OPM Medical Retirement: The Cousin: The Stifled Yawn

The more you try, the harder it is to keep it concealed.  You may not even be tired.  You may have had a good night’s sleep; but “the yawn” is interpreted in one of two ways: Either you are tired, or you are bored.

And in the situation you are in, either interpretation would not be acceptable.

And so you attempt to stifle it; sit up straighter; widen your eyes; take a deep breath; act as if you are stretching your neck, first to the left, then to the right.  But the more you try and stifle the yawn, the greater the hardship and it is as if there is an involuntary force emanating from within.

Life itself is like that.  You struggle, you try, you do everything to “stifle” the problem; but instead of going away, “it” keeps looming larger.  Medical issues tend to work that way; for, whether you actively go and get treatment for the health condition, the chronic and progressive nature of the medical condition seems to loom larger.

For Federal Gov. 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 basic elements of one’s Federal or Postal Service job, the vicious cycle of the “catch-22” keeps coming back: the more you attempt to work, the greater the stress upon your medical condition and the exacerbating side effects.

When you have come to a critical juncture in your chronic medical condition where it becomes like the stifled yawn which will not be suppressed or repressed, contact an disability lawyer who specializes in OPM Disability Retirement Law, and let not the stifled yawn turn into a sudden crisis where life’s dominance of difficulties begins to loom to large.

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 Application: The Facade

In its simplest definition, it is simply the frontal face of a building, expression or impression.  In its more insidious connotation, it is the mask which hides an ugliness within, and thus is meant to deceive.

Or, perhaps not even an ugliness, but of something secretive, of a necessity to cover, to conceal, to brush over in order that people will only notice the skin-deep impression left, the appearance upon first encounter, and not to notice the substance beneath or behind the facade.

Can a mask be kept on for long?  Will the concealment cover for long enough, or wide enough?  And long enough — for what?

Perhaps it is merely a smile to conceal grief; a smirk, to mask pain; or in reverse, of tears in order to contain disgust or anger.

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, having a “facade” is most natural, if not a necessity.  You want to seem “as if” — as if you are still able to do your job; as if nothing is wrong; as if….

At some point, however, the facade may not work, and you may have to prepare, formulate and file an effective Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS, through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

At that point, the facade which you wore so well may not be the mask you intended, for some may have come to believe that the facade was the actual you without the facade, in which case the facade may have been one facade too many.

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.

 

FERS Disability Retirement Law: Disappearing Fences

That pithy old adage; of “good fences make good neighbors”; it is a saying which old people used to say in delineating acceptable social norms; of an ethos which was generally known, frowned upon when violated, and reflects an antiquated time in our society when everyone “knew” their place.

In modernity, the large corporations have convinced us all that fences are unnecessary; that boundaries are meaningless; that bifurcations no longer apply. Instead, to be “connected” is of utmost importance, and loss of connectivity — even for a day, an hour, a minute — means that your entire source of self-identity may have become expunged from the ethereal universe.

It is all well and good for the wealthy to declare that there should not exist a “division” between one’s personal and professional lives; that your job should be enjoyed as much as in your personal sphere; or that taking calls, doing work, etc. while on vacation or on off-days is completely acceptable.  Fences have all but disappeared.  What was their purpose?

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, erecting and maintaining — even building new ones — is important; for, in the end, one’s “quality of life” begins with maintaining one’s health and well-being, but when that health deteriorates and cannot keep up with the demands of work, it might be time then to contact a FERS Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, if only to establish again that, indeed, good fences make good neighbors.

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.

 

FERS Disability Retirement Law: The Law-Shield

The Law can be used as either or both: Whether as a “sword” (in prosecuting a case, whether in criminal court or of initiating a lawsuit for money damages) or as a “shield” (as in the Constitutional protection against self-incrimination, or otherwise keeping certain tainted evidence away from the judgment of a jury); or, as often is the case, the use as both shield and sword during the life of a case — it is meant to be both, depending upon the context of a case.

As a Law-Shield in a Federal Disability Retirement case, the benefit of eligibility should be reliably based upon certain “givens” — i.e, given that a person has accrued a minimum of 18 months of Federal Service; given that the medical documentation establishes that the Federal or Postal employee can no longer perform one or more of the essential elements of one’s positional duties; given that the Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) has already been approved, etc. — in other words, once certain eligibility criteria have already been established, the Law-as-Shield should already protect the Federal Disability Retirement applicant from a denial by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

In reality, of course, the Law-Shield doesn’t work so easily, or automatically, and that is when the Law-as-Shield must be affirmatively applied as a Law-as-Sword, and pointed out aggressively by a Federal Attorney who is experienced in Federal Disability Retirement Law.

Contact a FERS Lawyer who is experienced in Federal Disability Retirement Law and begin the process of using the Law — whether as a Shield or as a Sword — to assert your right as a Federal employee and your entitlement to FERS Disability Retirement benefits.

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.

 

FERS Medical Retirement: The Pause Before Advising

That momentary hesitation — is it because the answer is unknown, or because all other factors must be taken into consideration before sound advice is rendered?

If the former, then it is likely bad advice, if rendered regardless; of the latter, it reveals a thought process where all of the avenues to a potential answer, and their natural consequences gleaned through experience of prior similar instances, will likely ensue with what can only be declared “sound advice”.

Advising is what people love to do; unfortunately, it is the rare instance which results in rendering “sound and good advice”.  It is a cheap mode of feeling important and relevant; to render freely one’s opinion and advice on a matter; and even paid advice, whether in the legal field or financial investment arenas, can lead to dire consequences if followed inadvisedly.

The pause before advising — for an experienced attorney, that hesitation is always because the question posed must be seriously considered before rendering advice which is important and relevant to the query.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who need guidance, advice and experience in preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS, contact an attorney who always pauses before advising; for, in the end, the best advice is the one which has first considered all aspects of the query posed, before giving a lifetime of experience in an art form which only rarely approaches science in its certainty.

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 Employees Retirement System (FERS) Disability Law: Societal Perfection

Anselm’s Ontological argument for the existence of God is dependent upon a crucial conceptual construct which, if and only if accepted, works.

It is the concept of “perfection”.  For, if existence — or, “to be” — constitutes the satisfying minor premise of the definition contained in the major premise, “That than which nothing greater can be conceived of”, then the question is: Do we necessarily have to agree with the societal construct of what “greater” means or, similarly of what “perfection” must entail?

Most ontological arguments must include some acceptance of what “perfection” entails — of the query involving, “How can an imperfect being possess a concept of perfection unless that perfection exists?”

But when it comes down to the details of what we mean by the term “perfection”, we find ourselves in squabbles of circular argumentation.  Societal constructs of perfection — or, of even lesser norms, like what is a “good” citizen, a dedicated worker, a loyal individual, etc. — often gets us into trouble, especially when such a definition becomes the basis for a self-harming viewpoint.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, continuing to work despite harming your own health is often insisted upon because of our distorted view of societal perfection.  We hold onto the societal construct of what it must mean to be a dedicated and loyal employee — i.e., the societal definition of perfection — until we die of exhaustion in trying.

FERS Disability Retirement through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management is a counter to that — it is a recognition that you should not have to work in a job which is harming your health.

If you are no longer able to perform all of the essential elements of your position with the Federal Agency or the Postal Service, contact a disability lawyer who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement benefits and begin the process of defying the false construct of societal perfection.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill
Lawyer specializing exclusively in FERS Disability Retirement Law

 

OPM Disability Retirement benefits: Misjudging Yourself

It is not an accident that most people are unable to accurately assess or evaluate themselves, their circumstances or the road forward.  Look at Plato and his magnum opus — The Republic.  Therein lies the hoax of unfettered hubris — of the declaration of who should be the ruler and king?  None other than the Philosopher — or, more humbly put, Plato himself.

Are we the best judge of ourselves?  All of us have a tendency towards seeing ourselves in greater or lesser degrees which fails to reflect reality.  To compound the problem, we also rarely appreciate criticism or outside evaluations which do not comport with our own self-assessment.  Yet, in most serious circumstances, that is precisely what is needed — an objective accounting of a given situation; the alternatives available or potentially open; the solutions possible; the road forward.

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, the need to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management is a given; but the assessment in the strength of a case, what is needed to bolster the chances of winning against OPM and the requirements to meet the legal criteria — those issues should be handled by a competent disability attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law.

For, as the patient as well as the Disability Retirement Applicant, you will likely misjudge yourself because you believe that your medical condition — by which you suffer so much — should automatically qualify you.  However, that is not how OPM sees it.

Contact an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law and avoid the pitfall of misjudging yourself, and allow the Federal Disability Retirement Lawyer make the crucial assessment and evaluation of your case.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill
FERS Disability Attorney

 

Postal & Federal Employee Disability Retirement: OPM’s Selective Exclusion

The danger of attempting to present a specific viewpoint is that one almost always engages in selective exclusions — sometimes inadvertently; most times, deliberately.

Selective exclusion involves a 2-faced lie: A. You selectively choose to include only those statements, quotations, references, etc., which support your viewpoint and (B) concurrently and in a parallel manner, you exclude those statements which might support or otherwise strength the opposing viewpoint.  A third — often unspoken — component implies the following: Truth is not the guide; rather, winning an argument is what prevails.

Now, if a person, entity, organization or agency is supposed to be “objective” about a matter, such deliberative intent to proceed in a biased manner makes it all the more poignantly unacceptable.  Yet, that is exactly what the U.S. Office of Personnel Management does when denying a Federal Disability Retirement case — of engaging in selective exclusion in justifying its position of denying a case.

How to rebut and answer such an approach?  By including all that was excluded, and arguing the law — which, by the way, OPM also selectively excludes.

Contact an experienced lawyer who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law and begin the process of answering the selective exclusion engaged in by OPM.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Lawyer
Postal & Federal Employee Retirement Attorney

 

Medical Retirement for Federal & Postal Employees: Isolation

It is a state which many declare to be desired; but, in reality, human beings are social and political animals (the latter term applied in an Aristotelian sense), and a true state of it becomes an insular havoc of desperate insanity.

Isolation is used in penal institutions as a means of punishment.  Whether it has a rehabilitative effect is questionable, but the policy is generally to impart upon the prisoner a stripping and depriving of a needed human experience — that of contact with others — and by punishing the individual, to allegedly “motivate” the offending party into behaving in an orderly manner in the future.  However, human beings possess great forces of creativity.  Stories from the Guantanamo facilities reveal a wide range of ingenuities in communication methods employed when “solitary confinement” is imposed upon multiple individuals.

In the end, the policy of isolation is often ineffective, and merely serves as an extreme measure of punishment which motivates not the human appetitive sense of behavioral modification, but cuts deeply into a profound sense of resentment and hatred.

In the general population, we have come to fool ourselves into believing that a blinking screen can replace actual human contact.  The worldwide pandemic has revealed the fissures of such thinking, and has tested the extremes of isolation.

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 under FERS, the sense of isolation can be felt from not being able to engage in the multiple essential elements of the position — of participating in conferences; of engaging with other coworkers; of missing time from work because of doctor’s appointments, etc.

Further, actual isolation is often exaggerated in the mind, where the mental isolation becomes disproportionately viewed and exponentially harmful to a person’s self-image.

Contact a retirement attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law and consider the option of filing a FERS Disability Retirement application.  As isolation is the harbinger of a future yet uncertain, FERS Disability Retirement may be the ray of hope which opens the jailhouse door to a mind which is willing to be motivated.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Lawyer

 

Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS) Disability Retirement: Ostensibly

Apparently; on the face of it; in all appearances.  Isn’t that how OPM views all medical disability retirement cases?

It is as if the “medical specialist” opens each file before reviewing it, with a notation under his or her breath, of: “Ostensibly”.  And so the challenge is on — of persuading from the presumptive world of the “Ostensible” to the world of approval where appearances are turned into reality.

How does one do that?  Why are some Federal Disability Retirement applications more persuasive than others?

Of course, there will always be the “irrefutable” cases; then, some cases which fall in the “probably no chance” category, simply because there is not enough medical evidence to persuade; then, as with most cases, somewhere in the middle kingdom where the coalescence of medical evidence, the law, agency actions or inaction, with a dash of concurrent and parallel legal issues must be all taken into consideration in their aggregate evidentiary presentation.

Ostensibly.  By all appearances.  That is the challenge — to persuade OPM that the ostensible is the real.

Contact an OPM Disability Retirement Attorney who deals only with OPM Disability claims, and begin the process of putting together an ostensibly viable Federal Disability Retirement case and turn it into the reality which brings about an OPM approval.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Lawyer