Federal Employee Medical Retirement: The Calendar

It rules every day and moment of our lives; yet, we feel out of synch with it, like the rip tide which pulls against the direction you wish to swim towards.

Every now and again, we read about more primitive societies who once possessed a biological affinity to the world around; but within the concrete jungle — or jumble — of technology and civilization’s dominance by construction, we have lost any sense of that.

And so we look out through the window at the stars and the moon, however dimly and distant they appear, misted (or misled) and obscured by the noise and artificial lights surrounding, and allow our lives to be controlled by the calendar of activities: Of chores to be done; of work to be accomplished; of deadlines to be met.

But that the full moon makes wildlife still a bit “off”, whether we believe in such mythologies of antiquated misgivings; but we take no notice.  Whether the baying of a dog during a full moon, or of skittish horses in the wild; no, it is the calendar which obscures, dominates, overrides it all.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers suffering from a medical condition, preventing the Federal or Postal employee from performing one or more of the essential elements of the Federal or Postal job — the most important notation on your calendar is the one for medical appointments and treatment modalities.  But you may have already exhausted your available leave and your agency won’t allow you to take LWOP anymore.

You probably need to file for Federal Disability Retirement under FERS, through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.  Put the notation in your calendar: Contact a disability attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and don’t let the moon lead you to howl in despair; after all, it’s the calendar which makes us do it.

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: The Disjunctive

In classical logic, the disjunctive can be posed in syllogistic form: Either A or B but not both; Not A; Therefore, B.  Jack lives in either Apartment A or in Apartment B, but not in both.  He does not live in Apartment A.  Therefore, Jack lives in Apartment B.

It is, in many ways, a crossroads, where the proverbial fork-in-the-road requires a decision.  What the disjunctive syllogism does not do, of course, is to take in the third option — of doing nothing; of not moving from decision-making to action; in which case, that third option often results in paralysis, further deterioration and consuming negation.

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, inertia at the crossroads of one’s career can result in the devastation of further ruination: Being placed on a Performance Improvement Plan; further deterioration of one’s own health; Termination from Federal Service.

Filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS is option B.  Option A is to remain at the job at the cost of one’s health, and that is certainly no option at all.  And option C?  To resign and walk away with nothing after all of that vested time with the Federal Government?  That, too, is not really a viable option.

Contact a disability lawyer to discuss the further particulars of your case, and consider the syllogistic value of the disjunctive.

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.

 

Permanent Disability Retirement from Federal Employment: Time for a Change

Often, the mind lags behind the body.  The body may have been indicating to you the need for some time; but “time” and “change” are conceptual paradigms which require thought — the mechanism of the mind which listens to the body.  Or, if one is beset with a psychiatric condition, what often happens is that one part of the brain becomes ill and cannot quite communicate to the other part of the brain which prompts the decision-making process.

Whatever the problem, there comes a time for a moment of realization — that it is time for a change.

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 position, the time for a change is now.

Contact an OPM Disability Lawyer who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement, and listen to your body — or the part of your mind which screams for that change — and make the first move in responding to the need: Time for a Change.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

FERS Disability Retirement for Federal Employees: What the Attorney Can Do

If attorneys were gods, they would work themselves out of business; but attorneys are not gods; therefore, there is much that an attorney can do.  Such a syllogism may be rather self-evident.  Attorneys are not gods; neither are they miracle workers.  Not every issue can be handled by, or resolved through, an attorney.

Sometimes, the lay person can do the work him/herself without an attorney.  At other times, the input of an attorney, however minimal, can be the difference between success or failure.

Here are some of the things a Federal Disability Attorney can do in a Federal Disability Retirement case: Focus and sharpen a case; cut out the irrelevancies; cite and apply the law; make the legal arguments which are current and applicable; streamline a case and make it clear and pointed; rebut an opponent’s argument by pointing out logical inconsistencies and mistaken applications of the law; provide a strategy and plan; give an objective account of one’s case.

There are many other aspects of any given case that a Federal Disability Retirement Attorney can be helpful with, but these generalities can provide you with a notion of what a good and effective attorney can do.

Contact an OPM Disability Retirement Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law and begin the process of putting together an effective Federal or Postal Disability Retirement application.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement for FERS Employees: Presumption of Orderliness

It is a peculiar presumption; for, in most other contexts, we presume the very opposite.  Yet, for whatever psychological basis of need or desire, we presume that there is orderliness in the lives of everyone else despite the chaos in our own lives.

We hide well for appearance sake, and perhaps that is the key: Everyone else seems to live an orderly, planned, well-managed life, and so the appearance itself is what maintains the sanity of society’s apparent orderliness.  Yet, when we hear about the chaos erupting in another’s person life — of a break-up between couples; of a life ruined for this or that incident; or even of a sudden medical condition that traumatizes a family member — are we really surprised?

In public we maintain a passive face; despite internal turmoil and private lives of hellish circumstances, we do our best to put forth a calm demeanor.  That is the unspoken rule, is it not?  Once out the door, the “deal” is that we leave the chaos behind and act “as if”.  To that extent, we are all great actors on the stage of public discourse; we just don’t get paid like the megastars in Hollywood, but nevertheless take on the lead role of the greatest movie series ever made: Life.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition which prevents the Federal or Postal worker from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, the time to stop “covering up” and “acting as if” has likely come to a crisis point.  The chaos of trying to hide the medical condition and acting “as if” everything is fine has now come to a point where life and acting coalesce: You must acknowledge the reality of the medical condition and stop trying to hide it because, in the end, your health is of greater importance than the appearance of orderliness.

Consult with an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law and begin the discussion of bringing back not only a presumption of orderliness, but a reality based upon an earned annuity of financial security.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement Benefits: Sitting alone

Sitting alone can be dangerous.  Whether early in the morning or late at night, when one’s thoughts are the only neighbor within, and the soliloquy of voices have been shuttered into basement echoes where the drip-drip of a broken faucet reverberates amidst the endless thoughts of tumult and disaster.  The disconnect between reality and thought, betwixt action and mind, become exponentially exaggerated when sitting alone.

Rarely do tectonic shifts in the objective world result in major disasters where entire civilizations crumble and become destroyed; for, each and every day, subterranean movements occur imperceptibly without notice of bystanders who walk from cafe to office; but within the shifts which occur while sitting alone, the tumults of a mind fearful of one’s future become endless nightmares that cannot be contained.

The subtlety of fear unrecognized; the voice within that panders to irrationality; or of the dread that overwhelms — it can all come about through sitting alone.  The cacophony of voices around; the television blaring to drown out silence; friends and acquaintances invited in order to keep out the squeezing quietude of being alone: these are temporary ways of blunting the danger of sitting alone.

It is like having a medical condition and trying desperately to ignore it; at some point, we are all alone in the world, just as the womb that once protected within a catacomb of warmth and security became lost upon the expelling into the cold and heartless universe, and so we remain sitting alone with fear and loathing for a future yet undecided.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who are sitting alone, unsure of what do to because a medical condition has begun to prevent the Federal or Postal employee from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, it is time to consult with an attorney and begin the process of initiating an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, to be submitted to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, and to stop avoiding the prospect of sitting alone by becoming lost in the day-to-day struggle of endless points of procrastination.

For, sitting alone is the pathway to realizing the disasters that loom within one’s thinking; it is a consultation with an experienced OPM Disability Retirement attorney that will open upon the doors for a future yet untold.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Medical Retirement for Federal Workers: Believing in something

It is difficult, these days, to do so.  One can, by rote of habit, engage in the taciturn void of Gregorian chants, of hardened wood to kneel upon in prayerful silence where altar boys were muffled in horror in backrooms somewhere behind the hidden conscience of priests who, holy though they appeared, were but men of fleshly wants; or of giving when the televangelist prayed for miracles and allowed the camera angle to capture the piety of a winking heart.

Modernity defies believing in something.  We scoff at piety because we learned long ago that priests in dark robes were merely cloaked in outward appearances while engaging in acts of desecration behind closed doors, and gurus who rode around in expensive cars while preaching the gospel of meditative calm possessed devious thoughts untold behind craggy beards and beady eyes; and so we have lost the capacity for believing in something, anything, and let our children roam the streets of nihilism, sensual extortions of human bondage and the virtual reality of video consoles, only to be disappointed when they find emptiness in their lives reflective of an endless chasm of dreamless nights.

Once upon a time, Johnny believed in things; and then the marching band stopped when wars became endless, where speeches no longer carried the weight of conscience and greed seemed rampant in the daily lives of believers and beggars alike.  A priest once told this writer that he wished that the Church would sell all of its assets and go back to being the mendicant preachers we once were; but that was years ago, and not much has changed.

For most of us, we continue to cling to the thin reed of possibility; for the rest of us, we must contend with the reality of life’s trials: of work; family; health and friendships; and perhaps the belief in a tomorrow yet to be fulfilled with promised days of warm memories.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition where the medical condition has begun to prevent one’s ability and capacity to perform one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, believing in something is a foundation for the next steps to take: Of a Statute in Federal Disability Retirement Law that sets forth a criteria to be met, and then to set about proving that one has met them.

Often, believing in something is nothing more than acting upon a need and setting about fulfilling that need; and for Federal and Postal employees who need to file for a FERS Disability Retirement, consulting with an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law is the first step towards believing in something that you have a right to believe in.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement: Answering the question

What constitutes “answering the question”, and more importantly, how does one determine when its opposite occurs — NOT answering the question?  Does the former occur if the questioner fails to follow up, and does the latter become an issue if the person asking responds with, “That doesn’t answer my question,” or some such similar declarative assertion?

Take the following hypothetical:  Person A asks Person B, “So, where do you come from?”  Person B answers, “The skies of Normandy were grey on that June day in 1944.”  Now, Person A could have various responses to such a statement, as in:  1.  “No, no, I asked where you came from.” 2. “Are you telling me that you come from Normandy, France?”  3.  “That doesn’t answer my question.”  4. Or, silence, with no follow-up.

Person B, of course, could similarly respond in variegated ways, as in:  A.  “I just told you.”  B.  “Yes” or “No” (in response to the follow-up question, “Are you telling me that you come from Normandy, France?”).  C.  Silence, or “Yes it does.”  D.  Nothing further.

It may be that Person B simply has a poetic bent, and from his perspective, the mundane query was answered in a metaphorical, literary manner.  More to the point, however:  Who determines if a question has been answered (leaving aside the further query of whether the answer itself has “sufficiently” or “fully” been responsive to the question) — the one who asks, or the one who answers?

In a normal conversation, of course, the issue rarely comes about; in an argument where one or the other side, or both, are trying to get answers and defeat the other side, the heat of the moment may determine the answer to the question; and the penultimate paradigm of the question, “Who determines whether the question has been answered?” occurs in the highest form during a deposition or cross-examination in the legal arena.

Observing what occurs during a court proceeding is an interesting experience of human behavior; of the back-and-forth between counsels and the witnesses being deposed or examined, as in:  “You didn’t answer the question.”  “Yes, I did.”  “I asked you…”.  “Asked and answered.”  “Objection, the question has already been asked and answered.”  And on and on until a singular point is pursued to an exhaustive level ad infinitum and ad nauseum.

Is the issue of what constitutes an answered question somewhat akin to the question or “original intent” — i.e., that just like an author’s original intent as to the meaning of a written document is what should rule, similarly, the person who asks the question has the sole power to determine whether or not the question asked has been answered, and moreover, adequately and sufficiently answered?

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who are beginning the process of preparing, formulating and filing 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, these questions concerning the “answering of questions” will and should come to the forefront when confronted with the questions asked on SF 3112A, Applicant’s Statement of Disability.

Inasmuch as the U.S. Office of Personnel Management has promulgated the questions in a carefully-crafted manner, there are some inherent pitfalls and dangers in what constitutes an adequate response, a sufficient answer and the complete delineation that rises to the level of a satisfactory statement.

SF 3112A is replete with unanswered questions within the very substance of each question, and the answers you provide are best guided by an attorney who has had the experience of legal encounters previously, and who specializes in the Law of Federal Disability Retirement.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Medical Retirement: The Categorical Imperative

It is, of course, the foundation of Kant’s moral philosophy; of the unconditional call to act in a certain way, accepted and mandated precisely because there is no room for question.  But that life were so easy; automatons would simply act in mechanistic ways, driven by moral certitude; free will could be determined by the comforting thought that universal codes of conduct shall always confine and direct.  And bureaucracies would always make decisions within a framework of computational algorithms.

But Federal Disability Retirement is not a matter of a diagnosis; unlike Social Security Disability, which does contain a semblance of categorical imperatives when it comes to certain medical conditions, the preponderance of the proof needed in becoming eligible for Federal Disability Retirement benefits is threefold: First, the minimum number of years under FERS (18 months of creditable Federal Service) or CSRS (5 years, which is presumably already met by everyone in that retirement system); Second, a medical condition which came into existence during the time of Federal Service (with some arguable exceptions within one (1) year of being separated from Federal Service); and Third, a nexus of relevant impact between one’s medical condition and the essential elements of one’s positional duties one performs for the Federal agency or the U.S. Postal Service.

It is this third step in the process which effectively compels one to step outside of the identification of Federal Disability Retirement laws as containing an element of the categorical imperative; for, in the end, it is not simply an evaluation of “which category” one falls into, but rather, how significant and persuasive is the bridge built upon between the two primary land masses:  one’s medical condition (land mass #1) and the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job (land mass #2).

That metaphorical “bridge” must be constructed with care, clarity, and concrete argumentation of persuasive force in order to withstand the inspecting scrutiny of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Look upon it as if OPM is walking through the construction site with a hard hat, pen in hand and taking notes furiously in attempting to discover deficiencies in the qualification standards imposed.  Jumping up and down and screaming at the inspector that the bridge fits into a pre-defined category will not suffice; instead, the categorical imperative must be argued for by pointing to the medical evidence, the law, and the connective tissues which form the effective and persuasive confluence of all of the elements which comprise the ultimate imperative of life:  that of a methodology of argumentation that one is “right”.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

The Devaluation of the Federal Employee with Disabilities

Countries engage it deliberately with its currencies; economic circumstances force it based upon fluctuating market volatility; and the basic principles in capitalism of supply and demand will often expect it.

Currencies are never stable indexes despite the best attempts by countries to manage and control their economies; the fact is, in this interconnected world of global economic entanglement, devaluation of worth can occur overnight, just after the soft breathing of nightfall overtakes, but before the dawn of first light when the halls of stock markets in faraway colonnades lined in symmetrical facades open their doors for the business of commodity markets.

Fortunes can be made, and lost, overnight; but the devaluation of that which implicates worth, can just as easily fall upon the human soul.  Medical conditions tend to do that.  We exchange, trade, value and appraise based upon a commodity’s supply, demand, desire and greed of want; but when it comes to human beings, though we deny such callous approaches, the encounter with such baseness still prevails.

For the Federal employee or the U.S. Postal worker, facing devaluation is nothing out of the ordinary when a medical condition hits.  Once the Federal or Postal worker suffers from a medical condition, such that the medical condition prevents one from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s positional duties, the avenue of choices becomes starkly clear:  One can try to hang on; one can walk away with nothing to show for those many years of dedicated and loyal service; or one can file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether one is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset.

It is the last of the tripartite alternatives which is the best option, and one which can secure a future for the Federal or Postal employee.  For, ultimately, the whole point of devaluation in paradigms of economic theory, is to stabilize the currency for future years; it is the experience of short-term suffering to attain long-term calm.  Economics is merely a microcosmic reflection of a macro-global perspective, and application of parallel principles are relevant to situations which might otherwise appear foreign.

Federal agencies and the U.S. Postal Service engage in devaluation, just as governments do, when the worth of the Federal employee or the U.S. Postal worker is seen in terms of productivity for the moment, and not for the long-term benefit gained for the future.

We live in a world of short selling trades; everything is seen for the immediacy of gain; but fortunately for the Federal or Postal worker who must contend with the attitude and approach of a Federal agency or the U.S. Postal Service in viewing the devaluation of the worker based upon productivity, the option of filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through OPM is one which is available, attractive, and allowable for those who are eligible to prepare, formulate and file for the benefit.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire