Federal Medical Retirement: Resisting the Scatter Approach

Preparing a Federal Retirement application under the FERS system naturally lends itself to a “scatter” approach because it requires multiple facets in order to complete the complex bureaucratic process.  Like the tentacles on an unruly octopus, some facets must be correlated in sequential order, while others must be attended to simultaneously.

And because some portions must be completed by your Federal Agency (which is too often uncooperative and/or uncaring, and also it is sometimes downright antagonistic to the process as a whole) — and all the while being under pressure of an unreasonable timeline imposed by OPM, it is easy to despair and give up on the process entirely.

Perhaps that is how the system has been deliberately created — to make the process as difficult as possible in order to discourage as many Federal employees and Postal workers as possible.  To counter this, it is important to begin with a guiding principle — of the statutory criteria and case-law formulations which provide the overarching foundational premise — a legal cover letter which creates a successful roadmap for arguing your case.

Otherwise, the only alternative remaining is to succumb to the “scatter” approach — which is precisely what the U.S. Office of Personnel Management wants you to do so that they can deny the case based upon the incomplete aspect of any one of the unruly tentacles required.

Contact an Federal Disability Retirement Attorney who specializes in preparing, formulating, and filing a coherent, cogent, and effective Federal or Postal Disability Retirement case, and resist the “scatter approach”.

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: Knowing What We Do

Human beings are the only species who pause and reflects upon whether or not what he is doing is done knowingly.

Self reflection; the ability to learn from past mistakes; the capacity to improve; the capability of admitting that we know not what we are doing, and to seek advice in order to fill the void from lack of knowledge — these are all qualities shared.

On the other hand, recent cultural and social upheavals in this country might test that concept.

Knowing what we do is important beyond doing what we do, because — if we are to still adhere to the Aristotelian concept in Western Philosophy that we are “rational” animals (and this may be a questionable presumption, these days) — knowledge, self-awareness and the capacity to comprehend the world around us are the very characteristics which lift us above the beasts abreast and allow us a glimpse of the angels above.

The primary prerequisite in knowing what we do, however, is to (A) Know when we do not know, and (B) have the humility to admit when we do not know what we are doing.

To that end, 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, knowing what we are doing in preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application through the Office of Personnel Management is a crucial step in winning the fight against OPM.

Contact a FERS Disability Lawyer who actually knows what he is doing, and begin the process of preparing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS.

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: Agency Support

In a Federal Disability Retirement application, part of the SF 3112 series of forms will have to be completed by your Federal Agency or the Postal Service — whether you are still working for the agency or not.  Primarily, SF 3112B (Supervisor’s Statement) and SF 3112D (Agency Certification of Reassignment and Accommodation Efforts) will be the two forms which the U.S. Office of Personnel Management will require as part of the Federal Disability Retirement packet.

Can “how” it is completed by your agency impact OPM’s decision on your case?  Of course.

Is it important to have the “support” of your agency or Postal Service?  To some extent.

Can lack of support — or even lying about some of the issues — be overcome?  Yes.

There are, of course, some things which you have no control over — such as individuals making false statement, agencies unwilling to cooperate, the Postal Service not responding, etc.  However, there are things which can be done to circumvent such lies, uncooperative non-responses, etc., and it is certainly advisable to have an OPM Disability Attorney guide you with the wisdom and knowledge of experience and prior encounters in order to give you the greatest possible chance in your quest to obtain Federal Disability Retirement benefits from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Medical Retirement under FERS: Revisiting Updike

He wrote about mundane things; of middle class neighborhoods, Pennsylvania towns in which he grew up; farmlands before strip malls replaced them against the skyline of cornfield rows; and of affairs that grew naturally out of a revolution emancipated from the Sixties; of quiet sufferings and the rhythmic monotony of ordinary lives.

John Updike was an “in-betweener” — too young to fight in WWII, too old to have been drafter for the Vietnam debacle; and so he experienced the quietude and normalcy in between the two bookends of this country’s tumult and trials.

Updike was a voice for generations who saw the post-war era, of baby-boomers and American prosperity at its zenith; of the loss of any normative confluence of moral dictum and the abandonment of constraints once imposed by Protestantism.  All, of course, with a twinkle in his eye and a ready smile.  The Internet abounds with photographs of this uniquely American author — almost all with that thin smile as if he was about to share a private joke.

The Tetralogy of the Rabbit novels (actually a quintet if you include the last of the series, a novella entitled “Rabbit Remembered”) evinces a country gone soft after the harsh period of the Great Depression, the Second World War, the Korean conflict and the Vietnam era that undermined the ethical mandates known for generations before, unleashing a liberty of hidden sins like a bubbling cauldron of untamed desires.  But in the end, he is best known for the mundane, the ordinary, and how life in the suburbs of a prosperous nation left an emptiness unspeakable except by a voice given in narrative brilliance, from an author who was a regular contributor to The New Yorker.

Somehow, he made the ordinary seem exciting, even relevant.  By contrast, modernity has focused upon the rich and famous, and of greater unreachable glamour where perfection surpasses pragmatism.  Updike was able to make the commonplace seem important, the ordinary appear significant and the monotony of the mundane as not merely prosaic.  And isn’t that all that we seek, in the end?

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 loss of relevance, the ordinary and the commonplace is what often scares the Federal or Postal employee.

The job itself; the career; the monotonous routine of going to work, yet finding relevance in the act of “making a living” — these were all taken for granted in Updike’s short stories.  That other stuff — of infidelities and dalliances — were a deviation that Updike tried to point out as mere fluff in otherwise ordinary lives; and of medical conditions, they upend and disrupt the normalcy we all crave.

Federal Disability Retirement is a means to an end — of bringing back balance within a life that has become disrupted, but it is a way to bring back order where disruption to the mundane has left behind a trail of chaos.  And to that, the twinkle in Updike’s eyes and the thin smile would tell us that he would approve of such a move which will return you back to a life of mundane normalcy.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Disability Retirement: “I would rather. . .”

The ellipses that follows is from the Ancient Greek that denotes “omission” or “that something which follows which is left blank”, and allows for wandering thoughts and meandering reflections to complete the lack.  What is the range of an acceptable addendum?  Does it matter what the prefatory statement allows for, and does the logic of its completion depend upon the spectrum of grammatical technicalities that confine and maintain boundaries of meaningful discourse?

For example, what if a person was asked to complete the incomplete sentence, and the response is:  “I would rather [red, blue, pink and all of the flowers in the universe].”  Would we say to the person, “Wait a minute, I asked you to complete the thought and you have provided me with gibberish.”?  And he/she comes back with:  “That’s how I would finish the sentence, because that’s how I feel.”   Would that be allowable?  Or, should the rules of grammar confine and restrict, so that the formality of completion should reflect a coherence that is expected and anticipated, such as, “I would rather [be at the beach than going into work today]”?

In the insular universe of private thoughts, of course, we can add whatever fanciful thoughts that infringe upon the uncertainty of our subconscious minds; but when the breach between private/public dichotomy occurs, suddenly we are thrown into an arena that restricts and confines, and compels us to follow the rules of conversational efficiency, including grammatical rules, traditional sense of coherence, logical consistency and meaningful conceptual constructs.  Exiting the arena of private thoughts right into the concentric complexities of the public world alters the rules of engagement.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, such that the medical condition begins to impact, prevent and block the Federal or Postal employee from performing all of the essential elements of the Federal or Postal job, the critical point of departure — from breaching that dichotomy between the insular world of the “private” and stepping over into the “public” — begins when first there is an admission that a “problem” exists.

Preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, to be submitted ultimately to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, is likened to completing the fanciful thought that begins with, “I would rather…”.  The replacement of the ellipses can have many forms, restricted and delimited by grammatical constrictions and  restrictive contexts, but no Federal or Postal employee who begins the process ends such a sentence with, “I would rather … [be on disability retirement than be healthy and continue to remain in my chosen career].

Those who believe that there is a scintilla of coherence or meaningfulness in such a sentence do not know Federal and Postal employees.  Instead, it is a choice resulting from limited options, but sometime the best one available, as filing for an OPM Disability Retirement may be the only alternative where other such contingencies have already been exhausted.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Employee Disability Retirement: The leaked information

Most “secrets” are well-known; it is the combining of a multiplicity of the unknown, which constitutes the importance of leaked information.  Thus, it may be disseminated as to the “what”, but until it can be connected to the “when” or the “who”, the irrelevancy of the data remains in its isolation of significance.  Or, perhaps what will occur is revealed, and by whom, and even the destined time and place; but if caution delays the planned event for another day, hypervigilance can only be maintained for a limited period of time before exhaustion of focus, concentration and attentiveness wanes by profound fatigue.

There is, then, that old hippie dictum:  What if a tree falls in a forest unoccupied; did it make a noise?  Similarly, and in parallel format:  What if information is leaked, but no one took notice; is it relevant?  Does signification of data require acknowledgment?  Why is it that, in certain crime cases, concurrence of telling is important, even if no action is filed?  Why do decades-old cases suddenly come alive merely because impromptu declarations are made, or do underlying motives undermine the validity of such reenactments of crimes committed but neither solved nor investigated?

One often assumes that information begotten through nefarious sources is somehow less reliable; but it is more likened to the man whose leg gets bitten off by a shark while swimming in the midday sun – he hardly becomes comforted by the statistical limitations of an event that has already occurred.  Yet, we constantly obsess over leaked information; data which may be sensitive; constructs that can be pieced together, like a jigsaw puzzle but in the realm of real life.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who are considering filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, there is first the fear that one’s inner intent may be “leaked”; that discussion over the telephone may be overheard by those whose intent and motivation may not be as pristine as the proverbial snowfall the night before; and that, once filed, personal medical information may be disseminated without the privacy protection accorded by law.

In the end, the best that can be done remains twofold:  (1) try to restrict access to a Federal Disability Retirement application by providing fair warning as to the legal consequences if violated, and (2) to realize that the ultimate goal should always be kept in sight – that of getting an approval from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, and once that is done, all of the leaked information around the world will become irrelevant, as the focus always was, and should be, to reach that level of rest and restorative peace in order to attend to the real issue at hand:  One’s own medical condition.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Retiring from Federal Service with OPM Disability Retirement: Happy Puppy

Overused words lose their intended efficacy.  Perhaps the point of decay came about when the (unnamed) fast-food company decided to combine the word with the term, “meal”, and thereafter kids, grandkids and celebrity popularization effectively killed the last semblance of meaning.  But when watching the exuberance exhibited by a puppy, where commonplace activities are engaged in with reactive and unbounded energy, it is appropriate and meaningful to compound the two, and ascribe the descriptively emotive, “happy puppy“.

Whether it is the latter term which enlivens the former, or vice versa, is a question of inference; for, with the loss of meaning generally of the former, but with a retained appreciation that the latter is always inextricably bundled with ecstatic joy and delicious laughter; sometimes, by mere inference and inseparable conceptual coalescence of words, the singular vacuity of a word can be reinvigorated.  It also is often ascribed in anthropomorphic terms, as well as its opposite:  men and women are described as “happy puppies” or “sad puppies”, and the accompanying imagery is one of circumstantial delightfulness or despondency.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers 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 Federal or Postal job, if the elusive concept of “happiness” has been replaced with the daily toil of anguish and turmoil of angst, it is perhaps time to consider filing for Federal OPM Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal worker is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset.

When once the Federal or Postal employee was described as “one happy puppy”, but now avoidance and treatment as the winds of a plague have brushed upon the workplace each time the Federal or Postal employee enters the premises, and whispers of the arrival of that “sad puppy” abound like a pervasive brushfire of vituperative verbal assault; then, it is time to prepare, formulate and file for Disability Retirement benefits through OPM.

For, when the reality of a circumstance overshadows the conceptual force of words, then it becomes an opportunity for the sad puppy to seek the higher grounds of greater joy, and to wag its proverbial tail into the sunset of a happy life.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire