OPM Disability Retirement under FERS: The Long Slog

Whether impatience is a uniquely American characteristic (a flawed one?) or is merely something inherently inseparable from the human species generally is a debate for anthropologists and similar academic theoreticians to engage; but in any event, it does appear to pervade the American character in pervasive plenitude.

We are impatient about almost everything — and appear to be willing to abandon all “old ways” in favor of the “new”.  This leads to some disastrous results — as in our impatience for conflicts that last too long and our quick willingness to abandon our efforts because our goals were neither quickly nor easily achieved.

The Long Slog is always problematic for the impatient — for, it means that we must commit time and resources for periods beyond a murky, endless timeframe.  How long something takes cannot always be clearly quantified, and often the anticipated length must be ignored and, instead, achievement must be measured not in terms of time, but in light of merely remaining and showing a steadfast commitment to honoring a timeless commitment.

This is often difficult because other thoughts begin to intrude during the endless lull — Are we wasting our time?  What if we are throwing away good money after bad (a very common thought);  What if we never achieve our goal?  And many more such concerns, besides.  How do we counter the natural concerns of the Long Slog?

First, by clarifying at the outset one’s commitment to a process, and recognizing that the stated goal can only be achieved without regard to time, and Secondly, to accept that any timeframe anticipated should be multiplied by a factor of 10.

Commitment is a difficult value to uphold, and that is why a marriage covenant is so often broken — for, who can even conceive of honoring a promise “Till death do us part” without knowing the particulars of what a lifetime will entail?  All that goes into a “lifetime” — of joys and sorrows, of happiness, suddenly overshadowed by sickness and tragedies unforeseen — in short, the normal history of all of mankind.

Thus do so many people end in divorce and, similarly do long-term commitments become abandoned and forgotten human detritus.

Likewise, when a Federal or a Postal employee decides to engage in the process of preparing, formulating, and filing a Federal Disability Retirement under FERS through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM), one must mentally prepare for the Long Slog.  It is a long and arduous, complicated bureaucratic process involving potentially 3 stages, and with an “almost certainty” of an initial denial from OPM no matter how well-crafted and fully documented the initial filing is composed.

Contact a FERS Disability Lawyer who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and begin to prepare for The Long Slog.

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 Disability Retirement Law: David Versus Goliath

It is in the Biblical book of Samuel, and even in modernity — where the once-obvious cultural reference was universally known, or otherwise familiar, but cannot now be presumed — most understand by a conceptual model in other ways: The odds stacked against one; the unfair advantage, at least on first appearance, of one over the other; that bulk versus agility never means that one can predict the outcome; and similar referential assumptions.

But with a sling and five smooth stones, the underrated David overcame the odds of fear, trepidation, unfair advantage and overwhelming odds.

We all love a story where the underestimated and disadvantaged individual overcomes the odds of life.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition such that the medical condition(s) prevents the Federal or Postal worker from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, it is an appropriate analogy to apply: The Goliath, of course, is the U.S. Office of Personnel Management — the Federal Agency which makes a determination on all Federal Disability Retirement applications under FERS.

The “David” is the Federal or Postal worker who must prepare, formulate and file an effective Federal or Postal Disability Retirement application, to be submitted to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.  And by extension, what constitutes the 5 stones which brought down Goliath?  The Law, of course.

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.

 

Medical Retirement for Federal Employees: Future Plans Deterred

The common criticism launched against Bishop Berkeley, whether deservedly or not, is that his philosophical positions fly against the common sense of everyday experience.  Of course, it all depends upon how you interpret his position.

His generally-accepted dictum of “Esse est percipi” (no, we will not try and be like the great William F. Buckley, engaging in the well-known habit of interspersing Latin phrases which no one understood but everyone acted like they did; and instead will provide in the next dependent clause the English translation so as not to appear too intellectually prudish) — “To be (i.e., to exist) is to be perceived” — engendered ridicule, confusion, complex rebuttals for justification of untenable positions, and a firestorm of fascinating linguistic gymnastics to explain contortions of philosophical positions.  For, we all believe that there exists, beyond our own perceptions, an objective world separate and apart from the experiential sensations of our own bodies.

One might counter: If “existence” is defined merely by our own sensations, then we should be able to defy the objective existence of the world by numbing our perceptual apparatus.  Thus, if a bus is oncoming, simply blot out our perceptual capacities and when the bus “hits” us — poof! — no bus.  Similarly, when we leave a room, the existence of the room from which we just exited is assumed to still exist despite our distance from it where we no longer perceive it.  In other words, we “believe” that the viability of the objective world does not depend upon our perceiving it.

Thus, the criticism of the statement itself — “To be” (i.e., exist) “is to be perceived” (i.e., that such existence depends upon our perception of it) — is thought to be nonsensical.  It is akin, likewise, to our future plans.  We expect future occurrences to follow upon the path of present conditions.  Thus do we wake up each morning and expect the coffee to taste somewhat like the way it tasted the day before, and the day before that; that when we awaken, the ceiling above is the same color as it was the morning previous; and that the office or worksite we will approach will be there as it was before.  The future depends upon the present; the present is inescapably embraced by the past; and so we walk about in this universe expecting that future plans will be undeterred by unexpected phenomena.  Except, when they are.

Medical conditions do that, don’t they?  They deter future plans because they disrupt what we were before; they alter the scope of who we were just yesterday, or the day before.  The proverbial “room of existence” that Berkeley posited has in fact changed; it is no longer the “I” who was yesterday.

Filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS is an attempt to regain the existential “I” of yesterday, in an effort to be able to focus upon one’s health instead of constantly worrying about tomorrow’s future with one’s Federal Agency or Postal Service job.  Consider consulting with an Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law.  It may be that existence depends more upon one’s perception than you think, and that future plans deterred may become undeterred by preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement Benefits: Pretzels of Arguments

Anyone with a thought can argue; of a voice which is louder, more aggressive; of incoherence in an age where logic has been abandoned and rationality of methodological proof is unnecessary, but where one’s “feelings” or whether one belongs to this or that victimized class in and of itself validates the propriety of an argument’s perspective.

“Pretzels of arguments” is a concept which evokes an image — a metaphor of sorts — where one has had to engage in a series of linguistic contortions in order to get from Idea-A to Conclusion-Z.  In modernity, however, the metaphor fails to define the illogical structure of an argument, for methodological soundness is no longer applicable: That is, one need not worry about the missing “middle term” in a syllogism or a necessary nexus between sentences in propositional logic precisely because in today’s methodology (if one can identify it as such) of logical discourse, there are no rules which apply.

Yet, pretzels of arguments still confuse us.  There are those who intentionally aggregate the conflate multiple arguments in order to confound; or, others who simply cannot restrict one’s thoughts into a coherent conciseness and therefore must speak in paragraphs where a couple of sentences will do quite nicely.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition such that the medical condition prevents the Federal or Postal worker from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, a necessary condition in preparing, formulating and filing a FERS Disability Retirement application with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management is completion of SF 3112A — Applicant’s Statement of Disability.

Some applicants provide an abbreviated annotation to the questions on SF 3112A (which is probably not a great idea), while others provide a voluminous account in response to the questions, going on for pages upon pages in pretzels of arguments that can confuse and lead one into a morass, lost in a forest of language (also not a great idea). SF 3112A should be completed with thoughtful precision — of providing enough information for an approval of a Federal Disability Retirement application, while leaving out unnecessary and confusing information.

Leave the pretzels of arguments for friends and family when holiday gatherings need some confusing diatribes in order to avoid the two rules of pleasantries: leaving politics and religion — those two subjects where pretzels of arguments are most needed.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

 

OPM Disability Retirement: Elevation of the Ordinary

The ordinary is in contrast to the extraordinary; the extraordinary, to the penultimate superlative; and perhaps one may go on to greater heights of adjectives, but the one which cannot be surpassed is that of “perfection”.

Various perspectives depend upon the manner of how we approach life; on the one hand, the “ordinary” can be viewed as comfortable anonymity — of a self-satisfied status of neither shining beyond nor underwhelming those around, but a quiet competence which betrays a quietude of monotony, of sorts.

By distinctive differentiation, the “extraordinary” is separated from the former by way of elevated characteristics that point out some level of accolades beyond — somewhat like those brighter stars within the vast universe of a sky filled with billions and billions of twinkling lights (can you hear in the background the voice of Carl Sagan?).

For some reason, we scoff at the ordinary and encourage a stature of the extraordinary.  Perfection is out of our reach; the extraordinary, however, is somehow seen as achievable, and so we become life coaches for our children within the microcosmic universe of our own lives: You can become X; You can do better; You can be the best; You are a special individual — etc.

When does the ordinary become a goal in life?  When everything and everyone is “extraordinary”, doesn’t the extraordinary become the ordinary?  When the elevation of the ordinary becomes a commonplace occurrence, then nothingness becomes something and everything becomes conflated and indistinguishable.  Until — that which was once ordinary is lessened.

When a medical condition prevents the Federal or Postal employee from doing the ordinary — of one’s job; of enjoying the weekends; of being able to just take out the garbage without pain, etc.; then the elevation of the ordinary becomes a focus of want.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition such that the ordinary is elevated to a goal of satisfaction, then it is time to prepare, formulate and file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Focusing upon one’s health is an ordinary matter for most people — we take our health for granted.  When our health fails, however, then it is time to view the elevation of the ordinary as a means of reaching for a time that once was, where Federal Disability Retirement benefits will allow for the extraordinary circumstances to return the Federal or Postal employee to the desired goal of elevation back to the ordinary.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal & Postal Disability Retirement: Trapped, the feeling

It is an unmistakeable sense; of panic which may ensue, or a narrowing of the universe where being shuttered, the walls shrinking, a sudden and overwhelming feeling of claustrophobia; and of physical manifestations, of an inability to breathe, of constrictions and lameness of limbs; it is all of being trapped, the feeling.

It need not be in a physical sense; a psychological condition that is just as real as the reality of the chair one sits upon; but others cannot see it, empathize about it nor conduct one’s actions toward ameliorating the condition; for, in the end, being trapped, the feeling, is an existential condition that can only be cured by first recognizing the source of one’s situation.

Observing an animal, trapped can evoke an empathetic comity of such feelings; we “know” how they “feel” just by the mere manner of actions they reveal.  The pacing back and forth; the eyes which tell you of their anxiety and distress; and constant movements in a frenzy of attempting to escape.

We have all been beset with being trapped, the feeling, and not knowing where to turn to, how to escape, what to do.  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, being trapped, the feeling, often accompanies one’s situation when handling both the medical condition and the reaction of the Agency or Postal Service.

The vicious circularity that begins to swirl like the formation around the hurricane’s eye or the tornado that touches down upon flat plains near an unwary midwestern town — of the increasing pressures being placed by the Federal Agency or the Postal Service and the need to attend to one’s medical conditions — at some point, something has to “give”.

Preparing a Federal Disability Retirement application, to be ultimately filed with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, is often the “escape route” available.  As to understanding the various exit points, the method and manner of escaping — for that, you should consult an attorney who specializes in preparing, formulating and filing a Federal Disability Retirement application, and one who performs the practice of law exclusively in the area of Federal Disability Retirement.

Being trapped, the feeling, is never a “good” feeling; but consulting with an attorney who specializes in finding the best approach in formulating an effective Federal Disability Retirement application allows for its opposite and positive feeling: being freed, the sense of elation.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Retirement for Mental or Physical Incapacity: Of Dreams Before

It is the past that always haunts; of dreams before, when youthful vigor and innocence begetting of naïveté left one breathless with a clueless notion of the world.  Was it better to live in a world of fantasy, where the world was limitless in its potential — or do we prefer the reality of cynicism where we finally comprehend the restrictions of imposed constraints?

The worst form of put-down is to refer to a middle-aged man or woman as one who “had” so much potential; for it is the third person singular in past tense that evolved from the present tense of “has”, and we wonder when the variation substituting the “s” with the “d” occurred.

It is all well and good to be young with yet the fading scars of an acne-riddled chin, with barely a stubble to makes a difference by a razor’s edge in the morning, and be referred to as a person who “has” potential; it is quite another when the first wrinkles of botox-resistant flabbiness find a permanent home in the comfort of an expansive forehead, when the verb is still applied but with the substituted subtlety of the interchanged consonant, barely noticed but with conviction declared.

That is when, of dreams before and hopes once harbored become but shadows left behind in the greenery of a forgotten childhood.

Do we despair when we no longer have dreams?  Are we sadder, less positive, more cynical, when the potential others noted have been dashed with the ravages of time, reality, cold facts and ruthless societal indifference?

One can possess virtue in this world, so long as it is never tested; but is virtue of any value if it never encounters reality but remains in the ivory towers of conceptual constructs?  Of dreams before — before what?  Before the “real world” extinguished them and relegated such to the trash heaps of childish fantasies, never to be redeemed because of the debts owed and the responsibilities to bear?

Yet, one can hold on to some dreams, and even if never realized, the dreams of youth may still be enjoyed regardless of the substitution of the “s” for the “d”.  What others say of you may not always be applicable; it may just be a soliloquy of regrets reflecting the speaker’s own failures.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition and need to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, the fact that things didn’t “turn out like they were supposed to” does not mean that, of the dreams before, everything has to be abandoned.

OPM Disability Retirement is merely a means to an end; it is, for the time being a means in order to focus upon one’s health and well being, in order to prepare for a future beyond today’s sorrows.  Federal Disability Retirement benefits allows for a person to gain some semblance of financial security in order to get back to good health, and to allow for the past tense to return one to the third person singular in the present tense — for dreams today, and not of dreams before.

Sincerely,

Robert R. MdGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement Benefits: Pleasure & the ascetic

The two concepts are often thought to be antithetical, from opposing philosophical frameworks and inconsistent in their expending of energies to achieve.  Of the latter, it connotes self-discipline and an aversion, if not outright refusal and avoidance, of any indulgences that are implied by the former.  The former, of course, is what most of us strive for — if not openly, then surreptitiously while denying that it is one’s singular goal.

Pleasure in its excesses can be harmful, of course, just as too much of anything can lead to self-immolation through abundance and gluttony.  Both, however, have something in common: they are like two sides of the same coin, where life doesn’t allow for the existence of one without the recognition of the other.

Thus: Being cannot be distinguished without Nothingness (e.g., it is because there is the “nothingness” of space between the bookshelf and the wall that you can differentiate between the two entities); life cannot be identified without its opposite —death, or inertness; wealth is created in contradistinction to poverty, or lack thereof; a smile can be recognized, but so can a frown; and so forth and so on.

What the ascetic fails to realize is that the extreme of self-indulgence in striving for pleasurable activities need not be the only methodology of interacting with this world; there are more moderate ways of living than the pure rejection of all pleasure.  Conversely, the one who strives only for pleasure — i.e., pleasure as the sole motivator in one’s life and goal-seeking — fails to realize that its corollary — pain — is a necessary posit, and if not rearing its ugly head presently, will do so sometime in the near future.

Pain is an existential reality of life, just as pleasure is the rare interlude that we all seek, and it is the ascetic who has realized that life’s pleasurable moments will often follow with a period of pain, as the reason why some seek to limit the pain by denying all pleasure.  That is why monastic orders come into being, and why Zen Buddhism founds its roots in the denial of reality in order to deal with pain — all because pleasure could not be ultimately achieved without the pain that accompanies.

That is the reality that Federal and Postal employees come to realize when a medical condition begins to prevent one’s ability and capacity to perform all of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job.  Suddenly, those “pleasures” that were once taken for granted — of a health body; of a mind that has focus, concentration, and mental acuity to multi-task on a daily, sustained basis — begin to wither and wane.

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, may become a necessity, and when one is forced to take that necessary step, it may be a good idea to consult with an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law.

For, in the end, neither pleasure nor the ascetic have grasped the true point of living a worthwhile life; as worth is determined by the priorities ones sets in the course of existing, one’s health should thus be a major element to achieve within every web of goals set, whether in striving for pleasure or regarding the ascetic who renounced it for the sake of a mistaken belief.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Medical Retirement from USPS or other Federal Agencies: Solomon’s choice

Even in this age of millennial ignorance of ancients, literary or biblical references to arcane metaphors (while taking delight in such useless information as the minutiae of Sanskrit grammar), the general view that King Solomon’s judgment was profoundly wise, is accepted without argument.  Yet, were his assumptions correct, and do they apply today?  Is it presumptively reasonable that love of child would rise above the other emotions felt – of jealousy, perhaps, or envy of the other mother – and declare the truth of the hidden motive?  Is there a priority or order of sequence that necessarily mandates truth to manifest itself, when the choice is one of death, loss, sacrifice and the horror of splitting a baby into two?

Of course, beyond the significance of the epic story itself, is the metaphor we are left with in living our daily lives – of making a choice between honor and its opposite, or of Truth and Falsity; of enduring for the sake of X as opposed to sacrificing in the light of Y.  To embrace a Solomon’s choice is to accept that there is a binary presentation in life’s offerings, and while that is often the appearance of a case, it is the stark reality of the limitations of alternatives available, that makes a decision to be made difficult and unenviable.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who must endure and “deal with” a medical condition, such that the medical condition has come to a point of interference with many of life’s major activities, including employment and performing the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal position, the options presented are often binary, and sometimes adding another to create a trinity of choices.

The Federal or Postal employee can remain and endure; or, if the Federal or Postal employee has met the minimum eligibility requirements (18 months of creditable Federal Service and an evidentiary basis of showing that a medical condition prevents the Federal or Postal employee from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job), consideration should be given to preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, to be submitted to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

The “other” choice, of course, is to walk away and do nothing; but that is, in effect, no choice at all, for the time invested and accrued in one’s Federal or Postal career should never be discarded and forgotten, especially when the second option is there to be accessed.

In the end, perhaps Solomon’s choice was, likewise, parallel to that “third” option which resulted in the decisions made, and as a consequence, bore the fruits for the future Trinity.  To split the baby in half could never have been a serious consideration, just like walking away without trying should rarely be considered by a Federal or Postal employee who suffers from a medical condition which prevents him or her from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job.  Solomon’s offer was, of course, a wise one; for, in the end, he knew that such a choice was an untenable one, just as the Federal or Postal employee knows that filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits is the one which will ultimately be the wise one.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement Attorney: Social Justice

Concurrent litigation entanglements occur often enough; if one has the capacity and ability to compartmentalize life, such multi-adversarial offensives can be effectively coordinated.  At the same time, however, it is important to recognize the folly of spreading oneself too thin; history confirms the defeats suffered at the principle of too much, too soon, as in Germany’s incursion on the Eastern Front while taking on North Africa and the entrance of the United States into a reluctant war.

Strategies of logistical considerations, as well as pragmatic considerations of finances, must always be a factor; thus, for Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who face a future with an ongoing medical condition which prevents one from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s job, consideration should be given to concurrent filings.

If an injury or medical condition is “work-related“, there is nothing wrong with filing for OWCP/DOL benefits, while at the same time filing for OPM Federal Disability Retirement benefits.  If both are approved, the Federal or Postal employee has the option of choosing to activate one, and allowing the other to be approved but remain passive.

Filing for Social Security Disability benefits, for those Federal and Postal employees under FERS, is a mandatory requirement during the process of filing for OPM Disability Retirement, anyway, so obviously the concurrent nature of filing is a necessary given.

When considering more far-reaching litigation entanglements, however, such as filing an EEOC Complaint potentially leading to a trial in the Federal Courts, pause should be given, if only because of the statistical disadvantage and high cost of such litigation.  A 2009 WSJ Article found that EEO discrimination lawsuits fared worst in statistical analysis in wins-to-losses ratio, and more recent studies do not provide greater encouragement.

While the recent focus upon the Pao v. Kleiner Perkins case would seem to highlight such statistical disadvantage, at the same time, one must recognize that the particular court case was a gender discrimination case filed and tried in state court, not in Federal Court, and each case reflects the complexity of the uniqueness of a particular set of facts.

The point here, however, is that while statistical analysis certainly can be skewed based upon a multiplicity of complex factors, for Federal and Postal employees who are considering filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, a pragmatic assessment should be made which asks, at a minimum, the following:  Do I want to be involved in a protracted litigation with my supervisors, agency and coworkers?  What is the purpose of my filing for Federal Disability Retirement?  Is the cost-to-benefit analysis sufficient in justifying litigation?  What is my definition of “Social Justice”?

For Federal and Postal employees, filing for, and obtaining, Federal Disability Retirement benefits is a practical exit from one compartmentalized stage of life; there is awaiting the next stage, of which Shakespeare reminds us all.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire