OPM Disability Retirement under FERS: The Plan for Tomorrow

It is often the single most important remedy for a sense of hopelessness; for, with it, one is armed with a map, a guide, a sense of direction.  Perhaps there is not one for the day after, or a year hence, and maybe not even for the next hour; but the plan for tomorrow is what motivates us, gives us a perspective and a context, and a measure of whether there is hope for the future.

It can be something insignificant as viewed by others, and perhaps even irrelevant by most; of doing X or going to Y; perhaps, of accomplishing something relatively unimportant or visiting someone or someplace; yet, without it, life becomes an empty void, a chasm of meaninglessness and a hole in one’s heart measured not by surface diameter but by the depth of an unreachable goal.

The plan for tomorrow takes care of the anxiety of today; it paints over the marred wall and the unvarnished surface; and it provides a glimmer of light in an otherwise darkened and terror-filled universe.

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 all of the essential elements of one’s Federal job, the plan for tomorrow is to remain healthy, stay upon the road towards recuperation and limit the stresses of the day.

It should likely include consulting with an OPM Retirement Attorney who specializes in OPM Disability Retirement Law.  Now, that is the true plan for tomorrow — to get the advice of an attorney who will prepare, formulate and file an effective Federal Disability Retirement application.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Employee Disability Retirement: Fight or Give Up

Those are the only two choices for most of life’s challenges and encounters: To fight for something, or to abandon it completely.  Of course, the “middle ground” is often preached — as in some sort of compromise, or to learn the “tools” of “conflict resolution”, etc.  But that all depends upon the conflict itself, doesn’t it?

Some issues of contentiousness simply do not accord a middle ground; there is no compromise for the mountain climber inching up the North Face of the Eiger — going back down is just as dangerous as struggling upwards, and so it is to either fight or give up, where the latter results in sure death and becoming a frozen corpse of another defeated detritus.

And in the Animal Kingdom — is there ever an alternative third way?  The predator who chases after its prey; flight for the prey is tantamount to a fight — i.e., to “fight” for one’s life by trying to outrun the predator; or, to give up.  There is no “rationalizing” with the cheetah or the lion; one cannot “reason” with the predator in an effort to try and dissuade it from devouring you for its lunch or dinnertime meal.

And so it is with the Federal employee or U.S. Postal worker who suffers from a medical condition such that the medical condition no longer allows the Federal or Postal employee from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job — the choice is between fighting for the benefit or to simply give up.  There is no middle ground or “conflict resolution”; either the disability retirement is granted in full or not at all.

Further, resignation or termination from the Federal or Postal employment makes the choice as clearly defined in stark terms: continuation in the job is no longer an option, and inaction merely means you have given up because you only have one (1) year from the date of separation to file for Federal Disability Retirement.

If the choice is made to “fight” as opposed to “give up”, then it is best to have an advocate on your side and consult with a lawyer who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law.  For, if the choice is between fighting or giving up, and the Federal or Postal employee decides to take the former course of action, then give it your best shot by having an attorney who knows the process, cites the relevant law and prepares your case to give you the best opportunity at winning.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

FERS Disability Retirement Benefits: Jobs versus careers

We make a distinction between the two, do we not?  One merely “lands” a job, whereas we “pursue” a career, implying the arbitrary nature of the first and the delectable interest shown in the second.  Yet, the bifurcation of the two is never so stark as night and day, but can often be clouded in the grey of differences: Obviously, a “job” can be a career, and careers can take on many jobs in the upward advancement of one.

Thus, one can begin as a clerk, move into management, and ultimately become the President of a company; and while each job is distinguishable from the other, the entirety of the whole constitutes a “career” that one pursued.  Yet, we make the distinction especially when we are in “dead-end” jobs — those employment situations which disallow for advancement either in pay or in responsibilities (although, in some dead-end jobs, the responsibilities continue to expand without any increase in pay, which defines why it is a “dead-end” job because, in the end, you will end up dead by working too hard without a living wage).  And, while jobs in their totality and/or continuum of advancements may lead to a career, can a career become merely a job?

That question is rarely, if ever, asked, because careers are generally thought to be an elevated form of the lesser stature of “a job”, and as the higher standard cannot be subsumed or subjugated to the lower, it is normally not a valid consideration.  Yet, we talk in those terms, don’t we?  We hear statements like, “My career has stalled” or “His career has hit a glass ceiling”, or even, “Her career is going nowhere”.

Medical conditions, of course, can be a key element in the interference of a “career”, and in some sense, of transforming a career into a mere job.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition such that the medical condition prevents the Federal employee from performing one or more of the essential elements of his or her positional duties, it may be time to recognize that one’s “career” has become a “job” precisely because of the medical condition.

The medical condition is the factor and element which has “stalled” one’s career, and it is time to then prepare, formulate and file an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, to be filed through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management. Consult with an experienced Attorney who specializes in FERS Disability Retirement Law in order to maneuver through the complex bureaucratic maze.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

FERS Medical Retirement Benefits: Forever and a Day

The concept itself is a conundrum; it is to emphasize the extension beyond eternity when eternity itself cannot be extended by self-definition.  The “add-on” of the extra day provokes the idea that it goes just a little further than that which we can comprehend; and yet, we can barely, if at all, comprehend the concept of “forever” itself.

For certain ideas, can we “feel” concepts better than we can “understand” them?  That, in and of itself, of course, is a puzzling concept; for, words, ideas and concepts are posited to intellectually comprehend as opposed to applying an emotive conceptualization of it.  To “feel” that you understand a word or a concept is quite different from comprehending it intellectually.  Yet, doesn’t the idea of “pain” fit into that category?

A person who experiences a great deal of pain may not be able to understand it, and yet he or she “feels” it, and in the very existential experiencing of the phenomena, comprehends it better than the person who merely reads about it but never experiences it.  Furthermore, the person who “understands” pain has a greater comprehension of the phrase, “forever and a day” — for the two are similar in experiences; the one is a medical condition that can barely be described; the other, a concept of existence that is similar to unendurable pain.

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, the feeling that life has become “forever and a day” is a familiar one, precisely because of the unendurable stresses inherent in trying to balance work, home, the medical condition and the growing stresses of it all.

Filing for Federal Disability Retirement under FERS is a step towards realizing that days do not need to become lost in weeks, weeks into months and months into years, where the pain or other medical condition, physical or psychiatric, must by necessity be an unendurable conflagration of existence.

FERS Disability Retirement is a means to an end — the end being, having the time and energy to focus upon one’s health; the means, to retire medically from a situation that has become untenable; all, in order to recognize that “forever and a day” begins with a day that can be differentiated from the “forever” that never seems to end.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement: Concealment through Repetition

It is often through mindless repetition that concealment of truth can be accomplished, and with insidious efficiency.  For, repetition of tasks; redundancy of toil; convenience of engagement in life’s duties and obligations without thoughtful input; these can all be performed in monotonous automation without the participation of the one true essence of human uniqueness and identity:  the creativity of thought.

Life sometimes deadens the soul; or, more accurately, it is we who, as the gatekeeper of sensory impressions which bombard us daily, allow for the toxicity of life to invade and destroy.  Of all moral failings, however, one of the greatest is to allow for the mundane to conceal the truth.  That is often what the human toil of work allows; for, when a medical condition, whether physical or psychiatric, creeps in subtle hiding but progressively deteriorates and eats away at the body or soul, the desperate need to hide behind the mindless repetition of work allows for a semblance of mundane continuation of daily routine, and to trick the mind into thinking that all is well.

It is tantamount to the Maginot Line which the French had erected, consisting of fortifications, armaments and weapons’ placement in anticipation of an outdated strategy of waging war:  it provided a semblance of security, and allowed people to mindlessly live life.

For the Federal and Postal employee who suffers from a medical condition, such that the medical condition begins to prevent one from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal position, the refuge behind work; the responses to agency actions of retaliation; the prolonging and procrastinating of the one true essence of necessity — of filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits in order to attend to one’s health — allows for the repetition of monotony to conceal the singularity of focus which is required to move forward.

Filing for Federal or Postal Disability Retirement benefits, whether under FERS or CSRS, is not the “be all or end all” of solutions; but it unravels a truism which prevents inertia of creativity, by allowing one to secure an annuity for the future, and to go back to the foundation of human essence: health, creativity, and the discarding of the repetition of the mundane.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

The Ritualistic Void Found in Postal and Federal Employees Who Continue Working in Jobs That Further Deteriorate Their Health

It is precisely the repetitive identity which provides for comfort.  Thinking is an endeavor which requires effort; ritualistic actions require merely attendance and presence, and the mechanical motions of responding.  When the mind becomes bifurcated from the task at hand, whether from being “lost in thought”, ruminating upon problems afar, or disengaged because one is contending with physical pain or psychiatric anxieties and lethargy, ritualism becomes a zone of comfort because the physical body can engage while the mental processes can embrace a parallel universe.

This ritualistic void is often what becomes of work when a Federal or Postal employee suffers from a medical condition, such that this health condition begins to prevent one from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s job.  How long one can continue in such dualism of actions is often dependent upon the type of Federal or Postal job which one holds.  Being a Letter Carrier or a Mail Processing Clerk while in progressively agonizing pain will often compel a stoppage of work, precisely because the pain directly and intractably interferes both in the physical actions of ritualistic behavior, as well as in the dissociative mind to deal with the pain.  Office and computer work can sometimes delay the inevitable.

Filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits for the Federal or Postal employee, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS or CSRS, is a decision to be made resulting from the cessation of the ritualistic void which occurs.  Federal Disability Retirement is a benefit accorded to all Federal and Postal Employees, and is filed through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management. When the tripartite coalescence of work, health and capacity begins to crumble and disintegrate, it may be time to reassess the ritualistic void presented by a job which no longer offers significance and meaning, but further contributes to the daily deterioration of one’s health.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Attorney

 

Federal Employee Medical Retirement: A Real-life Hypothetical

Assume the following hypothetical:  A Federal or Postal employee who is 48 years old, with 25 years of Federal Service, engages in a type of work which is repetitive, day in and day out (yes, even this sentence is repetitive and redundant), full time, over the course of those 25 years.  

One day, while moving a piece of furniture at the direction of his spouse, he feels a sudden and sharp pain in his back.  He has to sit down and rest for a while.  The “for a while” turns into a visit to the emergency room, then to his family doctor.  The MRI shows a disc bulge at L5-S1, with multi-level disc degeneration, spinal stenosis, and other degenerative changes.  Despite multiple modalities of treatments, including epidural steroidal shots, physical therapy, variances of medication regimens, etc. (and you can even add a surgical intervention), the pain continues to worsen and deteriorate his medical condition.  The chronic pain prevents him from performing his job.  Whether sedentary or physical, the high distractability of the pain results in his poor performance.  

Can he/she file an OWCP claim?  Such a claim is submitted and rejected, because the issue of causality cannot be established.  An appeal is filed, and it is again denied.  The treating Neurologist and Orthopaedic Specialist are unwilling to establish a direct causal link.  But one argues:  Do those 25 years of repetitive work account for nothing?  Can it all have occurred because of the singular occurrence?  Does my medical condition reflect that of a person twice my age merely because of a single incident?  

It is precisely because causality is the crux of OWCP, that Federal Disability Retirement under FERS or CSRS is an important benefit for all Federal and Postal employees. OWCP/FECA is a benefit which is great for the limited role it plays; Federal Disability Retirement is a benefit with wider applicability, and the chance for the Federal or Postal employee to enter into another phase of life.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

Medical Retirement Benefits for US Government Employees: Repetitive Stress Injury & Carpal Tunnel Syndrome

Stories abound, of course, concerning the worker who claims to suffer from Carpal Tunnel Syndrome, or from similar medical conditions which are often generically placed under the rubric of “repetitive stress injuries” — chronic conditions of pain, numbness, tingling, and radiating pain and numbness often emanating from extremities and impacting one’s ability to engage in fine dexterous movement and manipulations — often limiting movement and abilities upon computer work, file handling, but also into areas which require mechanical repair, electronic technician work, Airways Systems work, work which requires the fine manipulative use of fingers, hands, etc.

They are real injuries and medical conditions, and should not be dismissed lightly.  Use and overuse over time, or sometimes resulting from a specific traumatic injury, can result in the devastating impact which prevents one from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s job.  For Federal and Postal employees either under FERS or CSRS, Carpal Tunnel Symdrome (CTS) and Repetitive Stress Injuries are a viable basis to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS or CSRS.  When CTS surgery (“release”), hand splints, and physical therapy have failed to alleviate the chronic nature of the medical condition, it may be time to consider filing with the Office of Personnel Management.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

Federal Disability Retirement Benefits for Federal & Postal Employees: Psychiatric v. Physical Disabilities

People continually inquire as to the difference between Psychiatric v. Physical disabilities, as to whether one is more amenable to an approval over the other.  Psychiatric conditions can include a wide range of variables — from Bipolar Disorder, Schizophrenia, Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, Major Depression, Anxiety, panic attacks, Agoraphobia, ADD/ADHD, and multiple other diagnoses.  Physical medical conditions, also, include a wide spectrum of disorders — Cervical, Thoracic or Lumbar conditions; various cardiac conditions; Carpal Tunnel Syndrome; Fibromyalgia; Chronic Fatigue Syndrome; Shoulder Impingement Syndrome; Plantar Fasciitis; Migraine headaches; Lupus; Chemical Sensitivity issues; allergies; COPD; and multiple other conditions.  Is there a difference between these (and the listed conditions are by no means meant to be exhaustive, but merely illustrative of the wide range of medical conditions)?  The answer is, ultimately, No. 

The foundational essence of a Federal Disability Retirement case, whether involving Psychiatric disabilities or Physical disabilities, is the impact upon one’s ability to continue to perform all of the essential elements of one’s job.  Further, recent case law holds that OPM cannot make a distinction between “objective” medical evidence as opposed to “subjective” medical evidence, and so the old distinction between “psychological” medical conditions as distinguished from “physical” medical conditions can no longer be seriously upheld.  Ultimately, and fortunately, there is no difference between psychiatric disabilities and physical disabilities when trying to get approved for a Federal Disability Retirement case under FERS or CSRS.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

Federal & Postal Disability Retirement: OPM's Words

It is a frightening thought that there may be a percentage of Federal or Postal Federal Disability Retirement applicants who read an initial denial from the Office of Personnel Management, and take their words at face value.  From statements such as, “Your doctor has failed to show that your condition is amenable to further treatments” (by the way, when did the Office of Personnel Management obtain a medical degree or complete a residency requirement?) to “you have not shown that you are totally disabled from performing efficient work” (hint:  this is not Social Security, and the standard is not “total disability”), to a full spectrum of error-filled statements in between, one may suspect that there may be a knowing strategy in rendering a denial, knowing that a small percentage of the corpus of disability retirement applicants will simply walk away and not file a Request for Reconsideration. 

Further, I suspect that this occurs more often with certain more “vulnerable” medical conditions — Fibromyalgia, Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, Major Depression, PTSD, anxiety, panic attacks; Chemical Sensitivity cases, etc.  Why do I suspect these?  Mostly because such cases are attacked for “lacking objective medical evidence” (see my articles on Vanieken-Ryals v. OPM, and similar writings) and failing to provide “diagnostic test results”, etc.  There was a time, long ago, when it used to mean something when someone said, “The Government says…”  In this day and age, I would advise that you take it to an attorney to review whether or not the words of the Office of Personnel Management are true or not.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire