FERS Medical Retirement: The World of Yesterday

Yesterday was the day before the medical condition made its introduction; the day prior to having to acknowledge its existence, its impacts or its chronic appearance; the day just when complaining about life’s missteps and unfairness seems now so trivial and far off the mark of justified sequences; and it is the day now in the near past, yet so distant in significance or of memories retained of better times when laughter would echo with sincere, heartfelt exuberance until today came along with the baggage of the world of yesterday.

Yesterday is the time we romanticized, of better times, more upstanding people seemed to populate the earth, and though there were still crimes committed, hearts broken and promises left unkept, nevertheless we insist that the world of yesterday was better than today, and tomorrow, bleaker yet except in small puddles of hopeful naïveté left abandoned in the palms of begging children outstretched to ask for alms of forgiveness never to be recognized except in shuttered side streets where mud, recklessness and poverty-stricken families with eyes staring vacantly from gaunt looks remain in silent alcoves of painful remorses.

The World of Yesterday is what we remember, that which we long for, and to which we direct our conversations, thus averting our eyes away from the reality of today, the ugliness of tomorrow and the hopelessness of the day after.  It is what makes us pause, justifies our procrastination and makes pudding out of venerated food items that are left on the shelves to rot and decay.

For Federal Gov. employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, such that the medical condition now prevents the Federal or Postal employee from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, the World of Yesterday was when the chronic medical condition could be tolerated, hidden, ignored or “dealt with” — but we must always live in the world of today in order to prepare for the world of many tomorrows, and to do so, preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, to be filed with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM), whether the Federal employee or Postal Service worker is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, becomes a necessity, lest the World of Yesterday consumes the World of Today and subverts the many worlds of all the tomorrows which are yet to come.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire
Attorney exclusively representing Federal and Postal employees to secure their FERS Medical Retirement benefits from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

 

OPM Medical Disability Retirement Benefits: Per Se

The phrase, or word, is often misused or misapplied, but it always sounds intelligent when peppered about in sentences; annoying, when it is over-used and emphasized ad nauseam.  Essentially, it means to point to the importance or significance of something — by or in and of itself, intrinsically.

So, if you point to a person within a group and declare, “He isn’t the only one, per se, who can get the job done!”  Or, “It is not only the photographs, per se, which should convict the defendant, but…”  It is likely not a good idea to insert such a phrase when arguing to a jury, for it would probably confuse them, rather than enlighten them.

In the end, the phrase, “Per se”, is meant to focus the attentive signification upon the subject in question, but the way it is used/misused — with hesitancy and lack of confidence — often detracts from the strength of the phrase itself.  Thus, when a person says, “I’m not saying that my work, per se, is the best I have done.”  Huh?  What?  What did he just say?

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, per se, and wish to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, per se, because the Federal or Postal worker can no longer perform one or more of the essential elements of his or her job, per se, it might be a good idea to contact an OPM Disability Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, per se.

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.

 

Federal & Postal Disability Retirement: The Right Tools

Why is it that when you need a pair of pliers, all that can be found is a screwdriver?

Or, when you need a Phillips screwdriver (aside: “The Phillips head screwdriver was created and patented by Henry Phillips in the 1930s and was originally used on the 1936 Cadillac.  The great thing about it is that unlike the flat head screw — with a single ridge at its tip to slide into a screw with one slot — the Phillips screwdriver is self-centering.  Its “X” design won’t slip out of the X-slotted screw.  Instead, it grips the screw firmly in the center, provided it’s the suitable size for the screw” Quoted from the internet; an interesting tidbit of information), all you can find is a flat head screwdriver?

Of course, with all of the information quoted, we digress.  But then, digression is often more interesting than the main point to be made — namely, that in a Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS, it is important to have and to apply the right tools for the right job.  The “tools” in preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS are threefold: The Medical Evidence; the Law; and the intersecting argumentation to be used in applying the law to the medical evidence.

Contact a disability attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and quit trying to use a pair of pliers to screw in a nail.

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 Medical Retirement for Federal Employees: Reverberations of Choices

At the time, it may have seemed inconsequential.  The choices we make — of whether to go to college or not; of delaying further education; of where to live, move to, set roots in; whether to get married, start a family, the size of the family; of choosing friends, a career, maintaining close or distant contact with siblings, relatives, parents and extended family; and throughout life, the reverberations of our choices may appear, individually, to have minimal-to-no impact upon our lives.

We know this not to be true.  The small ripple created from a thrown pebble in a pond may seem inconsequential; but to the frog waiting for the undisturbed quietude to allow for an unsuspecting insect, the meal missed is the felt reverberation of the water’s ripple.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who are contemplating filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, the choice of advocacy may be an important component in making future plans.  What will your lawyer do for you?  Will he or she stay with you from start to finish throughout the stages of a Federal Disability Retirement process?

Contact an OPM Disability Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law and make sure that the reverberations of choices made will have a positive ripple-effect upon your future.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Lawyer

 

FERS Medical Retirement: Adapting to inevitable change

Change is an inevitability in life.  Most people, if confronted with it, freely admit that they do not “like” changes.  Being static; doing things routinely; living by force of habit; having a “routine” — these provide a sense of comfort.  Change, of course, can be a good thing — whether of forced alteration for the good of an individual or circumstance, or voluntarily because a necessary modification was identified, resulting in a greater refinement of efficiency or adjustment towards greater perfection.

Can a life unchanged throughout long survive?  Nature itself and the evolutionary theory of adaptability provides a partial answer: Those species which failed to adapt to a changing environment became extinct; others who adapted, whether by natural selection or (in the case of human beings, presumably) by planning, were and are able to survive the vicissitudes of tectonic shifts of change.

There are, of course, those who thrive on change — we read about them in various accounts about people who love the thrill of daily tumults and the unpredictability of ordained routines, or lack thereof and the instability of a life replete with the “high” of adrenaline flow that never ceases.  Can there be people like that — of the high-wired, high-strung individual, and do they constitute the paradigm of how the human species was able to survive the spectrum of past climate changes ranging from devastating floods, shifts of weather and increase of temperatures?

There are macro-based changes and micro-based ones, depending upon one’s perspective.  Global modifications represent the macro; alterations in individual lives constitute the micro.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition such that the medical condition prevents the Federal or Postal employee from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, the need to file for OPM Disability Retirement benefits under FERS may seem like a “micro” change to the outside world; but for the individual, it is a big deal, and how to adapt to the change that will come about in filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits can be a major, tectonic shift in one’s life, and to prepare for adapting to such a change, you should consult with a FERS Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Disability Retirement: Coincidences & wrong attributions

Two events occur within a fairly close span of time; we relate them; we attribute one to have caused the other.  Was it mere coincidence, and was the causal attribution wrongly implied?

We learn from a friend that a certain person X visited the house of person Y.  Y was a good friend.  X never liked you.  A week or so later, you bump into Y and you say, “Hi. Haven’t seen you in a while.  How has the family been?”  Y looks at you, turns the other way without responding, and coldly walks away.

You attribute the behavior of Y as being related to the fact that X, who doesn’t like you, had visited Y the week before.  You connect the coincidence of Y’s behavior and the visitation of Y by X, and create a narrative around the encounter: “X must have bad-mouthed me when he went over to Y’s house.  Y must have believed him, and that is why Y is behaving so coldly to me.”  In other words, you attribute Y’s behavior as the effect caused by X’s coincidental meeting with Y the week before.  Are you right in doing so?

Say, sometime later, you learn that it wasn’t X, after all, that had visited Y the week before, but it was T — another good friend of yours.  Further, you learn that Y’s sister had recently passed away, and Y calls you up and apologizes for the past behavior, explaining that Y simply “didn’t want to talk to anyone that day, and had been walking around in a daze of sorrow.”

Coincidences and wrong attributions; we all make them.  We go back and retrace our steps of logical reasoning to try and discover the flaw of our thought-processes.  It happens often.  What is the rule to follow to try and minimize such flawed approaches to logical reasoning?  First, to get the facts.  Next, to wait before coming to conclusions.  Finally, to try and limit one’s creative imagination from bleeding beyond the borders of known facts.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, and 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, it is important to first “get the facts” concerning Federal Disability Retirement, and not get mired in the fears of coincidences and make wrong attributions.

It may well be that certain actions initiated by the Agency are not mere coincidences; and it may be true that your “feelings” about the future can be directly attributable to what you have “heard” from others.  But before coming to any conclusions or making any decisions, it is well-advised to consult with an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, lest those coincidences lead to wrong attributions, resulting in making the wrong moves based upon baseless causal connections.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

FERS Medical Retirement: Absurdity with an explanation

According to Quine, the great mathematician and logician, that is the definition of a paradox.  It is an event or a concept that seems at first glance to be an impossibility, or a conundrum of some complexity, but can be explained to unfold the absurdity first displayed.  Thus — of the man who has walked the earth for decades but is technically only 9 years old, until one realizes that his birthday falls on the 29th of February, a date that appears only once every 4 years; this is a paradox, until the absurdity is explained and it suddenly makes sense.

Similarly, a medical condition is a paradox: It is an absurdity of sorts, especially when it hits a person in the prime of his or her life.  What possible explanation can be had?  Where is the “fairness” in it, and why do some people who eat all sorts of junk food for years on end never experience the calamity of a chronic and progressively deteriorating medical condition?  Where is the “equal employment opportunity” of a devastating medical condition?

Where is the sense of “fair play” displayed when a medical condition pounces upon a Federal or Postal employee and suddenly no amount of past accomplishments make up for the sudden loss of productivity and need to use the accumulated sick leave, and even invoke FMLA rights in order to attend to one’s health?

For Federal and Postal employees who suffer from a medical condition such that the medical condition prevents the Federal or Postal employee from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal position, the paradox comes in the form of when to consider filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset.  For, filing a Federal Disability Retirement application through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management is indeed an admission of a need for change; yet, paradoxically, change is precisely what your Federal Agency or the Postal Service does NOT want — they want you to continue as before the onset of your medical condition.

The absurdity resides in the lost sense of priorities: work, as opposed to one’s health; stresses that exacerbate, as opposed to relieving those elements that contribute to one’s deteriorating conditions.  The only explanation that makes sense is to prepare, formulate and file a Federal Disability Retirement application, to be submitted to OPM in order to be able to focus upon one’s health.

That is the paradox, and the absurdity with an explanation for a Federal or Postal employee who needs to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire
Postal & Federal Employee Retirement Attorney

 

Legal Representation on Federal Disability Retirement Claims: False notions

We all possess them; some, more than others; most, of a harmless variety where — so long as they are kept private and unannounced like an illegitimate child kept from the knowledge of one’s spouse, friends and family — no consequences ensue from the mere “having” of them.  False notions can take many forms, and on the spectrum of held beliefs, so long as one never “acts” upon them or otherwise expresses them in polite society, they remain the eccentric uncle that visits periodically but for short stays, and always tries to remain unobtrusive.

Say a person believes that the earth is flat — yes, there are many such people, to the extent that there are contingents of “flat earth societies” cropping up everywhere — but moreover, not only that the earth is flat, but you also believe that martians live on the far side of the moon, that every book published in the world over is written by Shakespeare, and that there is truly a wizard of Oz that controls the mechanism of the universe.  What harm is there in believing any of those?

Perhaps some are false notions; perhaps others are not.  So long as they do not intersect with conversations in the public domain, or do not interfere in the daily activities of living one’s life, is there any harm to possessing, maintaining, retaining and ascribing to false notions?

Take it a step further, however, and insert the following hypothetical: At a “get together” with coworkers and other departmental or other office personnel, a conversation begins with a group of gathered men and women, and someone begins talking about a new book that has just been reviewed by the New York Times Book Review Section, and one of the individuals pipes in that it, too, was written by Shakespeare.

The first person says, “No, no, it was written by so-and-so”, but the second individual persists and insists, and an argument starts: “No, it was written by Shakespeare.”  “You’re crazy.”  “No, you don’t know a thing!”  “And you probably believe that the earth is flat.”  And on and on.  Now, the next day, everyone is back at work — has anything changed?

Holding on to the false notions has not disrupted the flow of productivity, and the fact that one’s false notions were inserted unnecessarily into the daily discourse of other’s beliefs and understanding of an individual, has not disrupted the objective universe of those who gained further knowledge of another’s belief system.  False notions, then, so long as they remain private, or even when inserted into the public domain but without objective interference, may remain unobtrusive.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers, however, who suffer from a medical condition, such that the medical condition is beginning to prevent the Federal or Postal worker from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, a false notion can indeed have some deleterious consequences.

If you, as a Federal or Postal employee, possess a false notion of pride, or of loyalty to the Agency or the Postal Service at the expense of your health, and thus delay preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether as a FERS, CSRS or CSRS-Offset employee, the impact of further delay or procrastination can impact your health.

False notions are fine to foolhardily have fun with, but when it intersects with your health, it is time to prepare, formulate and file an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, to be filed with OPM.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire 
OPM Disability Retirement Attorney

    

FERS & CSRS Disability Retirement: Retaining innocence in modernity

Is it even possible?  Moreover, what would such a state of Being be like, in contrast to the conceptual entanglements in the aggregate as defined, say, 50 – 100 – 200 years ago?  For, as deviancy has been defined downwards in an uncontrollable spiral of destructiveness, so the very concept of “innocence” has altered in meaning, tone and implications, has it not?

Is “innocence” now merely the absence of cynicism, or perhaps a greater form of naiveté?  Is lack of sophistication the same as being in a state of innocence, and if the latter is lost, does it necessarily mean the consumption of the former as well?  Can one shelter a child today, anymore than one can “find” a rare discovery in an antique shop or a yard sale – for, with the Internet and the capacity of everyone to immediately establish the value of an item, can one really “discover” anything new, anymore than one can retain innocence in modernity?

Perhaps, instead of the concept of “retaining” – which implies that which one once possessed, then lost – the better avenue of investigation would be in discussing the possibility of “attaining” – where an admission is made of a foregone conclusion that the yesteryears of innocence can no longer be repossessed.

Where, once children were sent out into the woods with sticks imagined as Civil War weapons, and bullets whizzed by and grazed an arm and death was but a dramatic fall after an imagined battle pitched against the heroism of the Great War now forgotten or the Second One that was the defeating of the forces of evil; now, replaced with drone strikes, terrorism and massive shootings where political correctness cannot even allow the child to engage in pitched battles, let alone pitchforks that no one possesses anymore as a relic of the past, because now the Smartphone, the Internet, the email and the Instagram have replaced the human interaction we once relished but now dispossess and discard as human detritus of inestimable degradation of worth; and so it goes.

So the question comes full circle back to:  Is retaining innocence in modernity even a serious question?  Likely, not.  Instead, we must each, each of us, formulate a paradigm of self-worth; of who we are; of where we came from; and determine to chart a course of “right” living.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who are subjected to a daily barrage of harassment and antagonistic behavior in the workplace because of a medical condition that prevents the Federal or Postal worker from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, the pathway to retaining some semblance of innocence in modernity may be to prepare an effective Federal OPM 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.

For, to stay will be to become a bitter and defeated jumble of cynicism with an endless chasm of turmoil; to seek help in the process by turning to an experienced attorney in order to obtain a Federal Disability Retirement benefit, then to exit the Federal workforce in order to focus upon the priority of one’s health, is to declare to the world:  I may not be able to retain innocence in modernity, but that doesn’t mean I have to play the fool, either.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Medical Retirement from Federal Employment: And then we die

(It is the parenthetical previous statement that ultimately matters, left blank to be completed, and never to be presumed).  Actions of finality, or seemingly so, tend to create an aura of despair and angst.  Once, in a world where purpose was never questioned, and the teleological end of man never brought forth the hint of doubt, the cohesiveness of society’s resolve was never a pause.  It is the modernity of hesitation, trepidation and loss of judgment that brings us to the pit of incessant questioning, as opposed to “doing”.  This is a maddening world, where the rise of Existentialism and post-modern impotence leaves us to seek therapy at every turn.

What we do in our lives before that terminal event; what dreams we once possessed before the souring of cynicism overwhelmed us; and of those lazy summer nights when the dancing illumination of fireflies dotted the canvas of a blackened void, when thoughts would drift beyond the mere mediocrities of present lives, current circumstances and seemingly unassailable realities which constrained, restricted and limited the dreams shattered by the reality of our travails; it was then that a glimmer of hope, an expectation of possibility, and a hint of potentiality yet unrealized, would creep into the essence of our souls.

Fairytales matter, because youth cannot survive another day without some fantasy of hope; and doors left unopened and locked with the resolve of “forever” will only diminish and destroy, where the need for tomorrow yet shouts in a rashness of desire.  To shut the pathway to dreams or to construct obstacles for the mere sake of obstruction is to strangle that parenthetical gleam of light yet unextinguished and to betray the angels who look down upon us with the remnants of wings to be unfurled, in hopes of fluttering to pass by with a smile.

Perhaps, one day, there will still be such follies to believe in.  For now, there is only the toil of daily grind, and thus are we left with the question implicit in the statement:  And then we die.

In Muriel Barbery’s work, The Elegance of the Hedgehog, a youthful life of advantage but of seeming meaninglessness is traded with an older woman’s upward trajectory once lost in the anonymity of class distinctions, and the theme throughout encompasses the essence of a life’s worth.  We all want to embrace meaning and value in the life which has been given; have we fulfilled our potential?  Did the dreams we once possessed, handed to us like jewels on a plate of limitless infinity, become realized, or was it a wasted phantasm like a handful of sand squeezed and escaping through the crevices of our closed fists?

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who are considering filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, the questions garnered by thoughts of future insecurity are natural and plentiful.  It is, in many ways, similar to the refrain repeated herein:  And then we die.

Once a Federal Disability Retirement application is approved, and the Federal or Postal employee is separated from the Federal agency or the U.S. Postal Service, one wonders:  Was my work of any lasting value?  Did I leave an imprint upon the shifting sands of a prior existence?  Did I make a difference?

But those questions should be cast aside and left behind, and instead, it is still the future of one’s unfinished work that should always be focused upon, and preparing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, is to continue the narrative in working upon that familiar refrain, that the future still promises a fulfillment of unfinished potentiality, and the unmarked grave need not be one which is unvisited even in the twilight of our lives.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire