Federal Disability Retirement Law: Innocence & Wonder

The loss of the former results in the disappearance of the latter; for, it is the conditional existence of the former which allows for the latter.  The question in modernity is, Can a child even possess a modicum of innocence these days, in the midst of technological dissipation?  And if the answer is a fervent, “No”, then what chance is there of preserving that wide-eyed characteristic of Wonder — of curiosity compelled by a belief that there is value in the world to search for?

How often have we heard parents say something to the effect of, “I just want my kid to have some sort of childhood to enjoy,” or, “Let kids be kids.  They will grow up soon enough”?

In today’s world where pressures are so persistent to excel, to competitively grow up in order to have the greater advantage of material success, it is a wonder that children have any childhoods at all, as innocence has become equated to a disadvantageous naïveté and wonder a mere byproduct of ignorance.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal Service workers who suffer from a health condition such that the health condition prevents the Federal or Postal employee from performing one or more of the basic elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, the time for innocence and wonder has long passed; for, while you may once have had the experience of both, your medical condition combined with the way that your Agency or the Postal Service has treated you, has likely resulted in a more cynical perspective.

Don’t let that, however, prevent you from reaching the ultimate goal: Of obtaining a Federal Disability Retirement annuity under the FERS system from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.  Contact a Federal Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law and return to a time where Innocence & Wonder may still be experienced.

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 OPM Disability Retirement Law under FERS: Valid Arguments

Wittgenstein discusses extensively the concept of “language games” — that various subjects, circumstances and professions may require a different kind of such linguistic anomalies.

Thus, when going to a store to buy a computer, you will enter into an alien type of language game quite distinct and different from other modes of linguistic engagements — where certain terms such as “software”, “connectivity”, “applications”, etc., and a whole host of other strange concepts may be thrown about during the course of a sale.

Such a language game is appropriate within the context of a specific set of circumstances, and other forms may not constitute valid applications.  It would be, for example, inappropriate to suddenly interpose another type of language game during the course of a “computer-speak” language game — like suddenly engaging in “therapeutic” language games, of the X-steps in grief counseling, or marriage counseling, etc.

Legal argumentation is somewhat similar to the imposition of a specifically appropriate — or “valid” — language game.  Thus, in a Federal Disability Retirement case, it is important to recognize and apply valid arguments — ones which go to the heart and issue of a Federal Disability Retirement case.  While the “medical language game” will also be applied, it is the “legal language game” which persuades OPM when persuasive legal argumentation is the language game which must prevail.

Contact a Retirement Lawyer who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and begin preparing an effective OPM Disability Retirement application by recognizing and applying the valid arguments which comprise the language game of Federal Disability Retirement Law.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Lawyer

 

FERS Medical Retirement from OPM: Crisis Before and Problem After

A crisis is often the problem which was previously procrastinated.  Allowing it to build up to a point of a crisis-event — an emergency that needs to be immediately attended to — is something which many of us do.  It is the immediacy of anything that finally focuses us to attend to the issue; with our busy lives, we tend to ignore, put off and delay that which does not “have to” be dealt with.

But it is often the problem after that continues to haunt and nag.  We can attend to this or that crisis, but the resultant consequences trailing thereafter will often be the long-term conditions which have a residual impact long lasting, and while the crisis may have been handled, it is the problem after that will often defeat.

Look at our national debt.  So long as our country can continue to borrow, it is not a crisis, and so none of the politicians deem it a necessary issue to discuss.  By the time it becomes a crisis, none of the politicians who are in office today will be there, and so there will never be any accountability.  Yet, the problem after the crisis will remain for decades thereafter, if not longer.

And what about a health crisis?  Delay, procrastinate and disregard — until the health issue becomes a crisis; and the problem thereafter is often the chronic, progressively debilitating disability that remains.

And what about one’s job or career?  For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition such that it is becoming apparent that the medical condition will no longer allow you to continue in your job, consult with a Federal Attorney who specializes in FERS Disability Retirement Law.  Deal with the coming crisis now, lest the problem after becomes unsolvable.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal & Postal Disability Retirement: Preparing the case

For some reason, Federal and Postal workers who “prepare” and submit a Federal Disability Retirement application, do so without much thought as to what is entailed by the entire process.

They will often rely upon what the “Human Resource Office” tells them — of forms to fill out, what form to give to the doctor, the form to give to the supervisor, etc., and will spend more time trying to figure out the confusing life insurance form than in preparing the Applicant’s Statement of Disability (SF 3112A) or the legal precedents that govern Federal Disability Retirement Law — and then, when it gets denied at the Initial Stage of the process and the Federal or Postal Disability Retirement applicant goes back to the H.R. “Specialist” and asks, “Well, what do I do now?”, the response is: “That is not our problem; that’s a problem you have to deal with.”

Accountability is not known to be a commonly recognized characteristic in a Human Resource Office, and while there are never any guarantees in life, in any sector or endeavor, at a minimum, when one is being “assisted” and guided through an administrative process, it is important to know whether or not whoever you are relying upon will see you through to the end.

Why the Federal or Postal employee who begins the process of preparing, formulating and filing a Federal Disability Retirement application does so without the same care, scrutiny and comprehensive approach as one does in “other” legal cases, is a puzzle.

Federal Disability Retirement — whether under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset — is as complex a case as any other, and should be approached with the same intensity, technical application and expertise as a patent and trademark case, or a complicated medical malpractice filing.  For, a Federal Disability Retirement case involves every aspect of any other type of complex litigation — of the proper medical evidence to gather; of meeting the established legal standard in order to meet the burden of proof; of citing the relevant legal precedents in order to persuade the reviewer at the U.S. Office of Personnel Management; and presenting a compelling description to a “jury” at OPM that one has met the nexus between “having a medical condition” and the inconsistency inherent with the positional duties required, etc.

In the end, preparing the case for submission of a Federal Disability Retirement application involves greater complexity than what the layman can normally account for, and as the fine print in those television commercials state involving sporty vehicles maneuvering at high speeds, you may not want to try this on your own.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Legal Representation for OPM Disability Claims: The double-negative

Does it “tell” more than the positive?  Is the reduction by twice negating words of positive connotation a lesser meaning — a “softer landing approach” — than to declare it with a single positive note?

Thus, when a parent declares to a close friend or neighbor that his or her son or daughter is “not unpopular”, is it not the same as proudly stating, “He is popular”?  Is the double-negative more humble and sound less like bragging?  Is the meaning not unclear, or less unlikely, or not incomprehensible?  Or, what about a triple negative — say, if a person says that he is not not uncomfortable — is it a more polite manner of telling another that he is uncomfortable, but does each negative remove the bluntness of the root word such that the repetition of negation undoes what the foundation of the meaning provides for?

And how did grammar translate from linguistic insularity to real life?  When and how did we learn to speak in such negations?  Is it by stealth or cover-up that grammar reflects upon the negation of words, thus transferring such concealment into the language games we play?  Do we wear sunglasses to hide our eyes from remaining open as the window to our own souls?

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal Workers who suffer from a medical condition such that the medical condition begins to prevent the Federal or Postal worker from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, the application of the double-negative becomes infused in everyday encounters with the workplace — of needing to use Sick Leave in order to attend to one’s health, but trying to appear well at work so that the workplace barely notices; of trying to remain in corners of anonymity despite feeling the need to be “up front” about it; and of appearing to be “healthy” on the outside and yet feeling the dread of hopelessness on the inside.

The double-negative is too often a reflection upon the way we are forced to live, and for the Federal or Postal employee who by necessity must file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, it is a reality that must unfortunately be faced every day.  But filing is important, and making that decision is a crucial one that must be faced — or, in the manner of the double-negative, it is not unimportant to begin the process of filing something as administratively complex as something which is not incomprehensible.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Medical Retirement for Federal Employees: The chaos of life

Of masochism, there are indeed some who purport to invite the chaos of life, and actually enjoy it, relish in it and thrive in it.  Its opposite is considered monotonous, lacking of artistic content and without the excitement of unpredictability.  Yet, even those who thrive within the chaos of life will often need that period of respite, whether with a quiet moment of reflection, a night of reading beside a crackling fire, or just dozing in front of the drone of a television.

EMT personnel often require such a personality trait; firemen, law enforcement officers, and nowadays, teachers, professors and other educators, if only because the chaos that unruly and undisciplined children, teenagers and young adults bring into the classroom.

Perhaps it was a childhood upbringing; it is often said by learned psychologists that battered people tend to themselves batter upon reaching maturity, because they find solace in the comfort of that which they are familiar, and so the behaviors they learned and were imprinted upon as a child are the very patterns that are comforting; and thus does the vicious cycle of life – such as the chaos of life – recur and regenerate, only to imprint the same cycle upon the next generation.

Those who sincerely crave the very opposite – of a regularity in monotony of patterns predictable in their characteristic of non-change – are often criticized for failing to be able to “deal” with the chaos of life, and so the argument goes that those who thrive upon the chaos of life are better prepared for the vicissitudes of life’s misgivings.

Medical conditions comprise a sort of chaos of life, but whether one is “well-prepared” for it or not, it is something that must be “dealt” with.  It is, in the end, doubtful whether a person’s life prior to the entrance and introduction of a medical condition can adequately prepare one to “deal with it”.

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 the Federal or Postal job, part of the process in dealing with such a chaos of life is to prepare 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.

In such a case, instead of dealing with the chaos of preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application yourself, you may want to consider hiring an attorney who specializes in such legal matters.

In this vast universe that includes the encumbrances deemed the chaos of life, we must all make choices as to which portion of the chaos we want to personally handle; for, in the end, the chaos of life, how we handle it and what benefit accrues from it will all be determined by the outcome of the event – and for Federal and Postal employees, that outcome-based perspective is the resulting approval by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management on a Federal Disability Retirement claim, where once the approval is obtained, the chaos of life may be turned into a respite of relief.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Medical Retirement under FERS & CSRS: Admission

It is a noun of peculiar variability, perhaps all interconnected upon reflection.  It can refer to the permission to enter, whether by right, payment or removal of obstacles; or, denoting the price of such entrance; or even yet, a confession or acknowledgment of a point taken; and in other contexts, of being accepted into a fraternity of sorts, as in “admission to a university” or “to the legal bar” – meaning, not an actual, physical movement through gates now open, but a conceptual membership into a community of selective individuals.

Is there a linguistic relationship between that sequestered sense of the word – of an acknowledgment or confession – in contradistinction to the other forms, all of the remainder of which encompasses an entrance, movement or acceptance to a desired destination upon the removal of an obstruction, whether by a physical gate or a nod of consent?

How about this:  An admission denoting a confessional standard or conceding a point of conflict can be likened as a release, where pent-up resistance is suddenly or finally torn down, and the voluntary pouring out of one’s previously-withheld desire to “tell all” has been replaced with the emptying sensation of a satisfied conscience.  You are now allowed into the community of guiltless souls, or at least of having the feeling of being released from the cage of deception in falsehood.

Admission in this sense is a freeing of one’s inner soul, and it is normally insufficient to bring that narrative of expiation in a silent soliloquy to one’s self; thus, there are confessionals and penitent individuals, bowing with genuflective subservience and unmasking one’s soul to someone cloaked in authoritative garments, and somehow the externalization of one’s guilty conscience has an antiseptic, cleansing effect.

Admission into a fraternity of brotherhood is always a welcoming act; admission of one’s mistakes, wrongs committed and sins adorned, has never been an easy undertaking, and less so in this day and age where moral equivalency is the prevailing rule of life.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who are considering filing a Federal Disability Retirement application through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, the issue of admission is always twofold:  First, the entire purpose of preparing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application is to gain admission into the class of former Federal and Postal employees who are now Federal Disability Retirement annuitants; and, secondly, it is important to allow for the difficult admission that the entire administrative and bureaucratic process is a complicated one, and therefore may require the assistance of legal counsel in order to successfully maneuver one’s way through the maze of complexities.

An admission in the first sense is thus the goal; an admission in the latter sense is merely a reflection of wisdom in progress for the Federal or Postal employee who, by necessity of a medical condition, needs to file a Federal Disability Retirement application with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal & Postal Disability Retirement through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management: Letting Go

Sometimes, it is the striving itself which has propelled the continuation of action without thought, constancy without interruption, deterioration without remedy, and life without living; and amidst the automatic pilot which has carried forth the daily treadmill of forward progression, one looks back and wonders, Where did the time go?  Where did the concept come from — of unmanned space flights, drones without onboard pilots and driverless cars?

Yet, we need only look at ourselves in the mirror, and realize that the reflection which looks back is merely an image which disappears when the eyes close, the lights are turned off, or we simply walk out from the room.  Who we are; the essence of our very make-up; the surface appearance which belies the core and centrality of the bundle which aggregates to define the whole; is it the effort, or merely the thrill of the trying, which compels the hunt?

Time passes, but we rarely notice; age comes upon us, and like that proverbial thief in the dead of night, the wrinkles form like caverns scraping at the earthen clay, forming ruts and ravages over evolutionary quietudes of moonlit shores.  We strive too hard.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who come to a point of recognition that all of the effort in the world will not save their jobs because of the medical condition which continues to deteriorate and impact one’s ability and capacity to perform the essential elements of the positional duties empowered, the necessity and realization of filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, may come at different times, alternate phases, and indiscriminate moments when least expected.

Time can be a friend for medical conditions, but when the treadmill of striving takes us nowhere, the moment may have passed, and long since left us, beyond the period when we should have already filed.  Doctors have already spoken; friends have already warned; and family members have shared their concerns well beyond intrusion of courtesy.  Letting go of one’s past glories is often the hardest part of the process, but let go we must, and begin to prepare, formulate and file for Federal or Postal Disability Retirement benefits through OPM.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Medical Retirement from Federal Employment: Motive and Motivation

The similarities are almost indistinguishable; yet, the slightly nuanced distinction makes for the differentiation between intent and desire, and while both are nouns, it is not the grammatical identifier by which we seek their impetus.  The former is often unknown, hidden, deliberately concealed, such that a kind gesture or an act of empathy may have an ulterior basis beyond the mere surface of revelation.  Think about Vito Corleone in the movie, The Godfather; when he granted a favor, did he ever reveal his underlying motive?  The latter constitutes that ethereal quality, unable to be grasped but which, if the secret ingredients were bottled as merchandise to be sold, would grant the inventor untold wealth beyond those who market pills to boost testosterone levels in a society overcome with virtual madness.

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 distinction between motive and motivation may be the difference between remaining static or advancing in life.  To remain in place and attempt to decipher the former in the impending or anticipated actions of one’s agency, the U.S. Postal Service, or of Supervisors and Managers who daily connive and consider in furtive whispers of confidential backbiting, is to forever waste precious time upon the unknowable and indeterminate.  To possess the latter, whether in spurts of ephemeral wisps, like time which once seemed as the fortress of youth but left behind in the residue of an angel’s wings fluttering into the universe of the fantasy of unknown caverns, is to release the last vestige of rational import and move forward into a life beyond a career with the Federal agency or the U.S. Postal Service.  Sometimes, to accept less is to gain more.

Filing for Federal Disability Retirement through OPM may not always seem like an act of advancement, especially given that one is giving up a career, cutting one’s income, and relying upon an agency for a lifetime annuity; but when a medical condition cuts short the presentation of alternatives to consider, preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, is often the best motive in a universe constrained by the motivation of self.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Medical Retirement from Federal Jobs: Prerogatives

The exclusivity of a right or privilege can remain dormant until asserted; and assertion triggers and activates, and suddenly that which consisted merely of quietude and inertia, becomes the centrality of controversy, contention and adversarial encounter.  Much of life is like that; resembling the proverbial elephant in the sitting room, or the decaying clump of unidentified derivation of unseemly scents, people tend to avoid and take a wide berth while acting “as if” throughout the day, the week, a year, and in a lifetime.

In olden days of yore, the “prerogative” was retained by the King, the Crown and the Papacy to assert or not, depending often upon the whims of emotional and political turmoil.  The fact of inactivity or inertia with respect to the right or privilege did not result in the loss of it; rather, it merely meant that the non-use of power only magnified the unlimited potentiality for tyranny.  One doesn’t lose something merely because it isn’t used; unless, of course, you are a common man or woman without power or purpose.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who have been “allowed” by one’s agency or the U.S. Postal Service to continue to remain in one’s position at the “prerogative” of the agency or the U.S. Postal Service, by being retained in some capacity of “light duty” or informal arrangement of “less-than-full-duty” status, the attitude and atmosphere can be likened to the Royal Family allowing and granting a limited dispensation at the mercy of the Crown, and always with humble subservience of gratitude and metaphorical acts of low-bowing.

While it is dangerous to be indebted to someone else for too much, the greater travail is to believe that one owes something of value when in fact no such indebtedness ever existed.

For Federal and 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 positional duties, the fact that the Federal agency or the U.S. Postal Service “says” that it is “accommodating” the Federal or Postal employee, does not necessarily make it so.

The prerogative to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, always remains and is retained by the Federal or Postal employee, even throughout a circumstance and situation where the Federal agency or the U.S. Postal Service contends that the Federal or Postal employee is being “accommodated”.  For, the term itself is one of art, and “accommodation” — in order to be a legally viable accommodation — must meet certain standards and rise to a level of legal sufficiency.

The mere fact that the Federal agency on High says it is so, no longer applies; for, despite its claim to greater status of Royalty, the days of uncontested power through mere lineage no longer exists, except perhaps in the feeble minds of the commoner who treads the hallways of Federal agencies and U.S. Post Offices with fear, trembling, and humble subservience.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire