Disability Retirement from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management: Expunging the Chatter of Irrelevance

The bombardment of information is a constant and persistent drone; what constitutes newsworthy items, priority of information, and sifting through the quantitative morass of irrelevance, is a daily toil which requires expenditure of human stamina and sheer will power which grinds and depletes the soul of needed quietude.

This is a complex world.  The blare and glare of “relevant” information fights for our attention daily, if not every minute of each hour; if not every second and fraction thereof; and sometime in the recent past, the accepted bifurcation between news, entertainment, and personal opinion no longer followed the conventional pathway of self-evident declarations, and it became the norm to cross the boundaries of propriety.

Now, it is up to each individual to unravel the composite fictions created by the quantitative juggernaut of information overload. Information is there for the public; that is a good thing.  But to recognize and divide relevant information from the chatter of irrelevance — that is the key to maintaining one’s sanity.

For Federal and Postal employees who are contemplating filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether one is under FERS or CSRS, the tripartite pressure of information overload confronts one with an unavoidable immediacy: Trying to maintain one’s job while simultaneously fending off any adverse actions from the agency; trying to prepare a Federal Disability Retirement application without undue dissemination of sensitive medical information to those not necessary to the process, and thus attempting to retain a certain level of privacy; and trying to find relevant information from the vast storage of quantitative overload, and sifting it down to that which is relevant, as opposed to the chatter of irrelevance.

The chatter of irrelevance, quite simply defined, is that which makes a lot of noise, but is substantively devoid of useful content.

Compare, contrast, and analyze; but in the end, the age-old merchant’s adage of “buyer, beware,” should still be applied when accepting information for such an important step as preparing, formulating, and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal Worker is under FERS or CSRS.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Gov. and USPS Disability Retirement: Information Overload

Before we even became comfortable with the assignation of the term, “information age“, we were informed that we have already entered into the “post information age”; one has no idea where one stands today because of the lightning speed of our times.

Whether human nature can withstand the onslaught of such rapidity and volume of the multiplicity of component data; of what consequence we are creating in our very midst; whether destruction of societal relationships and connections are truly best for the survival and continuation of our species; all of these concerns matter little.  For, like the story of the complex machine which was once created, and for which Man forgot to build an “off switch”, the ever-forward trajectory of the age of infinite information encroaches whether we desire it or not.

Technology is dependent upon the newness of the next generation of dazzling whistles.  The desire for greater enhancement of stimuli is wired within the human psyche; and like the rat which becomes addicted and comes back for more, we require the overload.

For the Federal and Postal employee who is beset with a medical condition, such that the medical condition prevents one from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s job, the process of gathering, incorporating, and applying the information concerning Federal Disability Retirement and the bureaucratic process of obtaining the benefit can be, at best, a daunting task. There is always that “piece of evidence” of statutory linkage which must be considered; and as technology continues to progress without regard to individual circumstances, it is anathema to the regressive nature of a progressively deteriorating medical condition.

Ultimately, however, in whatever “age” we find ourselves in, we must play by the rules of the game, and acquire as much information as we can, and be able to filter that which is relevant as opposed to mere fluff.  Like the proverbial bubble filled with hot air, there is much information “out there” which is either irrelevant, inconsequential, or simply filled with errors.  One must be careful as to the source, and who to listen to.

For Federal and Postal employees under FERS or CSRS, the process of filing for Federal Disability Retirement will be a long and complicated one.  How one gets there will be the key; what information to use, and what tools to covet, will make all the difference in this complex world of post-whatever in which we find ourselves.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

Medical Retirement for Federal Workers: The Unknown Resulting from a Partial Answer

If a question is not fully answered, is it a lie or a mere oversight?  If one places reliance upon a partial answer, was it because the question was not properly posed, or the answer only fragmentally provided, or as a result of a deliberate attempt to mislead?

Everyone has experienced the process of “switch-and-bait“, where the sales pitch is declared as one never matched in the history of the world; but upon arrival, the original declaration of the event was merely the “bait” in order to complete the “switch” to persuade the attendee to accept another product.  In such circumstances, it is indeed fortunate if the only real consequence was a wasted trip, and one can turn around and walk out.

In law, knowing only the “partial answer”, or the incomplete set of facts, can lead to irreversible consequences.  For Federal and Postal employees, whether under FERS or CSRS, who suffer from a medical condition such that the medical condition prevents one from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s job, it is important to receive full answers — from all sources — in order to make the right decision for one’s future.

Filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management is a serious step for the Federal or the Postal employee’s future. As such, the information which one relies upon in making that important decision — from what the process entails, to the consequential interplay between FERS & SSDI and a multitude of other questions and answers — should be fully understood.

If a source of information seems incomplete, there is often a reason, and sometimes an underlying motive. Beware the buyer; always seek an authenticating source.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

Medical Retirement Benefits for US Government Employees: Misinformation

The problem with a society which provides unlimited information is that the traditional controls and mechanisms known for verification and validation of accuracy become diluted or altogether abandoned.  Plagiarism has become a pervasive problem; as vastness of information exponentially explodes, so the chances of being identified for unauthorized copying becomes infinitely lesser, while those who “play the odds” increase in boldness and in sheer volume.

In preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether under FERS or CSRS, it is a procedural requirement that — sometime during the process of filing with the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) — the Federal or Postal employee must show that he or she has filed for Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) with the Social Security Administration.  But it is the “when” which have become enveloped within a convoluted complexity of misinformation.

Various Human Resource Offices are insisting (in error) that SSDI must be filed before an application to OPM can be submitted.  Such misinformation may preclude a Federal or Postal employee contemplating filing for Federal Disability Retirement to meet the 1-year Statute of Limitations in filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits (after separation from Federal Service), or for other Federal or Postal employees who are still employed, if only because the process of SSDI can be an equally, if not more so, of a daunting administrative process as filing for Federal Disability Retirement.  Further, in attempting to file online for SSDI, there is the question as to whether one is still employed, and if so, SSDI will not allow the online applicant to proceed any further, precisely because such an applicant would be immediately disqualified, anyway.

The fact and correct information is as follows:  At some point in the process of filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, the Federal or Postal employee needs to file for SSDI, and show OPM proof of such filing.  From OPM’s perspective, upon an approval of a Federal Disability Retirement application, they need to make sure that the Federal or Postal Retirement annuitant is or is not eligible for SSDI, for offset-provisions of benefits between SSDI and FERS.  Thus, it is ultimately merely a payment/compensation issue.  Filing for SSDI is not in reality a prerequisite for filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, but merely a check upon a coordination of payment benefits if both are approved.

In this vast universe of information, one must expect a correlative dissemination of misinformation; like the black hole in the greater universe of thriving galaxies and dying planetary systems, one can be sucked into the void of ignorance and suffer irreparable consequences as a result.  That is why Captain Kirk needed to be periodically beamed up — if only to make sure that the molecular reconstitution was properly performed in order to continue on in life.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

CSRS & FERS Medical Disability Retirement: Sources and Information

George Orwell’s classic work, 1984, depicts a society in which the gradual, systematic reduction of words, and therefore the availability of the use of words, is deliberately restricted and expunged from the universe of vocabulary.  Such reduction is performed through the issuance of the official dictionary, which comprises the totality of acceptability of language in his fictionalized society.

As words and the compendium of words comprise conceptual thought; as conceptual thought form to create ideas in a universe of human consciousness; and as rebellion is acted upon through the prefatory coordination of thought, so the stamping out of rebellious-driven words is the first step towards total control of man.

Orwell’s approach is interesting, but not the only way in which to control the populace.  The inverse approach is also as effective, if not more so: inundation of information can also paralyze a population from effective action.  In the real society of our age, the vast expanse of information has become the problem, not the lack thereof.

In preparing, formulating, and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether under FERS or CSRS, it is important to distinguish between information which is third or fourth hand (as in, “I was told that…” or, “A friend of mine said…”), and information which is accurate and of a reliable nature.  Further, each case is different and unique, and stories about what X did, or the fact that Y was told that a Federal or Postal Worker got Z, should ultimately be discounted.

Vast information in and of itself is worthless unless it is guided by truth, objectivity, and relevance.  Be aware of the unfettered information “out there”, for the source of information is just as important as the accuracy of such information.  In preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, the Federal and Postal employee must always be cautious of the source of any and all information.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

Disability Retirement for Federal Workers: Reliability of Information

In this information age (or, as the linear sequence of “ages” go, some have already identified it as the “post-information age”), the necessity of distinguishing between information, relevant information, and reliably relevant information is an important capacity to embrace.

In preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether under CSRS or FERS, it is important to be able to identify the distinguishing factors between the three.  The problem is that the three categories are often encapsulated in concentric circles of information, such that they are indistinguishable.

A fourth category which often muddies the waters is the insertion of motives.  How often does it happen where one makes contact with an agency, and the person on the other end seems pleasant, sounds competent, and joyfully informs you that it is “being worked on” and will be completed within the next day or so?  Weeks go by, and when a follow-up call is initiated, one is told by a less enthusiastic voice, and one which may be unpleasant and unhelpful, that No, the file hasn’t even been received, and we don’t know who you spoke to, but what that “other” person said is not true.  The “motive” of the “other” person was likely merely to get rid of the caller.  The fact that the voice was pleasant and competent-seeming turned out to be an undermining factor as to the reliability of the information.

This is an age when anyone can be anyone else; where a declaration on a website or on a social network page can constitute the substance of a person’s identity, without the person have accomplished anything “real“.  The problem with such radical bifurcation between “information”, “relevant information”, and “reliably relevant information”, however, is that there are real-world consequences for those who seek out and utilize such information.

In preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, whether under FERS or CSRS, it is important to make such a tripartite distinction, and to proceed to prepare a case based upon a reliable information source, a relevant basis of information, and information which can bring about an effective end.  This takes discernment — a commodity which is greatly lacking these days.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement: Information in the Public Domain

In preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS or CSRS, there is a quantity of information which exists in the “public domain”.  Just as in the areas of social, professional and (unfortunately) personal lives, information on issues, people, concepts, etc., are plentiful, so similarly the legal arena has exploded with unending and expansive admixtures of facts, opinions and information.  That is the nature of this “information age“.  

Quantity of information, however, is not an indicator of the quality of such information.  Further, quality of information does not necessarily result in knowledge.  Knowledge is conceptually distinct from information.  The former encapsulates the application and effective usage of the former, while the former remains a vacuity of existence until it is formed and utilized.  

Proving one’s eligibility for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS or CSRS requires both knowledge and information.  For, ultimately, it is the effectiveness of the formulated application, one which persuades and meets the legal criteria at the Office of Personnel Management, which is what matters.  As such, it is important to first reach out for qualitative information, then to seek out a Federal Disability Attorney who has effectively applied such information for his or her clients.  

In the search for information, always ask questions, for questioning should always lead the comfort of mind that the source of the answers will provide an effective use of information, both in quantity and in quality.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

Disability Retirement for Federal Workers: Information v. Essentials

There is a tendency to want to “reveal all“, as if not revealing every aspect of a narrative is somehow misleading, untruthful, or deceptive.  But there is a distinction to be made between information, whether it is background information or information pertaining to relevant facts and circumstances, as opposed to the essential core of a narrative.  

As the Office of Personnel Management attempts to reduce the backlog of Federal Disability Retirement applications under FERS or CSRS, it becomes more and more important for each application to be submitted in a streamlined, “only the pertinent facts” type of submissions.  This is not to say that all “relevant” facts must be distinguished from documents and submissions which provide for contextual understanding of a case.  Rather, the days when volumes of medical documentation of all treatment notes, test results, etc., without a guiding cover letter, may do more harm than good.  

In this day and age when there is so much information on the internet (much of which is irrelevant and meandering), it is good to keep in mind the conceptual distinction between that which is merely informational, and that which is essential.  For Federal and Postal workers who are contemplating filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS or CSRS, make sure that you are focusing upon the essentials, and not merely providing information without context and relevance.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

Federal Employee Medical Retirement: First Steps

With almost everything in life, it is that metaphorical “first step” which is the most difficult in the process of beginning, enduring, and accomplishing anything.  This is no different in filing a Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS or CSRS.  The task at the outset can appear daunting:  the multiple forms; the ability to formulate the necessary connection between one’s medical conditions and the job which one performs; having the Agency fill out their portion; having the doctor formulate, in a precise and meaningful manner, the narrative report which will meet the legal criteria for successful eligibility for Federal Disability Retirement benefits.  It is as challenging as the first step for a child; as intimidating as the first step in any life changing event.  To ease the process, it is often a good idea to do some preliminary research, including speaking with an Attorney who specializes in the process of preparing, filing and fighting for Federal and Postal Disability Retirement benefits.  As with everything in life, proper preparation is the key to success, and it is no different for a Federal or Postal Worker who is contemplating filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS or CSRS.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

OPM Disability Retirement: Information

I am sometimes asked whether or not, in providing detailed information concerning FERS or CSRS disability retirement, I am revealing “too much” information. The way that I look at it is this: Not everyone can afford an attorney. I try to set my fee structure in a fair, reasonable and competitive manner, so that most people are able to retain me. When people are not able to afford an attorney, information on the process, the substantive requirements, and the legal precedents, are important to be able to access. While information provides power, however, it is not the same as having an effective advocate representing a case before the Office of Personnel Management.

Further, one of the greatest compliments I find in providing the benefit of my experience and knowledge to the public at large, is when other attorneys (i.e. competitors) parrot my information and repackage and restate what I have said, in their own “blogs” and “articles”. Professionally, I have no problem with other attorneys accessing the same information as the public at large, and restating the same (or similar) advice concerning the process of filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS & CSRS. Good law is just that — good law. Who uses it, how it is used, and what the “totality of the end product” results in, makes all the difference.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire