OPM Medical Retirement Laws: Confirmation and Affirmation

The former is both a religious sacrament in Church doctrine, as well as a state of establishing that something is true or correct; the latter, an act or statement of support for that which was previously thought to be so.  Both imply a previous state of foreknowledge, or at least an indication of some prior existence of validity; it merely needed a further stamp of approval or attestation of verification.  And that is how most opinions are sought, aren’t they?  In our own minds, we already know the answer; the search for counsel is not for new revelation, but merely a confirmation of that which we know, and the affirmation of what is needed to be done.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, such that the medical condition impacts the capacity and ability of being able to perform the essential elements of one’s positional duties, the recognition for the need to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal employee or U.S. Postal worker is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, is determined far in advance of any phone call to an attorney for guidance and counsel.

The search for “advice”, as the term is loosely presented, is often to merely confirm that which is already known, and to affirm the process which has already been discovered.  For, the medical condition itself already tells the Federal or Postal employee of the necessity of filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through OPM, and the agency’s unfriendly and often hostile response has established the harbinger of one’s future.

Like secrets between nations and skeletons in one’s proverbial closet, the preparation, formulation and filing of Federal Disability Retirement benefits through OPM is somewhat of a formality; it was known already for quite some time, but the Federal and Postal employee just needed to confirm and affirm the inevitability of necessity already revealed, but wanting of declaration.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Disability Retirement: The Privacy Factor

In preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through one’s agency, en route to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal employee or the U.S. Postal worker is under whichever various retirement systems (FERS, CSRS or CSRS-Offset), the inherent dangers of revelation, violation or dissemination, whether intended or otherwise, becomes a focused concern for every Federal or Postal employee engaging the administrative process.

The idea that a stranger may view one’s medical information is one thing — for, in that event, we have become used to the discomforting acceptance that strangers at a records copier service may inadvertently “view” such medical documents; or, that the necessity of the administrative specialist at the U.S. Office of Personnel Management must analyze and evaluate the medical information provided; and such instances are unavoidable and therefore marginally acceptable.

It is, rather, the viewing and dissemination of those whom we are familiar with, which tends to concern.  But to focus too obsessively upon such issues can distract and detract; the scent of vulnerability — a euphemism for people being nosey — is a natural result of bureaucracies, and Federal agencies and the U.S. Postal Service are rampant petri dishes for uncontrollable spread of viral prurient interests.  Fear of imaginative consequences can harmfully present an obstacle for progress.

Assume that the worst will happen, and when something less actually occurs, acceptance of such lesser results will be easier to embrace.  Medical conditions and information about one’s disability are indeed matters of privacy; but when a Federal or Postal employee voluntarily files for Disability with the Office of Personnel Management, the road from Point A to Destination B should be a straight line of focus, and not marred with distractions which ultimately have little consequential impact.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire