memories once floated upon a cloud of dreams and wishes?  Or, is it of more recent vintage – wrapped in layers of cynicism and denied opportunities, huddled in a corner where bitterness, wrongs and outrages of blames and byproducts of what others have “done” have emasculated and left that image we hold with disdain and dank disgust?

Where we are in life, at what stage we find ourselves; often, how we act and engage the world depends upon the image we hold of ourselves.  It is, after all, the one person whom we have no idea about.

Oh, yes, we try and fool ourselves by claiming to know ourselves better than any other, and we do this because we are the only ones who have access to that “inner” soul that speaks soliloquys and bitter asides when we believe no one else is listening.  But that is merely a subjective understanding of a subject that lives in the world of pure subjectivity; it is not, after all, an “objective” perspective and assessment of who we are.  For that, we must turn a dispassionate eye in reverse-form upon the image we hold of ourselves.

In the end, are we anything more than the aggregate of a language we have learned, and the very usage of the language we have acquired, the sense-impressions we have encountered and the image we hold – is it any more or less than what others have of ourselves?

That is why, in 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, it is important to have a greater sense of who we are when we write that “Statement of Disability” on SF 3112A.  For, SF 3112A requests certain and specific information about one’s self, the nexus between one’s medical condition and the impact upon one’s positional capabilities and essential elements of one’s job.

But the narrative we write should have a certain sense of objectivity about it, precisely because it is going to be some “other” person who will be reading it, assessing it and evaluating the sincerity and persuasive impact of the delineated discourse.

From that perspective, the image we hold of ourselves can be an impediment, precisely because it may not be an objective viewpoint, but one wrapped in the perspective of pain, turmoil, anger and despair, which is understandable, taking the medical condition into account.  Perhaps, an advocate who has a more “objective” perspective – like a lawyer who is well versed in Federal Disability Retirement law — might be of some assistance in the process.  Just a thought.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Medical Retirement from Federal Employment: If not X, then at least Y

Many such contingent annotations are in the form of:  If not illegal, then at least unethical; or, if not unethical, then at least lacking of propriety, etc.  It is the pathway to a lesser acceptance, where the focus of one’s aspiration is lowered because of the inevitability of discovering that evidence insufficient will be uncovered.  Thus can one go on ad infinitum in various but similar forms:  If not happiness, then at least some semblance of contentment; if not a soul mate, then at least someone to share my experiences with, etc.

But what if that “replacement” standard turns out to be less than acceptable over time, through duration of toleration, and during cold nights when boredom no longer excites in playing pinochle while the kids are asleep?  Or, if the infractions and constant infringements persist with no end in sight, and no appropriate definition of a violation such that there are penalties to be ascribed and consequences to be felt?  Do we then accept an even lesser paradigm, and if so, how do we know that such diminution and diminishment of acceptance won’t again be averted and avoided?  Thus, do we assert:  If not X, then at least Y; but if Y doesn’t work out, then at least Z; and so on?  When first one submits to the acceptance of a lesser standard, the proverbial horserace has already been lost.

In negotiations, in contractual disputes, in attempting to come to terms, etc., the sign first evidenced of conceding the lesser standard is the first indicator that the slippery-slope has just begun.   There are instances, of course, where the opposite is true, as well, except that we can rarely discern beneath the surface appearances.  That is what Federal and Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, such that the medical condition impacts the Federal or Postal employee’s ability and capacity to perform the essential elements of the Federal or Postal employee’s positional duties, must face and accept daily – the conflict between an aspirational paradigm of hope, and the reality of daily pain and anguish.

Thus, for the Federal or Postal employee, we have:  If there is lesser pain today, perhaps I can last through the day; If I show that I am productive this week, then maybe the supervisor will just leave me alone, etc.  As if, “lasting through the day”, or just “being left alone” for a week, a day, an hour, etc., are acceptable standards for living life?  That is why abandonment of all prior paradigms must often be employed in the journey of life, career and fortitude of endurance; we tend to cling on to categories of an “ought” no longer applicable.

For the Federal employee and U.S. Postal worker who can no longer endure the acceptance of the lesser standard when there is an alternative to the constant suffering and persistent harassment at the Federal agency or the U.S. Postal Service, fortunately, there is the ongoing benefit of a Federal Disability Retirement annuity.  Even for that, the road is still difficult and arduous, for the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, the agency that determines all disability retirement applications, does not merely “hand out” the benefit.  Like everything else in life, it must be fought for.

But, then, the Federal or Postal worker who fights for a Federal Disability Retirement benefit can retrospectively declare:  “If not the constant and daily struggle, then at least an annuity to secure my future” – the “exception” to the rule, where the lesser is in fact the greater, but is not always apparently so.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement Attorney: Out to Pasture

There is a natural proclivity by the previous generation to resist the transference of authority before its designated time; the conflict arises not as to the inevitability of such change, but rather as to the appropriate context, procedural mechanisms instituted, and the care and sensitivity manifested.  And that is often the crux of the matter, is it not?

The brashness and lack of diplomacy and propriety; the insensitive nature of youth in trying to take over before paying one’s proper dues; and a sense that the young are owed something, without paying the necessary price through sweat and toil.  And the older generation?  From the perspective of the young, they are often seen as intractable, unable to face the reality of the inevitability of generational transfer; the ideas once seen as new and innovative are mere fodder for laughter and scorn.

Such treatment of those on their “way out” are often given similar application for Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who show a need to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.  Such employees are viewed as those being “put out to pasture”, and as something less than human, partial in their worth, lacking of completeness, and needing to be shoved aside to make room for the healthy and fully productive.

Resentment often reigns; the insensitivity of the approach of agencies in their bureaucratic indifference is often what prevails; and once the exit is complete, those who were once the warriors and conquerors of yesteryear, are mere vestiges of forgotten remembrances of dissipating dew.

Always remember, however, that there is another perspective than the one which is left behind.  For the Federal or Postal employee who is put out to pasture by one’s agency, there is new ground to break, fresh challenges to embrace.  The pasture that one enters need not be the same one that the former agency considers; it is the one which the Federal or Postal Disability Retirement annuitant plows for himself, and whatever the thoughts and scornful mutterings of that agency left behind, they now have no control over the future of the Federal or Postal employee who has the freedom to follow the pasture of his or her limitless dreams.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal & USPS Disability Retirement: The Advantage of Persistence

If there are innate, underlying underpinnings of genetic inlays which provide for greater advantages in the evolutionary progression for those who consider survival of the fittest to be the teleological force behind man’s advancement, then the character trait of persistence must be one such data entry.  It is certainly a personality pre-condition for the meanest, most hostile and unrelenting individuals and organizations across the spectrum.  Like the wild dog with the unbreakable jawbone, persistence is that trait where relenting is not an option, and where right or wrong is not the standard which guides or otherwise influences the decision-making process of an individual who embraces a course of action.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who are filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, it is important to recognize and identify one’s friends, enemies, and those stuck somewhere in the middle, whether because of indifference or apathy; as well as the worth of avenues to pursue, those best left to abandonment, and what reactionary efforts should be engaged.

Federal Disability Retirement itself is a long, arduous administrative process which will require insistence, persistence and an intractable quantity of good, old fashioned stubbornness.  The identified adversary, the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, as well as one’s own Federal agency and the U.S. Postal Service, are entities known for persistence already.  The Federal and Postal employee who takes on the Goliath of the Federal system, must be prepared to endure the persistence of the opponent.  This, despite the disadvantage of suffering from a medical condition, which is and continues to be the primary underlying basis of one’s Federal Disability Retirement claim, to begin with.

Federal Disability Retirement is a benefit which allows for one’s future to be secured, and it is certainly worth “waging the good fight“. Recognition of what one must encounter; the greater advantages of the “opponent” in the fight; and the unrelenting nature of the bureaucracy; these are all elements which should be recognized at the outset, and to acknowledge that in preparing, formulating and filing for Disability Retirement benefits through OPM, there is always an evolutionary and genetic advantage in embracing the character trait of persistence.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement for Postal Workers & other Federal Civilian Government Employees: The Ronin

The Bushido Code of Honor and OPM Disability Retirement

The ronin is a masterless samurai; he is one who was released from any obligations from the daimyo, or feudal lord, who retained the samurai for protection and was paid a stipend.  The literal translation of the term is often ascribed as a “wave man”, or one who is let go to travel adrift amidst the turbulence of the ocean waves.

In modern usage, it refers to an individual who is between jobs, but can still imply vagrancy or unstable character.  For the injured/ill Federal and Postal employee, filing for Federal OPM Disability Retirement through one’s agency (if still on the rolls of the Federal agency or otherwise not separated for more than 31 days, as the law stipulates) in intermediate transit to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, or directly with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management if separated from Federal Service for more than 31 days, the pervasive sense of being like a ronin can be overwhelming.

When once the samurai was retained by a feudal lord of known standing and reputation within a geographical definition, the stature and status of the samurai was unquestioned; it was a bilateral benefit — the samurai walked with the name of the retainer’s aura about him, protecting him from slights and serious confrontations because an attack upon him would be considered as an assault upon the name of the daimyo; and, conversely, the feudal lord benefited from the fear engendered by the presence of the two-sworded protector, the warrior who follo.

With stated purpose and deliberateness, the samurai applied himself to protect and expand the vast holdings of the daimyo.  Like the Federal and Postal employee who has worked these many years for a specific agency or the U.S. Postal Service, whether under FERS, CSRS, or CSRS Offset, the samurai who suddenly loses the favor of his retainer, is set adrift.  The Federal and Postal worker often holds on to the last vestiges of favor, even when the tie and connection have been severed, precisely because to be set adrift amid the waves of life is a scary thought.

But filing for OPM Disability Retirement for the Federal or Postal worker should be considered an opportunity, and not a loss; it allows for the Federal or Postal employee the time to regain one’s health, and then to seek the retainer of choice in the private sector and make a stipend up to 80% of what one’s former position currently pays.

Federal Disability Retirement does not retain the stigma of being masterless; rather, unlike the ronin of old, it does the very opposite, and allows the Federal Government employee or Postal worker to become the master of one’s own destiny.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire