OPM Disability Retirement Claims: The Full Plate

From childhood, we are taught to (A) place on our plate only that which we can finish and (B) to finish that which we have placed upon our plate.  In modernity, perhaps such a “rule” is no longer applicable or enforced?

The old ways are often from habits ensconced from experience — of the Great Depression where scarcity, and even the fear of it, perpetuated a need to be frugal; of limited supply resulting in a greater appreciation of delights, and thus of a punctilious attention to avoid wastefulness; and of a wider deference for fairness, that others should share in the bounty presented.

In older days, to delight in a bottle of coke (yes, those little vintage bottles placed in ice, where cane sugar was used and not corn syrup) once in a year was a treat, whereas nowadays many people addictively drink an extra-large coke every day, leading to the rise of diabetes and making this country the greatest exporter of obesity around the globe.

But back to the metaphor of the “full plate”:  From childhood, we are taught never to walk away without finishing what is put on our plate.  As we grow older, the metaphor of the full plate turns a different meaning — of the day’s work, the chores before us, the various responsibilities throughout the day.  It has become ingrained in us that we “must” finish what is put on our plates.

This is similar to the idea that police officers retain, in error, that every encounter with conflict must be resolved then and there — often resulting in making decisions which, in retrospect, might have turned out otherwise had you just walked away from it and came back to the problem later.  That is where modernity fails in its approach to life: Not every full plate has to be clean at the end of the day, both metaphorically and practically.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who are struggling to get through the day because of a chronic medical condition which no longer allows the Federal or Postal employee to continue in their careers because of a disabling health condition, that long-held sense of duty and responsibility that the “full plate” — a metaphor representing the sense that one’s job must be endured no matter what — must be finished, may need to be abandoned.

One’s health should always be a priority, in the end, and preparing an effective FERS Disability Retirement application through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management may be the only and best option left.  Yes, it is okay sometimes to not finish the full plate.  Yes, it is okay to sometimes leave things unfinished.  Metaphorically or practically, it is sometimes the best thing to do — to leave the plate unconsumed.

Contact an OPM Disability Lawyer who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and consider whether the full plate needs to be completely eaten, after all.

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: Philosophy Gone Awry

Philosophy was always about asking universal questions.  What is the meaning of life?  What is truth?  What is Being?  Does God exist?  Are there eternal principles of moral import?

Philosophy self-imploded when it exhaustively asked such principled questions, failed to answer them, then questioned itself for failing to arrive at conclusive answers.  But the questions left unanswered were never meant to present an unfinished query.  Universality in the question itself did not mean that universality in the answer would ever be achieved.

The questions were to be answered for the individual; the universality of the question was merely meant to indicate a wider sense of applicability — not to fit every circumstance, everywhere, for everybody.

Philosophy took a wrong turn when Wittgenstein mistook the need for relevance greater than for the individual.  To that extent, he was correct to abandon philosophy in his early days and instead to become a primary school teacher in a small town in Austria — Trattenbach — for, the experience of daily drudgery, ending finally in striking a poor student for not being able to answer a question posed, then lying about it.

A logician who cannot abide that a conclusion reached in the particular can follow from a premise of a universal, philosophy had gone awry when the answer became more important than the question.  In the end, not all questions need to be answered; for, some questions are important merely in the questioning itself.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who need answers to questions concerning the particulars in a Federal Disability Retirement application, you need not worry about the ‘universals’ concerning OPM Disability Retirement Law — for, it is the ‘particulars” of case laws, decisions from the MSPB and the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals of precedents already established, which become the “arguing” points in putting forth your application.

Let philosophy die, as Richard Rorty used to say, its quiet death, but let Disability Retirement Law be argued by those who are competent to do so.  Contact an attorney who specializes in FERS Disability Retirement Law, and do not concern yourself with Philosophy gone awry.

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.

 

OPM Disability Retirement Application: Beliefs

They have become overly magnified in this day and age of incessant contentiousness; but as to what they are, from whence they are derived, and why some are valid while others are inconsequential, remain somewhat of a mystery.  People believe in all sorts of things.  Moreover, in recent years, discretion and modesty seem to have been lost, and the art of expression is no longer a predicate to expressing them loudly and vociferously.

Is it important for people to possess beliefs?  Should they be based upon factual predicates?  Moreover, are some beliefs more valid than others? Should logic play a role in them, or is mere passion and extreme emotion enough to validate?

It is all well and good to hold insulated beliefs on social media, so long as the circularity of such beliefs need not be tested in the objective world.  Thus, if X believes in Y, and A believes in Y also, and it is never expressed outside of the context between the insulated linguistic exchanges between X and A, no harm comes about.  But if belief-Y is that “oncoming buses traveling at Z-miles per hour cannot harm you”, and either X or A goes out and tests such a belief in the objective, “real” world outside of social media — well, you know the real-world consequences which will result.

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, your belief in whether you can prepare and formulate an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, to be submitted to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, depends a great deal upon your factual knowledge of the laws governing Federal Disability Retirement.

Don’t take the chance that the legal knowledge which must be relied upon is enough to prepare a strong enough Federal Disability Retirement case. Instead, it might behoove you to contact a disability attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Law, thereby preventing a disastrous result, such as the belief that an oncoming bus going at 50 miles per hour is a harmless entity in the objective world.

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: The Hunt for Nirvana

The initial question is: Is there even such a state?  That would, of course, preemptively undermine the very “hunt” for it, precisely because it would be an act of futility.  On the other hand, don’t most of us chase after chimeras of various sorts — whether of fame, wealth, lost loves or repressed daydreams?  So, why not hunt after the paradigm of paragon-like virtues — a state of release, of a transcendent experience devoid of self, suffering and selfish self-centeredness; or, as some might say, of a death-like state in living form.  Many would not even have a desire for such a state.

The amalgamation of we “think” is the state of Nirvana is probably quite different from the actual concept as attained or sought after by those who profess a belief in it.  It is the complete loss of self; of a state where one’s ego no longer exists, and with its disappearance, both sides of the human “coin” are also transcended: pleasure and pain.  One cannot go through life without its opposite and corollary: If you are capable of experiencing pleasure, then you are open to feeling pain, just as the person who can have happiness must by necessity tolerate sadness.  It is, unfortunately, part of being what it means to be “human”, and it is an act of futility if you try and expunge one while attempting to retain the other.  It is simply not possible.

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 likely time to consult with a FERS Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law.  Preparing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS is not a hunt for Nirvana; no, not even close.  In fact, it is another bureaucratic morass which can be a pain in the proverbial behind, and is a long and complex administrative process which makes the hunt for Nirvana like a pleasurable vacation in comparison.

Consult with an experienced attorney who specializes and knows about Federal Disability Retirement Law, and leave the hunt for Nirvana to those who like to trek through the Himalayan mountains.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

FERS Medical Retirement from OPM: The Fun of It All

Is that the point?  Do we live because there is a balancing of accounts, and so long as the right side of the ledger has enough checkmarks on the “leisure” side of life, where fun, joy, entertainment and self-satisfaction retain more fulfillment than on the left side (i.e., where work, drudgery, misery and repetitive monotony are recognized) — then, it is all “worth it”?

Do we continue on because of the “fun of it all”, or do most of us merely endure life, barely acknowledging the futility of our efforts and the inevitable melancholy of our lives, paused and interrupted only by the temporary suspension by sleep or daydreams?

We whisper our fantasies: “Oh, wouldn’t it be nice if…”.  It is the “Ifs” of life that transport ourselves from the reality of our condition into transferences of fantasies where for a brief moment a virtual reality replaces the starkness of present circumstances.  “If only I had a million dollars” (although, in this day and age, with inflation and the monetary devaluation of purchase power combined with the exponential increase of modern life’s consumer appetites, such a paltry amount barely makes a difference, anymore); “If only I had done X when I was younger”; “If only I had invested in such-and-such stocks”; “If only …”.

Like the overused reference to Sisyphus and the rolling boulder that never ceases, the toil that forever must be embraced and the daily grind that always remains, the fun of it all was always a misshapen goal that was never to be. Obligations in this society are no longer recognized; duties are easily abandoned; there remains only the barrenness of an isolated existence.  Where was “the fun of it all”?

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, it may be time to prepare, formulate and submit an effective Federal Disability Retirement application through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Consult with an Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law.  For, even if one’s Federal or Postal career was never sought based upon the illusion that life and a career should be pursued for the “fun of it all”, if the medical condition has stripped away even the illusion one once possessed, then it is time to seek a remedy for a replacement illusion.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Medical Retirement for Federal Government Employees: The content

It is ultimately the content that matters, especially in a technical, administrative procedure where tone and context become secondary.  After all, we are addressing a “medical” issue – a cold, clinical subject when it comes to filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application.

What should be included?  How far back?  What is meant by the “essential” or “core” elements of a job?  Does the capacity and ability to arrive at work for the duration of completing assignments in and of itself constitute an “essential” element of the job?  What if the job can be performed, but one simply cannot drive to the job?  Must I address failed efforts by the agency to “accommodate” me, and does the term “accommodation” have a narrower legal meaning than the way it is loosely used by my agency?

These and multiple other questions go to the heart – the content – of the issues presented when preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application.

Content is all important, and the audience to whom the Federal Disability Retirement application is intended is relevant to keep in mind.  If you are standing in line at a grocery store, or at a Post Office, and someone remarks to you, “You are obviously in pain.  Go ahead in front of me” – such kindness and consideration may prompt you to explain, in somewhat abbreviated form, the content of what your medical condition is.  However, if that same person who showed such consideration turned out to be a close family member, who either already knows about your condition or is otherwise intimately familiar with the circumstances and the history of your medical condition, your response may be somewhat different.

How much history of the medical condition needs to be related to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management; what medical records need to be attached and accompany the narrative report that creates the “bridge” and “nexus” between the medical condition and the essential elements of the job duties – these all fall under the general aegis of “content”, and must be carefully considered in preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Employee Disability Retirement: Witnessing the residue

Most of us merely witness the residue; the process itself, the events leading up to the conclusion, and “during” as opposed to the “after”, and all of the miniscule details that make up “in between” are invisible, ignored, unimportant or simply not thought of.  We see the “end product”, only, and that is how it should be.  We don’t have time to watch the apple tree grow from a seedling; for sausages to be made; for politics to be compromised; and for other people’s problems to fester.  And even if we did, what difference would it really make?

We assume much – that characters we see in movies made from “based on a true story” (whatever that means – and how much artistic liberty was taken with the details of such a “true story”, and what part is true and what is not?) productions went to the bathroom in between shooting at each other and becoming heroes; or that when children are seen, there was once love between the couple (although, that can turn out to be a wrong assumption where adoption or other arrangements have been made) even if the residue we witness shows only acrimony, bickering and constant arguing.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers preparing to 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, “both sides” witness the residue – from the Federal Agency or Postal Service’s side, they witness the residue of a filing for a disability retirement, without knowing the long and arduous struggle that the employee had with the medical condition prior to coming to such a decision.  Or, for that matter, from the viewpoint of the supervisor or co-worker, such a decision may come as a complete surprise.

Conversely, from the viewpoint of the Federal or Postal employee who is filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, witnessing the residue of the Federal Agency’s reaction or the co-workers and supervisors who make comments, or say anything at all, is often an interesting phenomenon for its complete lack of understanding or empathy.  They simply didn’t know, didn’t care or didn’t take the time (or all three) in showing any concern during the long struggle with the medical condition.

The key, however, in witnessing the residue, is with respect to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management – the Federal Agency that reviews and makes a determination on all Federal Disability Retirement applications.  For OPM, it is important to formulate a concise narrative in answering the questions on SF 3112A, Applicant’s Statement of Disability.  How much of the history; to what extent the minutiae and details of the past; and the precision of establishing the nexus between the medical condition and the job duties – these are all important in the proper preparation, formulation and filing of an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, where witnessing the residue may be a void too important to neglect.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Employee Disability Retirement: The Habit

No, this is not about that peculiar creature that Tolkien created who used to rule the earth but now hides in little dirt hutches in the deep recesses of forests (don’t all children and adults who have read his works believe in their heart of hearts that Hobbits still exist, and we just don’t see them?); rather, this, too, is a creature of sorts, just not the imaginary creation that gave joy to so many.

How is it that we come to learn it?  Is there a numerical value that must be first ascribed before the regularity of X becomes a Habit-Y?  What constitutes a definition of the repetition, and how is it learned, as opposed to unlearning certain types of constancies?  Is there a numerical value that further transforms a habit into an obsession, and where is the dividing line and what demarcates the distinction we thus impose?

If a dog, each morning upon the awakening by an alarm clock set by his master, rolls onto his back and waits until he gets a nice tummy-rub, and never deters or detours from such a habit, can he, too, unlearn it?  Is a habit, moreover, merely a settled tendency, such that the rest of those around may expect it to occur, but when it does not, is not necessarily a surprise or a disappointment, but a mere reliance that “normally” occurs but is not mandated by a turn to another direction?  When the expectation does not come to fruition, do we simply say, “Well, normally it is his habit, but perhaps he changed his mind”?

Kant, for instance, was known to take his walk at a specific time, and it was said of him that the townspeople set their watches against his daily routine and habit.  Does not that sound more like an obsession?  Is the difference one where there is greater ease to “break” the regularity, whereas an obsession is where such a tendency cannot, and is no longer a “voluntary” act?

Additionally, is there a difference with a distinction between a “habit”, a “ritual” and an “obsession”?  Or, is there no clear line of bifurcation (or is it “trifurcation”?), but the lines can cross over easily – as in, when we engage in a habit, sometimes there are rituals that are performed – washing one’s hands in the same way as always; combing one’s hair a set number of strokes; skipping over a particular crack in the sidewalk on the way home; and are rituals merely of greater intensity with obsession than with a habit?

And what of necessities that arise?  Such as filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management for Federal and Postal employees – do people not file because their “habits” are entrenched in a belief-system that one must just “buck up” and ignore the warning signs of a medical condition that continues to deteriorate and progressively debilitate?  When do habits stand in the way of doing that which is “reasonable” under the circumstances?

Here is a thought: For Federal and Postal employees suffering from a medical condition, such that the medical condition prevents the Federal or Postal employee from performing all of the essential elements of the Federal or Postal job, let not habit become an obsession, and instead, allow for the rituals of life to free you from the habitual obsession of ritualistic redundancy, and instead, begin preparing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

FERS & CSRS Disability Retirement: The Venting Venue

It is a necessary doorway (or so we are told) in order to attain sound psychological health; that, within the raging furnace of subsumed consciousness, of passions suppressed and grievances left unstated but yet seething beneath the subterranean caverns of unspecified aggregations of cumulative powder kegs confined by bloated egos, there remains a need for the fissure to emit the toxicities of life.  Or not.

The content of such emissions, of course, can never be challenged; it is only the context which should be questioned, in this age where subjectivity rules, the personal pronoun delegates, and the sacrosanct opinion of the “I” overcomes any Aristotelian residue of logical argumentation.  Venting is healthy (or so they say), and therapeutic, to boot.  And that which is both therapeutic and good, must by self-definition be unquestioned by any moral compass of historical certitude basked in tradition.

Thus, diatribes against parents are open game; vitriol against mothers, step-mothers, and especially mother in-laws are quite fashionable, and validated if spiced with an acerbic wit which only the unwitting can discern; and, certainly, the general population of parents, bad parents or parents who dared to restrict, set limits or otherwise constrained the alleged creativity of choice, lifestyle optioning and declarative innuendos of rejecting tradition and historicity of values, must be publicly flogged until the defamation of insensitivity is squeezed out of each, and where only the silence of conformity prevails, so that all traditions are banished into the timeless trashheaps of lost civilizations.

Perhaps it is good to vent; but when the “how”, the “where”, and the content-consciousness of “what” is left unconstrained, the issue is no longer whether, but if wisdom should properly channel it.  A stream flowing in front of a house, quietly lapping over the gentle smoothness of moss-covered rocks, may paint the picture of a serenity wrapped in the quietude of a morning mist; but when such waters turn into a raging turbulance and rise to levels which engulfs the rural solitude of a farmer’s self-sufficiency, the stream is then no longer the lifeline of gaiety and childhood warmth of memories unsheathed, but a warning that even the dreams of a butterfly can turn like a viper with fangs previously unseen.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who need to 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 proper preparation of an effective OPM Disability Retirement application should never be used as the venting venue for one’s solace or therapeutic health.  That should be left for another day, a different doorway, and a separate pathway for healthy living.

It is, indeed, the things stated in that moment of anger, actions embraced in a fit of rage, or hurts flung as self-defeating propositions, which one comes to regret.  The Federal Disability Retirement application, by contrast, must be objective, thoughtful, forceful in its argumentation and legal methodology of analysis and evaluative content, and never to be deemed impotent as a result of a venting venue of unnecessary contextual lapses.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire