FERS Disability Retirement Law: In Anticipation of…

Why do we chop and stack wood months before winter’s first blade of frost?  Why are drunk drivers arrested before they have committed any crime?  Why do we purchase life or health insurance before the contingent event has occurred, potentially throwing away hundreds of thousands of dollars on a bet which we will likely never win?

Are such actions engaged out of fear, or out of anticipatory logic based upon a rational thought process of, “What if?”  Do species aside from our own engage in anticipatory actions?

The dog who anticipates his master’s return home at the same time each day; the birds who come each season to the gardener who fills the feeder in the springtime of bursting growth; the geese who fly south; the butterflies that travel the seasonal changes — are they any less “logical” than our supposed “higher-level” reasonings?

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who are beginning to prepare an effective OPM Disability Retirement application in anticipation of what will ultimately result from an ongoing, deteriorating medical condition, the arguments proffered by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management are often along the lines of: But you aren’t there, yet.  Your agency says that you have been doing a great job — look at your past performance ratings!  Yes, but….

Contact an OPM Disability Retirement Lawyer to discuss how to rebut those argument which OPM makes in anticipation of…

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: The Fear of Tomorrow

There is, of course, the other statement — of replacing the preposition “of” with “for” — which alters the essence of meaning at its core, and not just in some ancillary manner.  The fear of tomorrow pits our relationship of a being in the present to an uncertainty of a time beyond; whereas, the fear “for” tomorrow magnifies the present in the context of recognized circumstances and current issues that must be analyzed as against a future possibility.

Perhaps the distinction in the prepositional modifier is too subtle to make a difference.  Yet, the first sense of the statement — the fear of tomorrow — places one with an angst as an object-to-object antagonism, much like a person’s fear of spiders or creepy-crawlies, where there is no cure for such a response.  The other form — of a fear for tomorrow — allows for rational discourse and a “talking about” not only tomorrow, but of the fear itself, their underlying reasons and the potential solutions to objectives not yet met.

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 fear of tomorrow must by necessity be replaced with a fear for tomorrow, and that is when the next step can be taken: Preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, to be filed through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Do not let the fear of tomorrow stop you from asserting your employment rights and eligibility for a benefit that is offered; instead, determine the underlying basis of the fear for tomorrow and begin to take the necessary steps to assert your legal rights by consulting with an Attorney who specializes in FERS Disability Retirement Law.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Disability Retirement: Inconsistencies

Selective extrapolation is the preferred method by which they justify a denial; a notation taken out of context from this particular day, or an offhand comment in response to a nurse’s question on a differentiated day where you may be feeling slightly better, etc.

Inconsistencies remain the harbinger of a denial of a FERS Medical Retirement application from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.  Yet, life is full of inconsistencies, and one can even argue that inconsistencies are the stamp of reality — that sincerity of life’s events are replete with contradictions and spectrums of bumps; that perfection is often a greater indication of artifice, instead of life’s reality that is actually lived.

That is the anomaly and the inconsistency itself: Perfection of circumstances is the real artifice; lack of perfection, the reality of living life.  Yet, the U.S. Office of Personnel Management reviews a Federal Disability Retirement application in the very opposite way; they search out the inconsistencies, then allege that those inconsistencies somehow rise to the level of artifice, when all along they merely reflect the reality of life itself, replete with inconsistencies that betray the lack of perfection which truth itself brings.

Thus, beware when the doctor or nurse writes in a note, “Feeling much better today” — for, although you still hobble about because of a broken body or are unable to focus or concentrate because of a psychiatric condition, the inconsistency between a singular notation and the reality reflected in one’s medical condition is the weaponized methodology of a Federal Agency which seeks out such inconsistencies as a basis for a denial.

As such, a Federal employee or U.S. Postal Service worker who seeks to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits should turn for advice and counsel to an experienced Attorney who specializes in FERS Disability Retirement Law to make sure that the inconsistencies may be minimized in the impact upon a Federal Disability Retirement application.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

FERS & CSRS Medical Retirement: The power of words

The extraordinary nature of such conceptual constructs cannot be long or seriously refuted.  Whatever the anthropological origins of them; of the efficacy based upon quantity as opposed to quality; of whether some societies that lack the nuance of inflection, meaning or inherent force; and however they developed over time, incrementally building into greater heights of tenor, tone or tempestuous triggers of emotional upheavals —one cannot deny the power of words.

Words convey meaning, direction, instruction; touch emotions when utilized with sensitivity and care; and trigger images so powerful that they can break down the most stoic among us, and convey persuasion such that minds can be changed, actions can be reversed and lives can be altered.

One cannot say of them, “Oh, they’re just a bunch of words” and believe them without recognizing the times when a 911 call helped to save a life because of the calm “words” of the dispatcher, or of the marriage vow that cemented and elevated the mere utterances into a lifetime of fidelity; or of the baby’s first formations beyond the gurgling sounds emitted that identifies comprehension beyond an appetitive nature.

The power of words can uplift, denounce, alter the course of history and damage a young psyche beyond repair.  The power of words can persuade, explain, instruct and describe, of the beauty of a sunrise beyond the meadows where butterflies float and flowers begin to disclose the radiance of the morning dew-droplets in the chasm of a waking mind, or of the sunset where sunlight is replaced by shadows within the hearts of young lovers projecting what the future might yet bring, yet contented in the embrace of warmth and merriment.

It is by words that civilizations rise and fall, and by which man is elevated above the apes, but yet remain just below the angels; and it is the power of words that brought us Shakespeare, Milton, Faulkner and Hemingway, and the quiet subtlety of F. Scott Fitzgerald’s politeness of society.  Then, by contrast, there is life itself.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, this contrast is known and appreciated.  Medical conditions betray the limitations of words; for, how can “pain” be adequately described?  What good is a “diagnosis” beyond that which cannot be cured?  How can one utilize the “power of words” to describe the despondency of Major Depression?  And more to the point: How can one adequately convey by the power of words, the impact perpetrated by the medical condition upon the essential elements of one’s job?

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who are considering 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, remember always that there is a wide chasm between “having a medical condition” and being able to persuade OPM that the medical condition prevents you from performing one or more of the essential elements of your job.

And such persuasion, ultimately, is accomplished through the power of words.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Employee Disability Retirement: Fodder for our own folly

We often collect that which we know we need not; and of fodder for other’s play, who but the foolish gather the refuse of one’s own folly?  Why does youth engage in a greater percentage of folly, and why do old men insist upon driving uncomfortable cars which make them look foolish once they park and struggle to get out from a position of near-supine discomfort so debilitating that you can almost see the decrepit arches of an arthritic back?  Foolishness, of course, is not the reserve of the young only, as middle-aged men with youthful grins and old men with conniving friends whose sole purpose in remaining a soul-mate is contingent upon peeking at the bank account of retirees, reveal and manifest daily.

In the end, the test that has always worked for this writer, is twofold:  First, that sincerity is never defined by more words piled upon a previous set of words, but action which follows to concretize the empty promises of uttered speech; and Second, that everyone in the world can do whatever he or she wants, so long as you are willing the pay the price.  Thus, as to the latter, it is all well and good to say you want to do this or that, but the problem occurs when consequences unfold, and you expect others to pay the fine, complete the obligation, satisfy the debt or expend efforts to extricate from the difficulties created.

For children, there is always an excuse:  Parental obligation and the minor’s claim of not having the maturity to “know better”, compels a feeling of empathy, a reminiscence of remorse, and a hint of guilt for not having spent that extra hour coaching youth baseball or embracing that “quality time” which forever harmed that fragile psyche of that young underling who – by all other measures of objectivity – is described as merely a “brat”.  Of the former, one must simply admit that the American folklore of a fool being born every minute – or was it every second? – is reinforced by our own inability to consecrate the condoning cadence of our corrugated cacophonies of constancy; sorry, but once alliteration becomes engaged, it is like putting a finger on the trigger of an automatic weapon and losing control.

More to the point:  Most arguments are non-substantive.  By that is meant the following:  there is rarely a “real” issue of disagreement, but rather, a mere necessity to renegotiate the words used in order to fit into a puzzle where two or more people interact.  That being the case, most issues that arise, are resolved with more words imparted, which is simply a further negotiation of words upon words in a language game of meaning, reinterpretation and declaration of purpose.

But as being foolish has a price to pay (refer to the Second Rule stated herein), so the need to follow up with a concrete action, instead of more words (i.e., the First Rule stated above) is necessitated when real issues that have an impact and consequence effect upon lives of others.  Most problems in life are self-creations; those who have a greater ability to justify by blaming others, simply get away with it without blemish or repercussions.

For Federal and Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, such that the medical condition prevents the Federal or Postal worker from continuing on in the career of his or her choice, the exception to the above applies:  Medical conditions are never the fault of one’s own, and so Rule One and Rule Two should never be considered.  It is, instead, Rule Three (heretofore unstated) which should rule:  Prepare the most effective Federal Disability Retirement application you can, and file it as soon as practicable, as the wait before the U.S. Office of Personnel Management is long and arduous, but always keep in mind the fodder for our own folly applies to everyone individually, including those within a massive bureaucracy as that of OPM.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Medical Retirement Lawyer: The Complexity of Unpredictability

Some view human behavioral unpredictability as a declaration of the underlying complexity; others would have it that, far from any such convoluted aspiration towards mystery and intricacy, a yawn and ensuing boredom more likely represents the determinism and simplicity of humans.

Which represents the true picture?  Perhaps youth and a naive lack of experience in encountering the universe of everyday conflict is what we discover in the spectrum of opinions; and cynicism abounds upon greater enmeshment and entanglement with the human condition.

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 question often arises as to whom, when and the timing of divulging the intent to file.  As the saying goes, discretion is the greater part of valor; unless there is a compelling reason to do so, limiting the information where relevant; restricting the venue of information to the extent possible; and keeping mum until and unless necessary, should be the guiding principle.

Why?  Because, first and foremost, medical information (which is obviously the primary foundational basis of a Federal disability retirement application) is sensitive in nature, confidential in scope, and entails vast privacy concerns for all.  Further, one never knows how an agency and its representatives may react (thus the charge that human beings are complex in nature), but the predictability of big-mouths and lack of discretion (alas, the corollary charge of simplicity of humans) should restrain and constrain any urge to divulge earlier than necessary.

“Necessary” is the key word, and that applies to people, timing and context of dissemination of such confidential information.

For the Federal and Postal employee contemplating preparing, formulating and filing for OPM Disability Retirement benefits, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, the general rule, always, should be to believe in both contradictory assertions:  Because human behavior is complex and unpredictable, be discreet in revealing information; and because human behavior is simplistic and unimaginative, similarly be discreet and restrained in providing sensitive information.

As one side of a coin is worth just as much as the other, it is best to feel the nature of two faces in a world replete with two-faces.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement Lawyer: The Happiness Principle

A society’s trending obsession is often reflected by the backdrop of books written, published and popularized in culture corridors of mass media; and so the Oprah of timeless celebration never loses its luster for belated works attempting to keep pace with the commercialization of principles which once may have been considered seriously.

Plato and Aristotle addressed the issue; Existentialism arose from the ashes of war, and sidestepped it by considering the bleakness of the human condition; but in the age of technology and the optimism blanketed through mass dissemination of information, the focus has shifted from essence to residual results, where the natural consequences of X becomes the focal obsession of Y.  Happiness was once, in a time of yesteryear, an afterthought to survival, secondary to ethical conduct, and tertiary to a productive life.

Today, it seems that the principle is the primary goal of living, as organisms and amoebas naturally tend towards food sources.  Beyond the happiness principle, however, is the undeniable fact that it cannot be attained when certain interrupting forces blockade and obstruct; and pain, psychiatric conditions and medical disabilities certainly fall into that category.

There is, then, the condition itself (the medical condition) which impedes the happiness principle; and administrative processes (such as Federal Disability Retirement, filed through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management) which constitute a bureaucratic obstacle to corollary life principles.

Obtaining Federal Disability Retirement benefits through OPM does not and should not pretend to resolve medical issues; but it does allow for the Federal or Postal employee to attend to the primary concern underlying one’s life — the medical condition itself. Often, we confuse the essence of a thing with the appearance of that which presents itself to us.

For the Federal employee and the U.S. Postal Service worker, it is important to understand that preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, whether one is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, is not the “end all and be all” of attaining the ultimate goal, but rather part and parcel of multiple components which, like pieces of a puzzle, need to be gathered, sorted and organized in order to create that collage of life called contentment.

Thus the “happiness principle”:  perhaps not the destination to be confused, but the quality of the ride to get there.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

FERS Disability Retirement Attorney: The Social Security factor

For Federal and Postal employees under FERS, who now comprise the majority of the workforce in the Federal government, the issue of when to file for Social Security Disability benefits (SSDI) while concurrently filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, is often a recurring question.

On SF 3112A, at the very bottom of the standard form, there are two boxes to check with respect to whether (A) Social Security disability benefits have been applied for, and (B) whether the receipt has been attached and included with one’s Federal Disability Retirement application.

Since most FERS Disability Retirement applicants are still on the agency’s rolls as either active employees, on Sick Leave, Annual Leave or Leave without Pay, the filing for Social Security disability benefits becomes an anomaly, a puzzle and a conundrum, precisely because of the following: Ultimately, the reason why Social Security disability benefits must be applied for, is to see whether or not a coordinating “offset” between FERS Disability Retirement benefits and Social Security disability benefits will be appropriately imposed (a 100% offset in the first year of concurrent receipt of benefits where the annuity rate for the FERS Disability Retirement annuitant is set at 60% of the average of one’s highest-3 consecutive years of service; then, every year thereafter, a 60% offset during each year of concurrent receipt of Federal Disability Retirement benefits at the Federal Disability Retirement annuity rate of 40% of the average of one’s highest-3 consecutive years of service); but presumably such an analysis leading to an offset would occur if an approval by the Social Security Administration is based upon information concerning the severity and extent of the medical condition and disability, and not because a denial of Social Security disability benefits is based upon one’s status of employment.

But here is the “rub”:  Human Resource Offices often will demand and insist that Social Security disability benefits must be filed for, before the Federal Disability Retirement application can be forwarded to OPM.  Nothing could be further from the truth; but then, as gods, dictators and other power-wielding fiefdoms comprise the vast expanse of authoritative sources in the universe, it is often a good idea to go with the flow, file (with minimal effort expended), obtain a receipt which shows that one has filed, and be asked at a later date to duplicate the effort, if needed.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire