OPM Disability Retirement: The Frustrating Process

Every administrative and bureaucratic process is a frustrating one, and waiting for an OPM Disability Retirement application to be approved is likely the epitome of frustration.

Thus, it is essential to understand at the outset that filing a Federal Disability Retirement application with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management is a long and arduous process that will likely take many years to accomplish, and nothing short of a miracle will expedite the time required.

One’s own efforts in attempting to take shortcuts will have minimal impact upon the ultimate outcome.  Still, an Federal Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law can undoubtedly enhance the chances of an earlier approval.  Even then, however, Federal and Postal workers need to understand that a great deal of the process merely involves waiting.

Filing quickly does not result in OPM rendering a quicker decision.  Often the contrary is true: By preparing an application quickly, it is likely not as strong a case as it could have been and when OPM finally gets around to reviewing it, a likely denial will be issued, further prolonging the waiting period because of needing to go to the next, “Reconsideration” Stage of the process.

And while every bureaucratic process inherently possesses its unique set of frustrations, OPM Disability Retirement has the added feature of contending with a serious medical issue, which tends to magnify the frustrations involved.

Can anything be done about it?  The short answer is, Not Really.  Calls to OPM will often only exasperate the level of frustration, and while “doing something…anything” may temporarily appease the frustration in the short term by making it appear that some progress is being made, almost all such efforts come to naught, and all that remains is to await OPM’s response.

Once received, of course, the entire process can be a further stage of frustration.  For, if an approval is received, there are further battles in getting the annuity payments started, and that doesn’t even touch upon whether the annuity is correctly calculated.  On the other hand, if a denial is issued, the bureaucratic frustration is further extended, especially because of the short timeframe provided in preparing and submitting a response.

Any Federal or Postal employee contemplating preparing, formulating, and filing a Federal Disability Retirement application under the FERS system to be submitted to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, must be prepared for a long and frustrating administrative process.

And if you want further insight into this lengthy and frustrating process, you may want to first consult with a Federal Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law.

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 and Postal Disability Retirement: How We See Ourselves

Is it ever static?  Does it evolve over time?  Are there individuals who never see a changed self while others believe in a rapidly-changing river on a daily basis?  Is the world comprised of the two “camps” of thoughts, sort of like the old Greek philosophers, Heraclitus and Parmenides?  Is there a successful approach in living — of “mind over matter” — which actually makes a difference?

If we see ourselves as a “failure” despite every objective evidence to the contrary — honors abounding, accolades showered, achievements attained, wealth garnered — does it make it so?

Then, of course, there are objective criteria — and in a Federal Disability Retirement case, it is important not only in conveying the subjective pain and interior psychological roadblocks which prevent a Federal or Postal worker from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, but to combine them with the objective evidence in presenting the full picture of one’s disabling medical conditions.

How we see ourselves is important in a Federal Disability Retirement case; but, moreover, how one’s doctor sees you may be the crucial juncture in attaining a successful outcome in an OPM Disability Retirement case.

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 for U.S. Government Employees: Now, What?

The question or declarative can be stated in two ways — As a query for the next steps, or as an expression of exasperation directed towards a frustration of multiple things gone wrong.  Or of a third: A combination of both frustration and an effort to understand what the next steps are.

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 declarative query, “Now, what?” is often heard throughout the process of suffering from the medical condition itself, as well as during the process of preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS.

The medical condition itself can lead to further complications, and thus the expression as stated; the Agency’s response of callous disregard can be the basis for the exasperation stated; the complexity of the administrative process of filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits can also be the origin and cause of frustration.  To minimize the trauma of the entire process, consult with an OPM Disability Attorney who specializes in Federal Employee Disability Retirement Law so that the next time you need to express the sentiment, “Now, what?” — you can do so by picking up the telephone and calling your attorney.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement under FERS: The Carefree Life

Is there such a thing, or is it a fiction, a mirage, a fantasy of those who create mythologies old and new — like the Utopia of some ancient history or of immortality in a netherworld of paradise’s dream?

To live is to care; to have a carefree life is therefore to die.  The incompatibility of the two concepts coexisting is intuitively clear; but the oxymorons we create are often as a result of dreams and goals expressed out of frustration from the overwhelming nature of those cares which confront us.

Life is a series of “cares”; to be free of them is to be free of life itself; and as living means that the human drama of interacting, helping, engaging in conflict and facing daily trials and all that constitutes the “stuff” that life is made up of, so it is the one who engages it successfully, who is able to maneuver through the complexities of such messes we make of it — that is the closest we can come to in becoming “care-free”.

There are those few who, perhaps, are able to escape a good part of the daily cares of life; but then the unexpected happens, such as a medical condition which one has no control over.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition such that the medical condition begins to prevent 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 modify the types and numbers of the “cares” that you are confronted with.

No, there never was or is a carefree life; but obtaining a Federal Disability Retirement may at least allow for the Federal or Postal worker to at least focus your attention upon the cares which matter most — that of health.

Consult with an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law today and consider preparing an effective OPM Disability Retirement application through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management in order to come closer to that mythological paradise of the non-existent, carefree life.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement under FERS: Factors to consider

The universe of thoughtful decision-making shrinks exponentially and in direct correlation with the pertinent and relevant information gathered, and it is too often the case that factors not considered are the very ones which lead to a non-decision or, more importantly, to a wrong conclusion.

What factors should be considered when a Federal or Postal employee is going to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset?

Certainly, age can be a factor — for, if OPM engages in a recalculation of a Federal Disability Retirement annuity at age 62, and you are fast approaching that age, the factor of “how long it takes” to get an OPM Disability Retirement approved (about a year, give or take a few months on either side of the equation); whether you get any backpay once it is approved (back to the last day your Agency or the Postal Service has paid you anything); and whether the time you are on Federal Disability Retirement counts towards your total number of years accrued until the recalculation age at 62 (it does) — should all be factors to consider.

Further, even if you are still relatively young, should those same factors be considered?  The short answer is an unequivocal “yes” — and probably many others, besides, including: Do I intend on working at another job in the private sector while on Federal Disability Retirement?  Do I have Service-Connected disabilities that can play a factor [sic] in the factors to be considered?

The universe of factors to consider in preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, are innumerable; and then, there are likely factors that you have not even considered, but which may be prompted by consulting with an attorney who has already considered multiple factors besides, and who may be able to guide you in this complex process called “OPM Disability Retirement”.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Lawyer Representation for OPM Disability Claims: The price paid

That is the question, isn’t it?  In this monetary-based system of thought, we always ask that one, and the follow-up:  What was the price paid, and was it worth it? Are the two questions and issues divisible, or are they inseparably linked like Siamese twins sharing a vital organ?

As to the first, the question can encompass an entanglement of intricate complexities that flow from the second — when, in fact, it is a simple question requiring merely a fundamental answer.  We ask first, What is the price paid?

We begin to hem and haw and hesitate:  Well, it was really beautiful and I’ve always wanted it and it was worth it because it brought back the warmth of childhood memories and….  Once such explanations and justifying delineations occur, you have conflated the second issue into the first; for, the first requires a simple and straightforward answer:  the dollar-amount; a monetarily-objective response; a unit from a designated numerical set, etc.  Thus: “I bought X”.  “How much did you pay for it?”  “It was priced at X-dollars, and I purchased it for Y-amount”.

Then, the inevitable follow-up:  “Was it worth it?”  It is this second question that evokes a conflation with the first; for, such a query is not so simple inasmuch as it involves psychology, emotion, rational and irrational underpinnings, and the subjective encompassment of often-unexplainable attachments.

The worth of a thing may not parallel the price of it; for, what what paid for it can spread throughout a spectrum of differentiating circumstances:  Perhaps one got a bargain; maybe the seller didn’t realize the true market value and vastly underpriced it; or, it may be that a person needed to do a “quick sale” because he needed the cash, and was willing to part with it at a basement-bargain price, etc.

Take the following hypothetical:  At an auction, a painting is bid upon.  It is a rather unassuming piece that depicts a woman, fully clothed, with a slight smile.  It is not an exceptional painting, and is expected to be auctioned off for about a thousand dollars.  The bidding begins, and very quickly, it becomes clear that primarily 2 individuals are vying for the painting — one, a very wealthy individual; the other, a middle-class bloke barely able to meet his monthly debts.  The bidding exceeds the expected price to be gained by the auctioneer, which makes him happy beyond description.

This is the cake that dreams are made of for the auction house that expects very little:  Two or more individuals who are willing to pay a price exceeding the monetary worth of the item.  After a series of back-and-forth bids, the middle-class bloke wins the bid — at $20,000.00.  When later asked about it, he replies: “The painting reminds me of my mother.”  Bankrupt and considered a fool by everyone in the neighborhood, he nevertheless feels for the rest of his life that it “was worth it”.

Now, turn the hypothetical around and let’s say that the wealthy man won the bidding.  When asked about it, he simply stated: “Oh, I was just bored.  I plan on trashing the painting when I get home, but it was exciting to just rob someone else of his desire and pleasure.”  In either case, was the price paid “worth” it?

That is the question that Federal and Postal workers have to answer when determining whether or not to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset — the price of one’s health; whether it is worth continuing in a job or career that persists upon a track to demoralize, deteriorate and destroy one’s health; or, whether a reduced income at the price of being able to focus upon one’s health may be “worth” it.

Preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through OPM itself has a price — of the long wait, the complex administrative process and the stress of waiting; but like the painting being bid upon at the auction house, it is always the balancing of the price paid and the worth of the gain that must be considered when preparing, formulating and filing for OPM Disability Retirement benefits.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Disability Retirement Benefits: Of good humor

Can it last, and for how long?  Are there such people in this world, who wander about and retain a sense of good humor no matter what egregious worldly circumstances devastate and make destitute the trying soul?

Or, like that chime that attracts little children to run with abandon into the streets upon hearing the approach of the good humor truck – you know, the company that was sued for creating an attractive nuisance, because children respond like cats and dogs to sounds associated with tasty ice cream (come to think of it, not just children, but all of us as well) – are there people as well who are like the memories of lazy summer days just waiting with that nickel to spend upon to soothe the saliva that drips with the heat of bygone days?

Of good humor – is it merely a human trait, or do dogs, cats and even undomesticated animals possess it, as well?  Have you ever met an individual of whom we say, “Oh, he is the guy possessed with an unalterable and unique advantage in life – of good humor”?  There is something attractive, is there not – to be able to smile despite tragedy, to find the satirical side to every turn of a trial, and even to consider a chuckle in the midst of a painful encounter?  The person who can smile throughout the tides of life is one who can withstand the tsunamis of unbearable pain and tragedy.

Certainly, for Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who must contend with the lengthy bureaucratic trials in waiting upon a Federal Disability Retirement application filed with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal employee or Postal worker is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, possessing a sprinkling of good humor is somewhat of a “must” in order to endure the administrative procedures involved.

For, the choice is somewhat clear – of being the good humor truck that brings satisfaction to mouth-watering children running for relief from the heat of summer, or being that child who gets run over by the good humor truck.  In the end, the goal of getting an OPM Disability Retirement annuity is not for the purposes of good humor, but to be able to ring the chimes of life in order to step into a brighter future and a better tomorrow, no matter what flavors of ice cream may be hidden behind the panels of the good humor truck.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement: The idealist, the skeptic and the cynic

The idealist possesses the dreams of hope and promise; the skeptic, the singe of hurt enough to dampen the spirit; and the cynic, well, he is the grumpy old man who has seen it all, been battered about by the reality of experiential confrontations where tales make the sweat pour from salted wounds too hurtful for words to embrace.

Do they represent a tripartite spectrum of thoughts, feelings and motives, or merely unconnected differences demarcated by time, encounters and length of procrastinated envy?  Do we all begin with the zeal of idealism, pass through the comfort of skepticism, then end up bedridden in the cocoon of cynicism?  Does generational wisdom conveyed by the old to youth ever pause the bursting bubble of naive relish, where mistakes foreseen and palpably avoidable allow for the wounds of time to be delayed, such that skepticism never enters into the unwelcome gates of a soul’s purity?  Or, does destruction of the essence of a person necessarily result in a society where generational transfer of wisdom is scoffed at, and youth and its folly is celebrated merely because beauty is defined by age, sound judgment by pharmaceutical ingestion, and where mistakes made are linguistically altered by clever euphemisms which extinguish not the pain of experiential confrontation, but the narrative which meekly follows?

Whether as inevitable stages of growth and decay, or dots on a graph of spectral divergence, either and all are extremes which reflect the stage of life, experience and historical context which an individual has encountered.  For the Federal employee and the U.S. Postal worker whose calloused soul has already been deadened by time and degree of harassment, the additional burden of a medical condition which prevents the Federal or Postal employee from performing one, if not more than one, of the essential elements of the Federal or Postal job, the time may have come to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.  Whether under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, once the Federal or Postal employee reaches the minimum years of eligibility criteria, the proof by a preponderance of the evidence must be shown.

For such a Federal or Postal employee, it matters not whether life has yet to dampen one’s idealism; nor that experiential harassment in the workplace has failed to turn one into a skeptic; or if cynicism has already prevailed, all the more reason to file for OPM Disability Retirement before the pain of the medical condition consumes to the extent that life’s despondency has already wrought.  In the end, filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through OPM is a necessity because of life’s encounters, and no man or woman can escape the scars of time, truth of weariness of soul, where the idealist lives on in the forgotten youth of our memories, the skeptic in the hardening callouses of our experience, and cynicism in the dying disregard of one’s mournful essence in losing the sensation of one’s inner being.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Medical Retirement from Federal Government Employment: Byzantine Iconoclasm & Compromise

It was a period in history when religious images and icons were considered heretical.  It resulted not merely in the rejection of new such images, but in the active and aggressive destruction of venerated art, sculptures, etc., and the persecution of those who created or owned them.  The term itself has come to represent an unyielding, irrational stance, unmoved by rational discourse, and even more to the point, aggressive in stamping out all opposition.

“Compromise”, on the other hand, has come to represent the ability and capacity to accept something other than the original starting points of two or more conflicting views, victims or vantage vats; for some, it reflects weakness and meekness in the willingness to capitulate beyond principles, setting aside cherished beliefs for the sake of concession and agreement.

What happens when an individual possesses the personality characteristics of an iconoclast, but circumstances dictate flexibility for compromise? Beliefs are great to have; that, and a dime, won’t even buy a cup of coffee, anymore, and it is this conflict which often arises which tempers the spirit of human pursuit and happiness of infernal contentment.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal Workers who suffer from a medical condition, where the medical condition impacts one’s capacity and ability to perform all of the essential elements of one’s positional duties, the internal conflict between enduring the pain and turmoil of one’s medical condition, and the need to keep one’s commitment to family, employment and self-sacrifice, come to the fore, and is often reflective of the historical clash and intersecting conflict between Byzantine Iconoclasm and Compromise.

We often think that our own situation, in its microcosmic relevance, has never been known, unlikely to have been experienced, and stranger than fiction of verse.  But as Aristotle often notes in observing the physical universe, there is a “substratum” concealed by the elements merely seen by the observing eye, which continues on imperceptibly whether we know it or not; and for humans, that underlying unchangeableness falls under the generic aegis of the “human condition“.

Often, changing circumstances require a fresh perspective and a willingness to re-prioritize our lives.  For the Federal employee and U.S. Postal worker who must face the very-real prospect of a change in career and future goals because of a medical condition, the first order of priority must be one’s health and attending to his or her ongoing medical condition.

Once that has been established, then one must ask, Is continuing on in the same way — like the Byzantine iconoclast of yesteryear — impacting my health?  If the answer is a truthful, “Yes”, then one must consider preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, in order to attain a state of circumstances where one’s health is not progressively being destroyed by one’s employment.  For, in the end, compromise from a prior set of circumstances is not indicative of weakness or concession of principles; it is merely to embrace the wisdom of ages long ago lost, and to recognize that those images destroyed in the fervor of Byzantine Iconoclasm never extinguished the true essence of religious belief, but merely the product of human creativity in service to the principles of beauty and art.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire