OPM Disability Retirement Law: Of the Bad Today

One often pauses in today’s climate and asks, Is it worse, today?  Is the “badness” more prevalent today than in epochs past?

Then, the pause and the question itself must be contextually “filled in”, like the gravedigger who digs a rectangular hole but stops and asks the absurd question, “What if there is no body today?”  Then, of course, you are digging a hole just to dig a hole, and the entire context and purpose suddenly disappears.  So, what is the context?  Well, for starters, Worse in what way?  And worse, for whom?

Certainly, if you were in prison at Auschwitz in 1944, there is no comparison worth making.  Or, if you were a Native American forced from your ancestral home to march the Trail of Tears, or an American soldier on the Bataan Death March in 1942 — surely, the “badness” perpetrated upon those people (answering the 2 questions, For Whom? and, Worse in What Way?) cannot compare to today?

And, in retrospect, it may be that America reached its pinnacle as a world power sometime during the 2 decades after WWII; for, surely there was no greater world dominance than the American specter following the Allied Victory against both Japan and Germany?

But even then — of the 1950s and early 1960s, the question still looms, For Whom?  Many African Americans who fought bravely in WWII thought that, having faithfully served their country against the forces of fascism and Germany’s genocidal racism against the Jewish population, surely — this time — things were going to change “back home”?

But no, they found that the post-war economic boom was not all inclusive, and that they would have to fight not only Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan, but within the borders of their own country, just to reach some status of equality.  And so we turn full circle and ask, Of the Bad Today, was it ever this bad?  Well, it depends….

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal Service workers who suffer from a medical condition where that medical condition no longer allows you to to continue in your Federal or Postal career, the Bad of Today has been your chronic and debilitating medical condition, and yes, it is worse than the Bad of Yesterday — if only because you are no longer the young and healthy whippersnapper you once were.

Contact a FERS attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and let not the Bad Today extend into the badder of tomorrow.

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.

 

The U.S. Office of Personnel Management: The Objective Perspective

There are those, of course, who contend that there is no such thing; that we are all colored by our biases and prejudices; that “objectivity” is a false premise, to begin with, and merely a pretext to spew one’s hidden agenda.

But the mind is greater than a mere cauldron of personal beliefs.  It can, through logical analysis, strip away personal content, private biases and reach a level of logical judgements through an extrapolated methodology of abstracted conceptualizations unfettered by privately-held prejudices.  It is comprised by a disciplined approach, and is a perspective which is obtained through self-checking and considered judgments.

The U.S. Office of Personnel Management, of course, claims to review all FERS Disability Retirement applications with an “objective perspective”.  They will claim that they are not out to deny a claim, but merely reviews all Federal Disability Retirement applications with an “objective perspective”.

Have you ever read a denial of a FERS Disability Retirement application issued by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management?  They make it sound as if you had absolutely no chance of success.  Does that approach appear to be “objective”?  “Unbiased”?

Consult with an OPM Disability attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and hire a Federal Lawyer who goes beyond the objective perspective, and instead becomes an advocate who will argue in your favor.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement: Point-by-Point Refutation

Must every point made by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management be refuted point-by-point”?

Some points, of course, are rather irrelevant and harmless; others, perhaps disingenuous, at best, and poorly argued, at worst.  Still others are blatantly untrue (i.e., an euphemism for “a lie”), while the remaining are often taken out of context or singularly and deliberately isolated without considering the context of the actual meaning of the statement made.  Not every point needs a refutation.

Furthermore, what is the basis of the refutation? Is it merely your word, your opinion, etc., as opposed to the reviewing “medical specialist” at OPM — or, do you have refuting facts backed by the law in rebutting the untrue or “out-of-context” statement or allegation?

The point is, not every point needs to be refuted, but in making such an important determination, it is a good idea to consult with an experienced attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, lest the pointless point made by OPM becomes a greater point of contention that needs to be pointed out now in order to become beside the point later on in point of fact.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire
Federal Disability Retirement Lawyer

 

FERS Disability Retirement Benefits: The Use of Language

Some are better at it than others; others, still, can state in a single sentence what most will try in a paragraph or a novel.  Poets are linguistic craftsmen who utilize an economy of words but convey the greater qualitative vehicle of descriptions and word-pictures; and essayists, confined often by space limited by editors and restricted by practical concerns, not the least of which may involve the potential boredom or attention-span of readers, must by necessity struggle with clarity of content.

The use of language is a funny thought; for the best of those who engage in it effortlessly, the ideas, concepts and descriptive pictures conveyed is accomplished without concern of the process, but merely by “doing it”.  Language is something we use daily; yet, few of us pause to consider it as a tool or implement of our daily lives.  A gardener who has mislaid his or her spade will look for it and, if it turns out that it is lost, will declare, “I cannot go out into the garden to work, today.”

Do we do that with language?  Do we wake up and say, “Well, today, I mislaid my X, and therefore I cannot engage in the language game.”  Of course, we refer to language as a “tool” in a metaphorical sense, and so we recognize that there are practical distinctions to be made between a spade and language, but nevertheless, they are both “tools” which are used — or misused — in our everyday lives.

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 his or her Federal or Postal job, the time to consider the use of language becomes an important and relevant issue precisely because persuasion, description and argumentation are what must be engaged in presenting an effective Federal Disability Retirement application to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Consult with an attorney in preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application with OPM; for, in the end, the use of language will be necessary in maneuvering through a complex bureaucratic process that also uses language to deny one’s right to a benefit which must be fought for, and language is just as much a tool of use as it is a weapon of abuse.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Federal Disability Retirement under FERS: Not as Before

Before what?  That is the natural response.  We tend to bifurcate our lives into segments which are palatable and comprehensible; of a time before X happened, and then our present existence after X; before we had children, and after; before we became married, and after; before some traumatic incident, and sometime thereafter, etc.  The present “I” is never the same as “before”, and one could even say that truthfully about every minute, every hour and every millisecond of a distinction between the “I” in the current state and the “I” of a past state of being.

Whether on a physical, cellular level where genetic structures alter and decay even by the minute; or on a cognitive level where new information, additional data is being processed by our brains every moment of our lives.  We are not as before; we are constantly changing; and like the river which Heraclitus identified an analogy for human existence, so the vicissitudes of the world surrounding impacts us daily such that we are not as before.

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 likely bifurcating event is the medical condition itself.  No, you may not be the same as before, and it is that identifiable change which forms the basis for eligibility of a Federal Disability Retirement benefit under FERS.

Consult with an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law and consider applying for Federal Disability Retirement benefits; for, not only are you not as before, but likewise, your Federal Agency or the Postal facility are viewing your work and future not as before, as well.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement for Federal & Postal Workers: Meaninglessness

Without the second added suffix, it remains an adjective; with the addition of the second suffix, it becomes an abstract noun denoting quality and state of being.  The combination of the duality if suffixes, altering it from an adjective qualifying a noun (as in, “This meaningless activity”) into an abstract noun standing alone (as in, “The meaninglessness was evident in the manner he lived”) makes for an interesting conceptual construct.

It is, indeed, a word which describes a state of being — both the quality as well as the “kind” of.  It also denotes something else: that, at some time prior, both suffixes were absent, leaving the root of the word and the core of its origins intact — that of “meaning”.  It is thus a word which describes both a state “before” and a condition “after”, of once having had it, then losing it, then becoming a state of perpetual loss.

It is, in the end, the “state” of being which becomes of concern.  For, left as an adjective, one can argue that it is merely a temporary mode of being, as in: “The meaningless endeavor he engaged in was to merely get him through the day.”  However, when the second suffix is added and the root word alternates from becoming an adjective into an abstract noun, the denotation of becoming a permanent construct of eternal loss becomes ever more problematic.

So, as life mirrors language, and language expresses our inner state of thoughts, it is not only the meaning of words which becomes important but, moreover, the way in which we actually live.  Meaninglessness, as a way in which we live, becomes ever more pronounced when our health deteriorates.

For Federal and Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition such that the medical condition begins to prevent the Federal or Postal worker from performing one or more of the essential elements of ones Federal or Postal job, the problem of “meaning” and “meaningless”, as well as “meaninglessness” becomes ever more pronounced.  As one’s health deteriorates, and as work becomes a greater struggle, so the once-meaningful career becomes a greater burden and begins to gnaw at the root of one’s existence.

While Federal Disability Retirement may not be the answer to all of life’s difficulties, it allows for a Federal or Postal worker to re-focus one’s priorities in life and turn one’s attention back to the basics — that of health and meaning. Consult with a FERS Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law to discuss the particulars of your case, and begin to discard the suffixes which drag you down.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire