Federal Disability Retirement: Promises and Pointing Fingers

We make them all of the time; many, merely implied ones; others, of more explicit origins; and of the “blame game” which we all engage in, the ease of pointing fingers when promises are made and broken — well, even our cousins the chimpanzees can do that with aplomb.  Promises are easily made; and, these days, just as easily broken.  Pointing fingers is a way of deflecting one’s own shortcomings and responsibility in the matter; and whether by the index finger or the middle one, the act itself is what matters.

Do some cultures, foreign or less “civilized”, use the thumb, the forefinger (otherwise known as the “index” finger), the middle one, the ring or the pinky in assigning and ascribing blame?

The middle one, of course, is a dangerous entity, for it can play a significance far beyond merely “pointing” to something.  And of the former — of a “promise” — can one be committed to it “forever”, or does a promise lose its efficacy and vitality over time?  When two people commit to each other and begin to build a life together, is there an implied “promise” of working for the rest of one’s life, but with conditions?

What if a medical condition begins to impede one’s career?

Often, the stress of loss — any loss — results in the pointing of fingers, whether justified or not.  Needing to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS, through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, often brings up accusations of broken promises and pointing of fingers — that you’re just not trying hard enough; that you can’t just go out on disability retirement at such an early age, etc.

People don’t understand that chronic medical conditions creep into a person’s life through no fault of their own; and when it becomes necessary to prepare, formulate and file an effective Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS, there will be many other stresses which come into play, such as accusations of promises left unkept and pointing of fingers; but, in the end, none of that matters, for, when a condition becomes so debilitating as to prevent the Federal employee from performing one’s Federal job, the best option to take is the one promising to point a finger to one’s self — of prioritizing one’s own health.

And whether that is done with the index, the middle, the ring or the pinky finger, matters not.  Or even the thumb.

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

 

FERS Medical Retirement for Federal & Postal Employees: Similar Lives

Dissimilarity is what threatens us; similarity — the notion that there are shared, common characteristics between you and I — provides for an acceptable level of comfort and security.

When we learn about the lives of the “rich and famous”, other than feeling some sense of envy, we can still imagine enough similarity of living such that we can “relate” to them.  We might say, “Yeah, but he still has to put on his pants one leg at a time” or some such similarity of response.  It is the dissimilar which tends to threaten — of behavior, looks or origins so alien that we fear that the strangeness of the unknown will somehow harm our very existence.

Modernity has tried to ameliorate that with a sense of living in a “global village”, where images of other cultures, other lives and different countries are transmitted into our living rooms via cable and other outlets; and social media allows for interaction with others no matter where a person resides.  Rumors of wars are no longer apt; we bring it live right into our recreational living spaces, and no longer are cultures alien, nor other lives strange; the strangeness now is of the person who cannot relate to the universal similarity of all lives lived in modernity.

Yet, there are still instances of dissimilarity which threatens — such as a medical condition suffered by a Federal or Postal worker who then begins to feel isolated and treated as a pariah.  Perhaps the response by others is likened to that “tribal” sense that people have: No one wants to be like the outsider, and so we shun them like those colonies of eons ago to which lepers were banished.

For Federal and Postal employees who believe that a medical condition now prevents him or her from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, and who are beginning to be treated in a dissimilar fashion, it may be time to file for FERS Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Consult with a FERS Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and do it before the dissimilar turns into a familiar case of similarity — that of fear turning into cruelty by the Federal Agency initiating adverse actions and ultimate termination.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Disability Retirement: Thinking Straight

Why “straight” as opposed to curved or in a zig-zag manner?  Who first thought that it was preferable, desirable, and even “smarter” to “think straight” as opposed to a thought process which involves a greater complexity of circuitous routes?

Is the origin based upon a metaphor or an analogy — that, because the shortest distance from Point A to Destination B must by geometric necessity involve a straight line, and therefore one may extrapolate from such a mathematical truth that the thinking-process which yields the best results is compromised of a similar metric: Of a direct and non-convoluted form of cognitive input, without the wavering lines and complicated conundrums involved in any form other than a straight line?

Yet, the process of “thinking” itself is often one that must include reflection upon multiple and endless variables: What if this happens?  What about such-and-such circumstances?  What about conditionals and unknown factors, and how will it end up if X fails to materialize or Y begins to dominate?  What about the principle contained in Occam’s Razor?  Is that the analogy that prevails upon the concept of “thinking straight”?

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 question as to whether you should consider filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS should, indeed, be based upon “straight thinking”, and the process of “thinking straight” should generally apply.

However, as Federal Disability Retirement Law is a complex administrative process that involves multiple facets that intersect with the Federal Agency, the Human Resource Office, the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, and complexities involving accommodations, potential reassignment issues, etc., the fact that a straight line may exist between the filing of a Federal Disability Retirement application and the approval or denial by OPM of that application, does not make it any simpler.

Complexity is a fact of life.  To simplify things, you should consult with an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law in order to make sure that “straight thinking” is achieved by thinking straight, and that should come from advice and counsel which gives you the right direction on how to get from Point A to Destination B.

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

 

Attorney Representation for OPM Disability Retirement: Thinking

What constitutes it?  What is the evidence that it was engaged in?  When a person is charged with “premeditation” in the perpetration of a crime, and therefore ascription of full responsibility is used to convict and assign a greater length of incarceration, what methodological intricacies are involved?

Take the following hypothetical:  A man walks into a candy store and grabs a Snicker’s Bar, and runs out of the store without paying for it.  He is nabbed.  At the trial of the matter, the prosecutor gives the following summation to the judge:  “Your honor, this man clearly thought about it.  He entered the store, looked about, and deliberately took the Snicker’s Bar and ran out without paying, knowing that he did not pay it — otherwise, why would be have run?  Indeed, when the police caught him, he yelled, “I was hungry!”  That statement alone shows that the man knew he had not paid for it, for it was an admission of a motive, and thus, it is a clear indication that he thought about stealing it, walked into the store and with criminal intent stole the candy bar.  Only the death penalty would be appropriate for one with such premeditative intent, as he is a danger to society!”

Now, contrast this with the following:  The Candy Store’s automatic door opens, and an animal — a neighborhood dog — saunters in, sniffs about, and no one really notices.  The dog grabs a Snicker’s Bar, gobbles it.  Passersby watch.  The store’s owner notices, laughs, shoos the dog out the door.  Why do we not think that the dog “thought” about it?  Why is “thinking” ascribed to the human being, but not to the animal?  What is it about the actions of the two species that differentiates them?  Does the mere fact that we able able to speak, formulate words and convey thoughts, whether pre-or-post action confirm that any extent of reflective processes occurred?  Is the process of “thinking” always productive — i.e., leads to actions that are fruitful, or is much of it simply an insular activity that results in no great consequence?

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who are “thinking” about filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, the key to “thinking” about it is to take the next step and act upon the thought.  People often think that thinking is a productive activity, so long as it remains active and continuous.  But thought can also negate and prevent, and too much thinking, or not enough, can often become an obstacle to the necessary next step.

In order to prepare, formulate and file an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, to be submitted to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, the key to productive thinking is not merely to engage in it as an insular, solitary activity, but to have the consultation and advice of an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement, lest merely thinking about it leads to an unthoughtful act that leads one to believe that the very thinking itself was thoughtless.

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: The Chasm Between the “Process” and the End-Product

One is often forewarned that, if you want to continue retaining certain foods and delectable delights of culinary desires, you should refrain from taking a tour of the manner, means and methodology of manufacturing the medium of modality.

The “process” of attaining a final product is, in many instances, quite different from the “end product” displayed and delivered for public viewing.  The latter constitutes all of the hard work, effort and refinements contained beneath and within the invisible undercoating which comprises the historical context of unspoken deeds; while the former is comprised of the aggregate of that which has been censored for public viewing.

In law, one reads about the final outcome — the verdict; the monetary sum awarded; the opinion of the Court; the statement of triumph by the prosecutor, defense attorney or the plaintiff’s advocate.  The process to get there — the preparation, the missteps, the unexpected statement by a witness previously vetted and sifted through multiple and complex layers of questioning and examination; these constitute the ugly foray of felonious intent.

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, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, the issue is rarely the “end-product” (Federal Disability Retirement benefits) — although, because of the reduction in income/annuity, and the change of circumstances from “employed” to “retired” constituting a radical change in life and perspective, that, too, can be a scary thought — but rather, the “process” of getting there.

But a traditional “cost/benefits” analysis normally results in affirmatively comprehending the singular issue of importance, significance and relevance in the necessity of filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits from OPM:  The medical condition itself is the driving force, and the mandate of compelling action.

In the end, the ugliness of the process itself must be ignored:  the admission to the agency, coworkers, supervisors, managers, etc., of the proverbial throwing in the towel or raising of the white flag; the ostracizing response by the agency (but isn’t that just a confirmation and affirmation of what has been going on for the past year or so, anyway?); the long wait; the encounter with the bureaucratic process (but again, isn’t that something one has already “been there, done that” by virtue of working for the Federal Government or the U.S. Postal Service these many years, anyway?).

The “process” of getting from Point A to Point B is a long and hard one, and no one can deny that the journey itself is but an unpleasant pathway of necessity; but that is why we have pithy proverbs to provide portentous pretentiousness:  There is “light at the end of the tunnel“; “Another day, another dollar”; “Youth is wasted on the young”; and the one most relevant as the Federal and Postal worker awaiting a decision from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management:  “Patience is a virtue“.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire