OPM Medical Disability under FERS: Memory

There have been many recent works of fiction involving the issue of memory — The Memory Police, by Yoko Ogawa; The Buried Giant (Kazuo Ishiguro); Tell Me an Ending (Jo Harkin); just to name three right off the bat.  Why has it become a recurring theme?

Is Google the culprit — that memory is no longer a skill cultivated; where conversations are suddenly terminated because someone has whipped out their Smartphone and looked up the name of the movie, the meaning of a word, or the line from a book of poetry?  Is rote learning even needed?  Does anyone memorize a poem, a line from a novel, or even a stanza from a rhyme?  Has an angst developed, an anxiety left unexpressed, an educational concern subtly evolved?

If we can Google anything, is there ever a need to memorize?  If we fail to cultivate the tools of memory, will we make more of the same mistakes than ever before?  Wasn’t it some philosopher who said that history will forever repeat itself because short memories spawn the ignorance needed to forget the horrors of war?  Didn’t WWII follow upon a generation who had forgotten that the “War to end all wars” — WWI — was fought to achieve an eternal period of peace?

And Vietnam was forgotten, followed soon thereafter with Afghanistan — and how the media attempted to capture a scene depicting some helicopter evacuating masses of civilians from the top of a building — that imagery of a former time, a forgotten memory, a repetition of history.  But did anyone remember?  Was there any resurfacing of memories?

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, “memory” is precisely what the U.S Office of Personnel Management wants you to forget:  That there is case-law which applies; that the law and statutory authorities require application and compliance; that eligibility for Federal Disability Retirement benefits must follow the regulations overseeing OPM’s decisions, etc.

The U.S Office of Personnel Management often needs some “reminders” of what constitutes legally-sufficient evidence for an approval; and while OPM’s memory may often fade, it is the job of a competent attorney to “remind” them, to shake their forgetfulness and to emphasize that past case-laws still apply in the current state of society’s amnesia, and thus, you should contact a competent and effective attorney to make sure that OPM “remembers” what the law is.

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 Legal Advice and Guidance: Addressing and Rebutting

Much of lawyering is artistry, as opposed to science.  As discretion is to experience, so choosing which issues to address is a matter of instinct and judgment based upon past experience.

There are those in life who are “bulls in a china shop” — an old adage which refers to people who just barrel through without considering the consequences.  Another familiar saying is: “Discretion is the better part of valor”, which can mean many things and contains some nuances, but essentially refers to judgment of action in the face of issues to be confronted.

We no longer live in the middle ages where knights and other warriors engage in duels and valor-filled defenses of honor, but the saying itself can still be relevant in terms of discretionary judgments as to which battles to confront, which wars to engage and when to retreat, or leave “well enough alone”.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers contemplating filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, the number of issues to tackle — whether preemptively at the First Stage of the process, or in rebuttal form at the Reconsideration (Second) Stage, or even before an MSPB Judge at the Third Stage of the Process — is overwhelming.

Addressing and Rebutting each and every one is almost impossible, but nevertheless must be done.  How is it done?  By breaking down the complex into the simple, into manageable numbers, then addressing the overall issues and rebutting by citing the relevant case-law.

Addressing and Rebutting — the two ends of a bookcase which constitute the essence of a winning argument.  Contact an OPM Disability Retirement Attorney who specializes in Federal Medical Retirement Law, and make sure to address and rebut the legal and medical major issues in every Federal Disability Retirement case.

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 Law: In Anticipation of…

Why do we chop and stack wood months before winter’s first blade of frost?  Why are drunk drivers arrested before they have committed any crime?  Why do we purchase life or health insurance before the contingent event has occurred, potentially throwing away hundreds of thousands of dollars on a bet which we will likely never win?

Are such actions engaged out of fear, or out of anticipatory logic based upon a rational thought process of, “What if?”  Do species aside from our own engage in anticipatory actions?

The dog who anticipates his master’s return home at the same time each day; the birds who come each season to the gardener who fills the feeder in the springtime of bursting growth; the geese who fly south; the butterflies that travel the seasonal changes — are they any less “logical” than our supposed “higher-level” reasonings?

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who are beginning to prepare an effective OPM Disability Retirement application in anticipation of what will ultimately result from an ongoing, deteriorating medical condition, the arguments proffered by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management are often along the lines of: But you aren’t there, yet.  Your agency says that you have been doing a great job — look at your past performance ratings!  Yes, but….

Contact an OPM Disability Retirement Lawyer to discuss how to rebut those argument which OPM makes in anticipation of…

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 under FERS: Virtual Reality

Say a person says to you, “I was in Japan last night.”  You had just seen him the day before, and so you might quickly calculate how many hours it would take for a flight to Japan, how long he could have stayed there and then flown back; and, perhaps you would unduly confuse yourself by thinking, “Perhaps the time-zone shift is such that yesterday is today and today is actually tomorrow’s today because of the international time-zone shift”, or some similar nonsense as that which often confuses and confounds us all (in fact, isn’t that how we always feel when we must change the clocks for that “Spring Forward” and “Fall Back” period?).

You study the person’s features and determine that he looks refreshed, without a hint of sleeplessness.  Upon coming to the conclusion that, No, it is not possible that your friend had actually gone to Japan and back, you say to him or her: “What do you mean by that?”  The person says, “Just what I said.  I visited Japan last night.  I went on a tour of Kyoto, a couple of shrines, saw the cherry blossoms and had a couple of meals and drank some sake and then went to bed.”  And you take that sliver of an opportunity — that phrase, “I visited” combined with, “then went to bed”, and with suspicious deliciousness as of a genius private detective who has singularly uncovered a mystery, declare: “Aha! You mean you were on your computer and took a virtual tour of the country!”  To which your friend says: “You can put it that way.  I say that I was in Japan last night.”

In this world where virtual reality and reality itself has been conflated, the words we use have similarly broken out of their previous state of rigidity.  Whether of “alternative truths” or misstatement of facts, the malleability of language has had to adapt and conform to the changes of reality.  Is there a distinction with a difference between a person who takes a “virtual tour” of a country, as opposed to actually, physically flying there and walking about the lost ruins of Peru?  To the question, “So, did you visit the Sistine Chapel while there?” — both and either may provide a detailed description of their independent and individual experiences, and do so convincingly; and even to the question, “Were you really there?” — the answer can be identical and yet truthful.

Yet, there are some things in life that still defy conflating virtual reality with the “real” reality — such as injuries or disabilities.  For, “virtual” injuries and “virtual” disabilities do not impact the identical experiential phenomena of the “real deal”, and for Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a real medical condition such that the reality of that condition prevents the Federal or Postal employee from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, you may want to consider filing for FERS Disability Retirement benefits.

Before you do that, however, consult with a “real” Federal and Postal Disability Retirement Lawyer, lest a “virtual” one provides you only with virtual advice, in which case it won’t be worth any more than a virtual dollar used to pay for a virtual meal.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement: The need to belong

Is there?

The brashness of youth in the misplaced arena of self-confidence when one first encounters the reality of the world after being sequestered in schools, from High School to College, but yet to be tested by the reality of the surrounding world; and so the young person says thoughtlessly: “I don’t need anyone; I will go it alone.”  And so the story goes: and like Harry Chapin’s song, “Cat’s in the Cradle”, of little boy blue’s father who never had time to belong because he was always too busy; but then, we feel most comfortable in situations of familiarity, though we may deny it.

The need to belong is not a peculiarly human need; it is shared by most other species, although there appear to be exceptions within the subset of every species, where the loner presents with contentment, and even an antagonism towards the collective community.

Is it fear that compels the desire, or an innate sense of wanting to belong (a more positive characteristic than fear)?  Can the need be quashed and dismissed, set aside and disregarded as mere convention to be ignored and diminished?

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who are considering preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, is it the loss of community that often makes one pause — i.e., the need to belong?

Certainly, the camaraderie and being “part of the team” — though one may scoff at the very idea — allowed for one’s identity to thrive within the community of Federal or Postal workers; and identity-tied-to-career and work is an important component in belonging to anything, for everyone.  Yet, the health condition itself is the very element that separated and excluded in the first place; the Federal Agency or the U.S. Postal Service is the “community” that begins to shun, to exclude, to make an outcast of the Federal or Postal employee, and that is almost an inevitability that must be faced.

At some point, that “community” called the Federal Agency or the U.S. Postal Service begins to lose its patience, and begins to restrict the use of Sick Leave or LWOP; or, when the FMLA runs out, a “demand” to return to work, to maintain a regular work schedule, etc., is imposed.

Unfortunately, the “need to belong” has to be a two-way street: The desire to belong on the part of the Federal or Postal worker, and the comity of interests shown by the Federal Agency or the Postal Service.  When one or the other begins to wane or vanish altogether, it is time to file for OPM Disability Retirement benefits and to look for other communities in which to satisfy the need to belong.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Lawyer Representation for OPM Disability Claims: Hypotheticals

Why do lawyers, above most other professions, utilize the tool of hypotheticals?  What is their evidentiary value, and in what way does it help to advance the cause of one’s case?

Say, for instance, you need an architect or an engineer (yes, yes, the humor here is that in speaking about hypotheticals, we are preparing to present one), would you be at all impressed if, after describing with precision the type of product you desire to have built, or in requesting a blueprint of a model house you are interested in, the architect or the engineer presents you with a hypothetical?

What, first of all, is a ‘hypothetical’?  It is, first and foremost, a proposition of non-existence, but with components of reality that may or may not have occurred or existed except in partial or disparate forms, delineated in an attempt to make or prove a point.  It is the tool of the attorney, just as the pencil and the blueprint are the resources of the architect, and the mathematical calculations the reliance of the engineer.  Often, it is used by means of analogical content to prove a point and to enhance the evidence gathered.

Take, for example, the lawyer who defended a bank robber.  He meets his client for the first time, and the criminal defense lawyer puts up a hand in order to stop his client from speaking, and says the following: “Now, take the following hypothetical, Mr. Dillinger: A man walks into a bank and hands a note to the teller that says, ‘Give me everything in your drawers.’  Now, that man was subsequently arrested.  No cash was ever exchanged; no weapon was ever found.  The question, then, is: What was meant by the words?  Only you know.  If, by way of a hypothetical, the man meant to obtain the contents of the teller’s drawer, it might mean 10 years in prison.  If, on the other hand, the note meant to be a lewd proposal about the teller’s anatomy beneath her undergarments, it would likely be a misdemeanor offense.  Now, Mr. Dillinger, which is it?”

Now, aside from some who would view such a presentation as somewhat unethical for “suggesting”, on the part of the lawyer, which intended “meaning” the defendant possessed at the time the note was passed, such a hypothetical is intended to denote the importance of hypotheticals within the purview of “the law”.  Hypotheticals allow for individuals to see the differences in paradigms or examples; it allows for options by way of analogy.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition where 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, hypotheticals have quite likely become like unicorns and gnomes: no longer a figment of one’s imagination, but a reality that must be faced within a surreal universe of a Federal Agency or the Postal Service that fails to possess the humanity necessary in dealing with a person with failing health.

Words of platitudes are often spoken; and, perhaps, here and there, you come across someone at your agency that actually cares.  But for the most part, such “caring” amounts to no more of a reality than mere hypotheticals; and when that realization comes about that the clash between hypotheticals and reality must be confronted, it is time to get down to the “nuts and bolts” and prepare, formulate and file a 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.

And, as an aside, you may be asking, What was Mr. Dillinger’s response to the lawyer’s hypothetical? He punched the lawyer in the mouth, stood up and said, “Jeez, I ain’t no pervert!  Of course I wanted the money!”

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

 

Attorney Representation for OPM Disability Claims: Sacrifice

What does it mean to sacrifice?  Is it a concept learned, or an act embraced during a moment of trial?  If not learned, can it occur when two strangers meet, or do the circumstances, upbringing, genetic material inherited, etc., all make the difference?  And of “learning” — can it be by osmosis, classroom lectures, or purely by observing and watching others engage in the act of sacrifice?  What compels a person to sacrifice one’s own life, well-being, wealth, the shirt on one’s back, or the last dollar in one’s pocket, and does it count at all if it is done for one’s own self-aggrandizement?

Say a person sacrificed a limb in order to save another’s life, but remained anonymous except for the inquiring reporter who wrote a piece delineating the admirable qualities of that person, etc.  We would all likely read such a story with interest and read it and share it with out children, friends, family, etc., and talk about good character displayed and the fine example shown.

What if that same sacrificing person was overheard to have said, “If I had to do it over again, I wouldn’t have done it.”  Would that change the calculus of our thoughts?  Would we think less of the person for having second thoughts?  Or, would we suspend our disbelief and say, “Oh, he’s just saying that because living without a limb must be traumatic, but he doesn’t really mean that.”?

What if, in addition to the sacrificing individual making such a statement, it turns out that the sacrificial act was just an accident and was not deliberately intended — would that further downgrade our admiration for the person?  What are the qualities that must all come together in order for an act of sacrifice to be admired and shown as a paradigm of exemplary behavior?

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 the Federal or Postal job, the intersecting issues between enduring the pain and difficulties of a medical condition, with the requirements of performing all of the essential elements of the Federal or Postal job, come to the fore when reflecting upon the conceptual paradigm of “sacrifice”.

At what point does sacrifice turn into foolhardiness?  Is it when the pain and suffering can no longer be endured and others, including the Agency or the Postal Service itself, begins initiating the process of removal or placing you on a Performance Improvement Plan?

While we may never know precisely the distinction and difference between sacrifice and self-destructive behavior — what people mistakenly obscure between “bravery” and “bravado” — what should always be kept in mind is the unmistakable fact that one’s health should be a primary concern, and that “sacrifice” should be reserved for a worthy cause.

Thus, when the intersecting ideas of “sacrifice”, “work” and “health” clash as irreconcilable differences, a divorce must occur between the three at some point, and 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 may be the best option left before throwing away the chance of an admirable act of sacrifice is lost to an unworthy cause at the price of one’s own health.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

 

Federal Disability Attorney: Beliefs beyond boundaries

There are beliefs that are presumed to be true, if not merely conventional.  Superstitious beliefs, so long as they do not interfere with daily activities and being productive, are acceptable; believing in the existence of aliens on other planets, for instance, or even that some have visited this planet, will not make a difference in the conduct of one’s life; on the other hand, if the same person believes that the alien is invisible and shadowing him wherever he goes, it might begin to impede ordinary and acceptable behavior.

There are “flat earth” associations, and one may cling religiously to the belief that the earth is flat and not round or oval, and argue vociferously that when you walk and see the horizon, there is no indication other than that the earth is flat; and such a belief would likely remain harmless and largely irrelevant.

Then, of course, there are beliefs beyond boundaries of acceptable and normative accountability, like embracing a belief in a date certain that the world will end, where such a belief results in preparation for the coming doom, spending all available resources in building and reinforcing a bunker constructed in one’s backyard, quitting one’s job in order to prepare for the inevitability of the end.  Or, of a belief that all women on Thursdays who wear blue are germ-carriers, because when Jason was five years old there was a woman who wore blue on a particular Thursday who stopped, patted him on the head and said, “Nice boy”, and on that very day, by that woman who wore blue, he became deathly ill and ended up in the hospital for two months teetering on death’s doorstep.

Is that an “unreasonable” belief to have?  Can one not make the argument that there is a “rational” basis for such a belief, and it is within the reasonable boundaries of acceptability?  Would you call such a person “crazy”?  And, so long as he goes to work each day, is productive, doesn’t harm anyone – and no woman on Thursday enters his cubicle wearing blue, he never runs out screaming, “Don’t let her touch me!” – no one would be the wiser for holding such a belief.

And of the Federal or Postal employee who refuses to take the necessary steps to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits because he or she believes that taking “advantage” of such a benefit means that he or she is no longer “worthy” – is that a belief beyond boundaries of rationality?

Yet, that is often what pauses the Federal or Postal employee from preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management – the mistaken belief that is beyond the proper boundaries that there is something inherently “wrong” with the Federal or Postal employee when you file for OPM Disability Retirement benefits, when in fact all you are doing is to finally recognize that health, life and one’s well-being are more important than killing yourself over a job that has always accorded the benefit of a Federal Disability Retirement.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Disability Retirement: When and what to file

In preparing an application for Federal Disability Retirement, multiple standard government forms must be completed.  As most Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers are under the “FERS” system (an acronym for “Federal Employees Retirement System”) as opposed to the older system of CSRS (standing for, “Civil Service Retirement System”), the applicable forms are comprised of two (2) “sets”:  The SF 3107 Series (encompassing the basic forms needed to apply for “immediate retirement”, which is part of the process of filing for Federal Disability Retirement) and the SF 3112 Series (which includes the Applicant’s Statement of Disability – SF 3112A; the Supervisor’s Statement – SF 3112B ; and the Agency’s efforts for Reassignment and Accommodation form – SF 3112D).

Both sets of forms must be completed, and it is essential that the applicant understands the complexity, involvement and onerous nature of each form, before engaging in the process of preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application.  All such forms – once completed – need to be “filed” with the appropriate agency, and this becomes somewhat tricky.

To understand the administrative process of the entire procedural phenomenon, we need to begin with the oversight of some statutory principles.  First, all Federal Disability Retirement applications must be filed with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management within one (1) year of being separated from the Federal Agency or the U.S. Postal Service.  But there are “sub-parts” to such a Statute of Limitations (so named because it limits the ability of a Federal or Postal employee from filing a Federal Disability Retirement application if one goes past the 1-year deadline).

The first “subpart” concerns the initial 31 days after separation from Federal Service.  If you, as a Federal employee or U.S. Postal employee, have been separated, but not for more than thirty one (31) days, then you should still file through your agency’s Human Resource Office or the H.R. Shared Service Office of the U.S. Postal Service, located in Greensboro, North Carolina.  As a practical matter, if the time of separation is approaching the 31st day, you should probably just wait until after the 31-day period, and instead file directly with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management in Boyers, Pennsylvania – which brings us to the second “subpart” concerning separation from Federal Service or the U.S. Postal Service:  If you have been separated for over 31 days from the Federal Agency or the U.S. Postal Service, then you are required to file your Federal Disability Retirement application directly to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management in Boyers, Pennsylvania.

Likely, if you have been separated from the Federal Agency or the U.S. Postal Service, the U.S. Office of Personnel Management in Boyers, Pennsylvania will request your SF 50 or PS Form 50, which is evidence of the actual separation from your Federal Agency (now former) or the U.S. Postal Service; but even if your former Agency or the U.S. Postal Service has not yet issued you such a form, indicating the formal separation from Federal Service, you should always make sure that you file your Federal Disability Retirement application before the 1-year Statute of Limitations has expired.

Beyond these “fundamentals” of when and what to file, are substantive and procedural issues which are too complex to extrapolate in a limited forum.  To further understand the intricacies, you as a Federal or Postal employee, if considering preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, should either exhaustively research the statutory or case-law background in preparing your Federal or Postal Disability Retirement application, or consult an attorney who is knowledgeable about issues concering the proper preparation, formulation and filing of a Federal Disability Retirement application.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Disability Retirement Law Blog: The Trifecta

The bet must be precise.   Thus, it needs to be based upon extensive research, a knowledge of each of the elements, the circumstances surrounding the process; the quality of the expected environment; whether intersecting conditions will interrupt or influence; what other unforeseen confluence of intercessions may develop.  The finishers must be predicted in sequential order.  The trifecta is therefore a management of time, knowledge, expertise and sprinkled with a bit of luck extracted from the cauldron of a witch’s brew.

Federal Disability Retirement is somewhat akin to the trifecta.  Extensive research, a knowledge of the elements to be proposed, and a delineation based upon the compilation of another trifecta — the medical evidence; the statement of disability; and the legal argumentation — must be brought together into a confluence of coordinated and comprehensive consolidation of cogency.

Preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal employee or the U.S. Postal worker is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, however, should not be based upon a spurious bet.  And, unlike the trifecta, a semblance of certainty should enter into the equation, such that the sequence of delineated data should compel the OPM reviewer to declare unequivocally and with unconcerned eloquence, “Of course!’ — and grant an immediate approval of the Federal OPM Disability Retirement application.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire