Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS) Disability Retirement: Unique Problems

Every individual is beset with unique problems; for, it follows from the details of each circumstance, the particularity of each issue and the application of specific concerns which each individual faces, etc.

Medical conditions represent unique problems; and for Federal and Postal employees who suffer from a medical problem such that the medical conditions no longer allow for the unique compatibility between the medical issue and the essential elements required of one’s Federal or Postal job — such unique circumstances will require an individualization of a specific nature in preparing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS.

By “unique”, however, does not mean “unfamiliar”.  An experienced attorney in FERS Disability Retirement Law who understands the complex issues surrounding a Federal Disability Retirement case can differentiate between irrelevant facts and issues, and the core issues which impact a Federal Disability Retirement application.

Contact a Federal Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law and begin the process of streamlining the unique issues and circumstances relevant to your particular case.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Lawyer

 

Federal OPM Disability Retirement Law under FERS: Valid Arguments

Wittgenstein discusses extensively the concept of “language games” — that various subjects, circumstances and professions may require a different kind of such linguistic anomalies.

Thus, when going to a store to buy a computer, you will enter into an alien type of language game quite distinct and different from other modes of linguistic engagements — where certain terms such as “software”, “connectivity”, “applications”, etc., and a whole host of other strange concepts may be thrown about during the course of a sale.

Such a language game is appropriate within the context of a specific set of circumstances, and other forms may not constitute valid applications.  It would be, for example, inappropriate to suddenly interpose another type of language game during the course of a “computer-speak” language game — like suddenly engaging in “therapeutic” language games, of the X-steps in grief counseling, or marriage counseling, etc.

Legal argumentation is somewhat similar to the imposition of a specifically appropriate — or “valid” — language game.  Thus, in a Federal Disability Retirement case, it is important to recognize and apply valid arguments — ones which go to the heart and issue of a Federal Disability Retirement case.  While the “medical language game” will also be applied, it is the “legal language game” which persuades OPM when persuasive legal argumentation is the language game which must prevail.

Contact a Retirement Lawyer who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and begin preparing an effective OPM Disability Retirement application by recognizing and applying the valid arguments which comprise the language game of Federal Disability Retirement Law.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Lawyer

 

OPM Disability Retirement Benefits for Federal Employees: Building

We pass by them every day; as a noun, it remains a structure of immoveable proportions.  As with most things, it begins with a foundation, and the action of construction then ensues with a systematic plan which involves mathematical calculations, engineering acumen and architectural design.

It is more an art form than a perfected science.  The “form” is already in existence in the mind of the builder; the “substance” of it is a mixture of raw materials — of concrete, wood, brick and mortar; and the design is left up to the creativity of symbolisms and cultural historicity.

Building a FERS Disability Retirement case is not much different.  It must also involve a foundation; then, upon that foundation is built the arguments based upon legal precedent, logic, analytical posits and ultimate conclusions to be reached: an approval of one’s Federal Disability Retirement case from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Contact a FERS Disability Attorney who specializes in OPM Disability Retirement Law, and begin the building of one’s Federal Disability Retirement Case by hiring a lawyer who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law — the “Architect” of the building.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Government Employee Disability Retirement: “Difficult”

It is not the same as “unable to”, or even one of “incompatibility”; rather, it merely means that here are some impediments, but if one’s performance ratings are still fully successful, then it shows that — despite being “difficult” — the Federal or Postal worker is still able to perform all of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job.

To qualify for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, certain legal criteria have to be met, and the mere fact that it is becoming increasingly “difficult” to satisfy that criteria does not mean that you would qualify.  Having “difficulty” doing your job, but still being able to do it, means that you are still performing all of the essential elements of your job.

If your agency thinks that you are doing a great job by giving you “fully successful” performance reviews, then where is your argument that you are unable to perform all of the essential elements of your job?  Yes, yes, I know — the question often asked is, “Do I have to end up in a wheelchair before I can file for FERS Disability Retirement benefits”?  No, not quite; but the mere fact that you are having “difficulties” doing your job, but are still doing it, may not be enough.

There is a middle ground, a “flash point” that goes slightly beyond “difficult” but somewhat before becoming wheelchair bound, where the criteria of “incompatibility” comes into play.

Consult with an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and discuss the legal ramifications of where you might be in the process of preparing, formulating and filing an effective FERS Disability Retirement application.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Disability Retirement for Federal Employees: Looking After Yourself

All of our lives, most of us look after others.  Sure — there are those who are self-centered, egoistical, and selfish to a point of absurdity; but the rest of us find value in caring for others, or of working towards something else, at the expense of our own “whatever”.

There is much talk these days about joy, happiness, contentment, etc.  Gone are the days where you should do “whatever makes you happy” — for one thing, the economy isn’t good enough to embrace such a philosophy.  For another thing, it is often impractical for the art of living to simply pursue one’s desires.

We work for others; we do things to please others; we even accede to another’s wants and needs; and perhaps, in a perfect world, if everyone did things for others, it would mean that everyone’s needs would become satisfied because everyone else is also looking after yourself.  But that approach to life works only in a perfect world; whereas, much of modernity proves the opposite: If you don’t look after yourself, no one else will.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition such that the medical condition begins to prevent you from performing one or more of the essential elements of your job, it is high time that you began to look after yourself, and not worry about your Federal Agency, your coworkers, your Postal Facility or anything else.

Health is of paramount importance.  Consult with an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and begin the process of preparing an effective FERS Medical Retirement application in order to begin looking after yourself, for once.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal & Postal Disability Retirement: Reenactment

Among the various species, are we the only ones who engage in reenactments?  Isn’t living life itself enough?  Do we really have to live it all over again, except in a “reality-based” methodology of reenacting what once was?

What does it say about a species which attempts to recreate scenes, scenarios and historically arcane contexts; or even of the lonely teenager who revisits the place of his or her first love, to go over a moment shared barely a fortnight ago?  Or even of the theatre — of a play reenacted night after night; and of battles from decades and centuries ago where we already know the outcome but desire to relive the moments leading up to the end.  Then, there is the “crime scene reenactment” — of extracting from scant evidence and trying to comprehend how it happened in an effort to discover the “who” of the crime.

Why do we humans want to recreate painful memories?

For most, there are moments and issues which we would rather forget, but forgetting means that it is already in the past and we have the capacity and ability to leave it behind us.  Medical conditions have a tendency to resist such forgetting; they remain as a constant reminder of our own mortality and vulnerability, and though we would wish for such a history of misery to be left behind, the daily reenactment of scenes of struggle remain as a constant reminder of the cruelty of the world around us.

Federal Disability Retirement through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management may not diminish the pain and constant reminders of our mortality, but it allows us to focus upon our health in order to move on with life.

Reenactment of scenes of encountering the daily adversarial and contentiousness of going to work; of the Federal Agency’s stubborn refusal to accommodate your medical condition; or of the medical condition itself which is a daily reenactment of life’s unfairness; these and many more reasons are why a Federal or Postal employee may take the important next step in preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal OPM Disability Retirement application.

If you don’t want to repetitively view the reenactment of an endless struggle, contact an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and consider filing a Federal Disability Retirement application in order to get beyond the repetitive reenactment of the drama daily encountered with your Federal Agency or Postal Service.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

 

Federal Disability Retirement: Perfecting life versus living perfectly

It is the latter which most of us do, or pretend to do, and which stunts the capacity to engage in the former.  And so that which we should be doing (the former) is prevented because of that which we are already doing (the latter), in a never-ending cycle of self-destruction.

Those Internet internecine attempts which include Facebook and Instagram don’t help in these matters, and perhaps exacerbate them exponentially.  For, in both cases, they encourage each one of us to “appear” to be living perfectly, when the whole endeavor of human existence should be a striving towards perfecting our lives — i.e., of recognizing the imperfect status of our current condition, having a paradigm towards which one strives in order to correct those defects, and thus towards the “end” of this prosaically-described “journey” of sorts, to be able to declare that “perfection” was somewhat achieved.

But — no — instead, we create an appearance, a facade, a dissembling image of one’s appearance and put forth a self-portrait of an already-achieved perfection: The perfect happiness; the perfect outing; the perfect couple and the perfect participle.

The origins of philosophy (i.e., Plato, Aristotle and those who followed) were always concerned with the differentiation between “Appearance” and “Reality”; in modernity, the two have been conflated, where one’s appearance is the reality of one’s existence.  By commingling concepts which were once clearly bifurcated, we prevent the capacity of human beings to strive to be better, to grow and mature towards greater fulfillment of one’s potentiality.

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, it is a familiar concept — of hiding one’s imperfections in an environment that demands perfection daily.  Medical conditions and their impact on a person’s life — these are considered “imperfections” in a society that demands nothing less than perfection.  Thus does the targeted harassment begin — to “punish” the very person who needs support, empathy and understanding, instead of the constant barrage of unneeded animosity.

Filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management may not, in and of itself, be the perfect solution; but, as imperfect a solution as filing a Federal Disability Retirement application may seem, the appearance of an imperfect solution may be preferable than the perfection expected but unattainable in a society that appears to be perfectly fine with imperfections pervasively perfected by appearances of concealed imperfections.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Filing for OPM Disability Retirement: Time wasted

It all depends upon one’s perspective, doesn’t it?  For some, watching television is time wasted; for others, reading a novel, and even within that subset of opinions and viewpoints, it often depends upon “what” you are reading before the hammer of judgement is struck: If a beach-time novel, then it is a waste of time; if a classic, then you are utilizing your time wisely.

But what if you are, in fact, sitting on the beach enjoying the lazy lapping of waves, and merely want to get lost in the fantasy of a junk novel — isn’t relaxation a good use of one’s time?  When does “constructive” relaxation turn into time wasted — i.e., laziness?  Is it when the bare necessities of life are no longer attended to?

Of that proverbial brother in-law or other distant relation who is whispered about, who barely holds on to a job, is found spending more time at the corner pub than attending to one’s kids, or the one who constantly oversleeps, overstays his welcome or overstates his woes — is it just a guy who likes to relax, or is he a lazy bum?

Is there a mathematical formula in determining when time is well spent doing nothing, or is wasted?   Sort of like: Time multiplied by the extent of bare necessities required divided by the extent of need, minus particular circumstances that must be taken into account factored by 3.

Can a lifetime be wasted, and if so, what would be the criteria to be applied or imposed?  A wealthy person might contend: We have about 60 years or so to make our fortunes, and if a person has not done so within that timeframe, it is a lifetime wasted.  Some others might counter with: Amassing wealth is not the sole criteria of a worthwhile life; the fostering of human relationships, of making someone else more comfortable, or of even granting a dog some happiness, is what makes this life a worthy one.

Does a medical condition bring about a differing perspective?  For the wealthy person who makes enemies throughout and angers almost everyone with his or her single-minded focus while disregarding the feelings of all else, but who suddenly is hit with deteriorating health — does time take on a different meaning?

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, where the medical condition begins to prevent the Federal or Postal worker from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s job — is time being wasted by the struggle itself?  Does it appear that everything is an uphill struggle: of juggling doctor’s appointments, work, family obligations, etc.?

Preparing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, to be submitted to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, may not be the best solution of all, but it may be the most prudent one, as time is not a friend to be wasted when it comes to one’s health and future security.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Medical Retirement for Federal Workers: Road Maps

Does the “new way” diminish other manners and approaches?  Does an increase in technological guidance diminish and decrease the self-reliance and initiative required once upon a time?

Take, for example, the trip taken today — any trip: One merely types in the address or the phone number, presses a button and Google Maps guides you to your destination.  In days now gone and forever forgotten, one had to take out those old paper maps (you know, those multi-folded, accordion-like Rand McNally relics) stuffed in the side door compartment of one’s vehicle or dug out from under the piles of old registration cards in one’s glove compartment, and carefully follow the numerical and lettered cross-sections of quadrants in planning the course of a trip otherwise lost in the morass of unfamiliar territory.  Or, like most men — just “wing” it.

Does the loss of a road map — the necessity of its very relevance and existence — mean that there are reverberations in other sectors of one’s life, or in the way one’s brain works?  Do we, because of the ease of Google Maps, become lazier, expect that everything will be self-guided, and is that the future for everything in life, especially once the self-guided vehicle is perfected?  Does the expectation of technology’s ease make us lazier, allowing for procrastination to become extended beyond reason, where we no longer “plan” for things well in advance, assuming that whatever the issue or anticipated endeavor, it will all be taken care of by a click of a button, or at most, a few keyboard taps away?

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, road maps are a necessity of life — both for the Federal or Postal employee in maneuvering through the complex administrative pathway of a Federal Disability Retirement application, as well as in preparing a “legal roadmap” for the U.S. Office of Personnel Management in approving the Federal Disability Retirement application.

In both cases, the road map is similar to that old Rand McNally map that required quadrants to be precisely followed: For the Federal Disability Retirement applicant, the need for precise guidance by the best route possible in order to obtain an approval from OPM; and for OPM, the proper legal citations and arguments that will persuade them to grant the approval.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire