Postal & Federal Disability Retirement: Sufficiency

Sufficiency is the area of opinion and dispute and reaches just beyond the more certain standard of necessity.  X may be necessary , but is it sufficient?

In a basketball game, it may be necessary to play defense, but is it sufficient?  For, if you prevent the opposing team from scoring, but your own team fails to score any points, you may have satisfied one necessary aspect of the game but simultaneously have failed to sufficiently satisfy another, integral aspect — that of offensive scoring of points.

Similarly, in a legal case, while you may meet the necessary formal requirements to win a case, the question remains open as to the sufficiency of the evidence to persuade a jury as to the size of a compensatory award, or whether it was persuasive enough to cast sufficient doubt in the jury’s mind.

Necessity thus becomes the minimal satisfaction whereas sufficiency is the battleground where leeway is given as to whether the quality or quantity satisfies the extent beyond the minimum criteria met.

In a Federal Disability Retirement case under the FERS system, this is the area where the U.S. Office of Personnel Management will focus upon in denying a FERS Disability Retirement case.  They will make such generalized statements as, “While we do not dispute the existence of your health conditions, there was insufficient documentation to establish that you are disabled from performing the essential elements of your position.”

How does one rebut OPM’s argument from insufficiency?  Is it a qualitative or quantitative insufficiency?

That is the question and area of law where it becomes an art form more than a science, and only experience and years of knowledge can discern the underlying requirement needed.  There is no one “right” answer.  Sometimes, faxing to OPM a voluminous amount of treatment records is the only way to meet the “sufficiency” test, but more often than not, it is the quality of a medical report prepared by the treating doctor which is the only means of satisfying the sufficiency criteria.

As with all things in life, areas of dispute rarely have a single answer, precisely because the very nature of disputation involves issues that reach just beyond the point of certitude.

Thus, in responding to the question of sufficiency, you may want to contact a FERS Disability Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and who has the experience and background in addressing the issues of sufficiency beyond mere necessity.

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 from OPM: Clarity

It is not a feature or element recognizable in modernity.  Rather, its opposite is more prevalent: Of obfuscation, confusion, lack of it.  Clarity in the face of life’s complexities evolves from a more simple set of principles: A cohesive community centered around established customs, mores and undisturbed ethical values; a way of doing things which is unaltered, “just because” this is the way it has always been done.

Lack of clarity comes about when language develops toward a complex and sophisticated level of discourse.  The more there are ways to describe the world, the greater opportunity to lie, confuse, cheat and steal.  Clarity of thought; clarity of law; clarity of purpose — these are rare attributes in this age of confusion.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition and must consider preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management under FERS, it is important to have clarity on a number of fronts: Clarity concerning the eligibility criteria; clarity of the laws governing Federal Disability Retirement; clarity in the path moving forward.

To attain such an acceptable level of clarity, contact a Federal lawyer who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and don’t let confusion be the obstacle which prevents you from moving forward in life.

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 Government Employees: Whose Fault?

Where the blame attaches, the responsibility follows.  Blame is always a component of responsibility; they are cousins attached at the heart, or at the very least upon the stem of the brain.  Whenever anything happens in life, the second question is always, Whose fault?  Assuming that the first question had to do with the event itself (i.e., What happened? How did it happen? — which is a query that comes close to the “Whose Fault?” Question, etc.), the second and subsequent questions almost always seek to blame.

Why is that?  Well, for one thing, causation is often tied to the one who causes — the perpetrator of the action which triggers the series of events resulting in the calamity, etc.  An investigation into an accident; a man-made disaster that results in destruction; a negligent act causing harm; these, and many others, point to a cause whose origins point to fault and blame.  What follows thereafter is what we deem as “responsibility”; that the person to whom blame attaches is “responsible”, and concomitant consequences must then follow.

But what of medical conditions?  Can one attach “fault” or “blame”?  Whatever the answer to that question, the treatment the Federal Agency attaches to a Federal or Postal employee is akin to asking the question, Whose Fault?  For, once a Federal or Postal employee can no longer perform one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, the manner in which the Federal Agency or the Postal Service treats the Federal or Postal employee is tantamount to asking the question, Whose Fault?

Consult with an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and begin considering the process of filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, lest the Federal Agency or the Postal unit you work at deems you to be “at fault”, even though medical conditions are, indeed, a “no-fault” incident.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal & Postal Disability Retirement: Chaotic Regularity

We have a need to order the world.  Some, but only a few, live by chaotic regularity, but when chaos gets to a point of regularity, there is also some semblance of order to such a world — one which can be predictably chaotic.  Chaos is a part of everyday life; of a sick child; a troubled relative; financial difficulties; a crippled pet; a spouse’s mood; a career’s ceiling; problems define the ability and capacity of an individual’s inner reserve.

Medical problems are often at the forefront of a chaotic regularity.  Yes, there are some who actually thrive in living a life of chaotic regularity, but most of us crave for the quietude of boredom.  For the rare few, perhaps the life of chaotic regularity finds comfort in daily disruptions; but for the rest of us, it is only the routine of monotony that allows for an exception of chaos to be acceptable.

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 idea of chaotic regularity is perhaps too comfortable and intimate.  The medical condition itself; the inability to do what once was so easily accomplished; and fear for the future — these must all enter into factoring the need to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS.

Consult with an OPM Disability Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement and seek to get out from the chaotic regularity that a medical condition imposes.  For, it was on the Seventh Day that quietude finally came…

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill
Federal Disability Attorney

 

Federal Employee Disability Benefits: Philosophy of Life

Is it necessary to have one?  Does one ever begin this process of organic expansion with a conceptual paradigm which encapsulated the activities, movements, thought-processes and decision-making judgments that, in their aggregate, define a person’s “Philosophy of Life”?  And if we all have one, when did we subscribe to it, create it or “own” it?  Or is it all just some pithy mandate which we follow — you know, some line here or there that we picked up, either from a book, a movie, some T.V. serial, or even from some bartender who likes to mete out wisps of wisdom to those half drunk?

“Joe’s philosophy of life is to never trust anyone.”  Or: “Kim — she just believes that you should finish whatever you began.”

Of course, if you went to college and took that “Introductory Philosophy” course, you received a Reader’s Digest version of various philosophers, and perhaps came upon Seneca, the Roman Stoic, whose attempt to bifurcate the physical world from one’s inner soul has become popularized in modernity; and perhaps there are those who have grasped upon a coherent or systematic philosophical paradigm such that one actually possesses a “philosophy of life” —but few of us are organized enough to have that and, even if we did, how many of us actually follow our own philosophy of life?

Most of us just struggle through and meander, responding from one mini-crisis of life’s travails to the next.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, where that medical condition begins to prevent one’s ability and capacity to perform all of the essential elements of one’s Federal job, it is not a “philosophy of life” that will help you survive the bureaucratic process of preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, but rather, correct knowledge, helpful information and a plan of attack.

Consult with an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law before initiating the process.  And, after obtaining your FERS Disability Retirement benefits, perhaps that will be the time to begin to formulate your Philosophy of Life — that is, the life beyond Federal employment.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Medical Retirement for Federal Workers: These Holidays

Do We dread, or welcome them?  Is it a season to which we look forward, or hope that they will quickly fade into memories best left forgotten?  Is it to endure, tolerate, give a plastic smile to, or do we guffaw uproariously where our hearts flutter with sincere flushes of joyful tears?

On the other hand, must our emotions always be bifurcated into extremes of disjunctives?  Must it be “Either/Or” (to borrow Kierkegaard’s Title to his opus magnum)?  Can it not be some compromised “middle ground” where we enjoy certain parts of it, tolerate with indifference others, and leave the rest to the ash heaps of eternal drawers shuttering away in memories unrevealed?

The “Holidays” are a time of bustle; and though we complain of the “commercialism” of the modern era, we refrain and restrain ourselves because we know that, to do so is to be tagged a “Scrooge”; and so we quietly acquiesce, “go with the flow” and smile wanly as the world decorates itself in preparation for a single day in a time of multiple troubles.

But in the end, isn’t it nice to “make-believe?”  For, there are always the tomorrows and the day after; the day before, and other times of mundane and common occurrences, and to celebrate one out of all of those “others”, even if tomorrow brings back the reality of tumults and memories of better yesterdays — still, through it all, it is nice to gather around and sing a Christmas carol, to light a candle, to bow in prayer for thanks and wishes.

In the end, it is — after all — these Holidays that matter not because the world says so, but because we have an excuse to be with family, friends, hug and laugh, if only for a day in remembrance of these holidays.

Merry Christmas, Happy Holidays, and have a Happy New Year.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Disability Retirement Representation: The defeating question

It is the question itself which is often “telling”; it informs us of where the line of answering and posited queries is likely to take us.  It is like the map that guides in a certain direction, the compass that informs one of the vantage point of one’s existence or the gravitational pull which pulls in order to remain cohesive with other heavenly bodies; the question itself may not even need an answer.

The latter, of course, is referred to as a “rhetorical” one – that which needs no answer, is asked without necessarily seeking a response, and the one that, standing alone in the silence of an unsolicited reflection, cuts deep into the queried subject in order to provoke a contemplative reaction.  But of the “defeating” question – is it ever asked or, if it is, what is its purposive intent and deliberative content?

It is the one that is avoided, and left unasked because the facts, circumstances and surrounding context will almost always already be known to the inquiring mind.  What is the purpose for which it is asked?

No, not to defeat, but rather, to admit to the already-obvious answer that is readily known, by virtue suspected and thus absented and avoided.  Plagues reported, germs suspected and sneezing people avoided, the defeating question is the one that you already know the answer to, but by the mere fact of not vocally articulating it, is intended to remain unspoken and thus carefully avoided.

It is like the neighborhood bully that requires running after school at full speed over fences and back alleys; and like the dog barking in the early morning requiring one or of the other of the spouses to get up and let out, each hoping that the other will think kindly of the fake snoring and each avoiding the direct obligation and love for the animal itself; the defeating question, once asked, is in danger of being answered and therefore brought “out in the open” for no one to ignore, anymore.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, such that the medical condition may require the Federal or Postal employee to prepare, formulate and file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, the question unasked and avoided, and the one feared as the “defeating question” is quite simply: Do I need to file for OPM Disability Retirement benefits?

Already answered.  The only difference is, what is meant by “defeating”, is often within the purview of the inquiring mind.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Employee Disability Retirement: Games

It is primarily a form of play or sport; but in other contexts, used as a verb, it can imply or denote the manipulation of rules in order to attain a result through unfair or unscrupulous means.  As a sport, some engage in the competitive aspects of life itself, outside of the boundaries of organized or even recognized activity — as in playing “mind games” or harassment for purposes of torturing and victimizing.

Fiefdoms tend to encourage that sort of gamesmanship; and while Feudal Lords no longer exist in an official capacity, they continue to pervade through vestiges of barbarity concealed in the cosmetic niceties of polite society.

Perhaps, in some form during the Darwinian lineage of evolutionary survivorship, when brute strength alone resulted in the genetic alterations through environmental forces necessitating unrelenting characteristics in the expansion of the species, the voice of reason was lost, the soul of empathy extinguished, and the fathomless essence of humanity became a whisper of past hopes and bottomless faithlessness in epochs forever forgotten.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, the “game” of harassment, intimidation and unremitting stress piled on in order to test the outer limits of tolerance, is but a daily occurrence no stranger to the fiefdom of yore.  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 positional duties, will need to make a decision in the process of such encounters with coworkers, Supervisors and Managers:  to remain in that “game” of no returns, or to exit and move onto other and more fruitful activities.

Filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, is a means of moving on with life.

Study history for a few moments, and one can see the barbarism of the past; study it for a considerable pastime, and one can comprehend the loss of hope for the present; study it for a lifetime, and one may see the faint glimmer of light for one’s future.  For, as life is not merely a game, but more of an endeavor beyond mere survival, so recognizing that cutting one’s losses before the game’s end is often the smartest move, and that includes preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through OPM, when the time is ripe and necessary, as in the “now” of forever tomorrow.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement Lawyer: Life’s Dispensation

It is often a word which is accompanied with the adjective, “special“, as in “special dispensation”; but a close review of such a phrase would reveal the redundancy of placing the two words together.  For, to have a dispensation is to be offered a unique situation where one is already exempted from the usual and customary rules applicable; and to insert the adjective, “special’, adds little to the exclusionary nature of the occasion.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, and where the medical condition is beginning to impact one or more of the essential elements of one’s positional duties occupied in the Federal sector and U.S. Postal Service, it is the disability and medical condition itself which gives rise to the dispensation requested, demanded or otherwise warranted.

That is precisely why resentment, hostility and exclusion occurs as a reactionary response by the Federal agency or the U.S. Postal Service: because special treatment outside of the normal rules of employment tend to engender such negative responses.

Filing for FMLA; requesting an accommodation in order to continue working; becoming entangled in EEO Complaints, grievances and the like — they all set you apart, and require actions outside of the normative parameters of daily relationships within the employment sector.  And that ultimate reaction by the agency, of “sticking it to the guy” even when it involves a medical condition impacting one’s employment and livelihood — one wonders, how can others be so cruel?  It is justified precisely through the psychology of the “herd mentality“, reduced to its most natural form in a single question:  “Who does that guy think he is?”

For Federal and Postal employees, whether under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, it often becomes necessary to follow up with the ultimate dispensation of that which one’s employment offers — that of filing for Federal Disability Retirement through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

It is not always the case that an employment package offers an annuity which (A) provides for continuation of insurance benefits and (B) allows one to work in a different vocation while receiving the annuity; but Federal Disability Retirement allows for both, so when the situation arises and there is a dispensation which reveals a solution to a problem, it is indeed a special circumstance which should be recognized as such, while ignoring the redundancy of life’s tautology.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement: Stages

Life brings about natural “stages” — paralleling certain age requirements, with subsets and parenthetical footnotes as to each.  As the queried riddle posed by the Sphinx (“What has four legs in the morning, two legs in the afternoon, three legs in the evening, and no legs at night?”) brings about clarity of identity, so the stages of life provide a glimpse into the inherent complexity of man’s psyche.

It is, in part, an inevitability; but to say that all such epochs of behavioral vicissitudes are pre-determined or otherwise inevitable, is to ignore man’s free will, and the capacity to adapt, change and recognize the surrounding environment and realign accordingly. Do artificial stages reflect or parallel man’s natural stages?  One wonders.  For, as man is the creator and inventor of such artifices, do we recognize the inevitable parallelism between that which we mold, and from which we conform the substratum of life?

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Service Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, the administrative process identified as “Federal Disability Retirement” presents itself in multiple potential stages, also.

There is the initial application stage; then, if it is denied by OPM, one has the second Stage to have it “Reconsidered” (and thus the name, the “Reconsideration Stage”); if denied a second time by OPM, then one can appeal the Federal Disability Retirement case to the U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board; and further, if the Administrative Judge at the MSPB rules against the Federal or Postal employee in a Federal Disability Retirement case, one has the further appellate right to file a Petition for Full Review, then an additional appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, or to bypass the Petition for Full Review and go directly to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Somewhat like the Riddle of the Sphinx, there are normally 4 (sometimes 5) stages to most administrative processes, and Federal Disability Retirement is no different.  The difference is found in the fact that, unlike those complex stages in natural life, we have the capacity and opportunity in engaging the artificial stages presented, to add, make corrections, and supplement the mistakes made previously.  But that we could do more of that in our natural lives!

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire