Tag Archives: focusing on the essential elements of your disability application fers

Federal Worker Disability Retirement: Life as Episodic Declarations

One wonders whether harm is not being perpetrated upon the youth, in the manner in which reality is presented.  Many seem to believe that reality is that which occurs on Facebook, Twitter, or some form of electronic media; and the interconnected nature of relevance in life cannot be decoupled from the episodic declarations as posted on such mediums.

For the next generation, how much more of reality will be defined by virtual reality, where “reality” itself no longer needs the predicate of “virtual”, because the subject has replaced the predicate?  Contrast such an upbringing to a generation of older workers who struggle daily with technology and its practical applications; and while we all recognize the future relevance regarding technological innovations, virtual reality was meant to be merely an escape from the daily toil of the harshness of life, and never a replacement.

For Federal and Postal Workers who face the trauma of a medical condition which can neither be avoided nor replaced, the decisions contemplated for securing one’s future become more than mere episodic declarations on the pages of social media; it is the threat to one’s existence, and the daily encounter with pain, cognitive dysfunctions, and potential surgical interventions which dominate; but for the next generation, will such harsh realities mean little until and unless they are posted on social media sites?

Federal and Postal Workers of today understand the causal connection between livelihood, work, production, career, and the difference between the compendium of the latter and that which constitutes “virtual reality”.

Filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether under FERS or CSRS, is an administrative process which goes to the heart of confidentiality, personal life, and answering of concerns about one’s future.  While some may in the end post something about it on a website, there are some things in life which should remain private and sacrosanct, and the guiding advice of an attorney and the confidentiality kept within the confines of an attorney-client relationship, should always remain.

Life, in the end, is more than an episodic declaration on a social media site; in fact, when the lights are turned off, it is the quietude of reality which continues on, and not the artificial glare of technology.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

Medical Retirement for Federal Workers: The Inauthentic Life

The converse of a life of inauthenticity, of course, is one in which there exists not a chasm between one’s appearance and the substantive content of one’s character; duplicity and a secret life are contradictions; integrity is the consonance between one’s stated being and the reality of the inner self.

The modern age promotes a life of inauthenticity.   For, with all of the social media outlets — of Facebook, the Internet, Twitter, email, web pages, etc., one can create an image of one’s self which is far different than the reality of the person whom we meet.   But more than that, who determines the truth of the content of one’s public image?   Such an impression is no longer based upon the actual encounter with the person; rather, the person who creates the image is the same person who determines the validity of such presentation.  There is thus no public vetting or verification of the image presented to the public.

Throughout civilized annotation of time, there has always been the problem of substance and appearance; indeed, the history of Western Philosophy is replete with repeated attempts at resolving the “problem” of appearance versus reality — thus, the need in modern times to unveil the reality of Being.

On a microcosmic scale, this is the problem presented to the Federal and Postal employee who suffers from a medical condition, such that the medical condition impacts one’s ability to perform the essential elements of one’s job.

The “hiding” of one’s medical condition becomes a daily necessity in the world of employability, because there is always the fear that recognition, unveiling and discovery that the Federal or Postal employee is no longer able to perform the full positional elements of the job will result in dismissal.   So the Federal and Postal employee engages in daily duplicity — all the while killing him or herself and acting “as if” nothing were wrong.

There is, of course, a difference between such an act of hiding one’s true condition, from the person who utilizes social media to present a self other than one’s “true” self — the former is borne of economic survival and necessity; the latter is a result of an unfettered ego.

In the end, the attempt to keep undiscovered a medical condition such that the medical condition prevents one from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s job, will result in a crisis point where appearance can no longer mask reality.  When that crisis point comes to fruition, then the Federal or Postal Worker, whether under FERS or CSRS, should consider filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.   Such a step will ultimately allow for the Federal or Postal employee who has been living an inauthentic life, to move forward without the need of duplicitous means.

For the rest of the world, however, the life of inauthenticity will continue to thrive, so long as the loss of public means (or desire) to distinguish between appearance and reality is left to the sole discretion of the person creating one’s own public image.

It appears that the Western Philosophical problem haunting from the time of Plato and Aristotle has finally been resolved:  there is no difference between appearance and reality; appearance is reality, and reality contains no substance other than the appearance of one’s own creation.   The Emperor not only has his clothes on; even if a child points it out otherwise, the fact that he says it, makes it so.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

 

Medical Retirement Benefits for US Government Employees: Lexical Nexus

The lexical expansion of the English language and the evolution of meaning, the transition of words and application, is a subject worth investigating.  One needs only to read a Shakespeare play to recognize that language refuses to remain static; and a culture which desires to progressively develop and advance will systematically reflect the changes of a society’s culture, ethos and normative infrastructures.

There is something to be praised for a static society — one which steadfastly refuses to alter its traditional ways; but as technology is the force of change, and as capitalism is defined by progressive advancement of development at all costs, so we are left with a Leviathan gone berserk and unable to be stopped, and language reflects such revolutionary upheaval.

For the Federal or Postal employee suffering from a medical condition, one needs only to pick up an old medical dictionary to realize the exponential explosion of identified medical conditions.  Yet, the interesting aspect of comparative historical analysis, even on a superficial level, is that the symptoms described in an old dictionary prompts recognition of all such “new” medical conditions.

This leaves one to believe that the reality of the world does in fact remain static; it is only our language which must adapt and reflect in order to adequately account for the reality of the physical universe.

In preparing a Federal Disability Retirement application with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether under FERS or CSRS, the inadequacy of one’s lexical universe may be a hindrance to the proper formulation and delineation of the nexus which must be created between one’s medical condition and the impact upon one’s job.  It is thus the lexical nexus (if one may coin a unique phrase) which must be created in order to effectively prevail in a Federal Disability Retirement application.

While having a medical dictionary may aid one in such an endeavor, the better approach is to first understand that it is not the correspondence between language and reality which matters, but that language is a universe unto itself in which man is the ultimate master of such, caught in that unreality which Heidegger attempted to unravel, and which Kant successfully bifurcated.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

OPM Disability Retirement: OWCP Doctors, and Others, Etc.

Can a doctor with whom one has been treating, but one which was obtained through the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act, Department of Labor (FECA/DOL), Office of Workers’ Compensation Program (OWCP), be an effective advocate for one’s Disability Retirement application?  Of course.

Often, however, there is a complaint that the “OWCP doctor” is not very responsive to a Federal or Postal employee’s attempt to approach the question of filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether under FERS or CSRS.  As FERS & CSRS Disability Retirement is based upon proving by a preponderance of the evidence one’s medical inability to perform one or more of the essential elements of one’s job, it is crucial that the Federal or Postal employee contemplating filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits have a supportive doctor.

While the Merit Systems Protection Board’s expanding case-law holdings continue to reinforce the idea that the most effective advocate in a Federal Disability Retirement case is a “treating doctor”, as such, medical reports obtained through 2nd opinion or “referee” consultations, or via filing for Social Security Disability benefits, may have some limitations on their usage; nevertheless, the weapons of arguing that an “independent” source of medical review also found that one could not perform one or more of the essential elements of one’s job, can be an effective substantive argument.

As for the OWCP-treating doctor, sometimes those forms completed by such a doctor will be enough to meet the eligibility requirements for OPM Disability Retirement — but that is an individual assessment based upon the uniqueness of each case.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

Medical Retirement for Federal Workers: Illness v. Disability

Everyone has experienced an illness which results in a temporary period of disability; there is, however, a vast difference between such an illness, and a medical condition which is of such severity, chronicity, and intractability, such that it prevents one from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s job.

In this day and age of cynicism and suspicion, where economic forces have pitted the private sector against Federal and Postal employees, it is important to approach a Federal Disability Retirement case in a methodological, systematic way, such that there is no question as to the viability of one’s case.  The U.S. Office of Personnel Management scrutinizes each Federal Disability Retirement application with a set of legal criteria, and if any one point of the Federal or Postal Worker’s application fails to meet the legal criteria, the Office of Personnel Management will deny the case.

In preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, whether under FERS or CSRS, it is important to ensure that one’s narrative description, the compilation of medical reports and evidence, and the entirety of the Federal or Postal Disability Retirement application, is not characterized merely as a “temporary illness”, but is unequivocally shown to be a medical condition such that it prevents one from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s job.

There is a difference between an illness of a temporary nature and a chronic and progressively debilitating medical condition; but more than that, there is a vast chasm between a fact and the effective description of the fact.  It is the latter which must be conveyed to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement: In a Perfect World

Becoming distracted from the essential focus of an activity is a problem which we all face. In preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits from the Office of Personnel Management, it is easy to become overly focused upon what the Agency is doing, will do, or potentially might engage in, which could somehow (it is thought) impact one’s Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS or CSRS.  

In a perfect world, the administrative process would proceed in a sequential, logical and methodological manner.  However, this is not a perfect world, and at each step of the long, administrative process, there are always glitches and temporary hold-ups.  The Agency often takes its time; the supervisor may make some statements which appear contrary to facts; OPM may require additional medical evidence, despite everything that needs to be filed for an approval having been submitted, etc.  

The Office of Personnel Management is a paradigm of an imperfect world.  It is an agency which has the power to be the sole arbiter of a Federal Disability Retirement application, for all Federal and Postal employees, and that power is indeed one which can determine the economic future of thousands of Federal and Postal employees.  

Making the distinction between peripheral and ancillary issues, and separating them from the essential components of what constitutes the important aspects of preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS or CSRS will help in the process.  Recognizing that this is far from a perfect world will help to ease the strain of the process.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire