OPM Disability Retirement under FERS: Learning a New Language

Perhaps, with modern technology, there is little need — or incentive — to do so.  There are “apps” for foreign languages, translation of phrases, and electronic dictionaries to convert concepts from one’s native tongue into esoteric languages of foreign origins.  And, like testing one’s knowledge and memory, something has been lost with the rise of technological ease.  No longer is it necessary to try and communicate by trial-and-error combined with over-exaggerated hand gestures, universal sign languages and facial expressions of grave frustrations.

No — we all just turn to our Smart Phones and allow for technology to perform the working of learning a new language.

In some instances, however, not even modern technology can assist in learning a “new language” — such as the language of Federal Disability Retirement Law.  For, in many senses, a Federal or Postal worker attempting to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits must indeed learn a new “language” — of the rules of eligibility; of what constitutes a legally viable accommodation; of foreign terms and legal concepts which must be understood and grasped before moving forward.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who need to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, contact a “translator” who can assist and guide you in learning a new language — a Federal Disability Retirement lawyer.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement under FERS: The Typical Day

For some, it is a monotonous conversation which can be engaged in while being on mental autopilot: “How was your day?”  “Good.  Just another typical day.  And yours?”  “The same.”

It is that repetitive pablum of pointless conversations engaged in throughout households the world over — pointless, but necessary, in order to establish the comfort of monotony, which is what we all seek; we just don’t know it.  We think we desire excitement — though not too much of it; or of an atypical day — so long as we can rely upon a typical day following; or perhaps, for some, of a fresh relationship — so long as it does not infringe upon the ones we already have.

The “typical day” is one which is challenging — but not so much that we cannot meet the challenge; a day which may have some surprises — but not ones we could not have predicted; and, perhaps, a day which can be talked about without reverting back to the pablum of autopilot — so long as we can relax and not put too much energy into the conversation of the day.

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, there is no such thing as a “typical day”.  Each day is fraught with pain, anguish, unpredictable behavior on the part of supervisors and coworkers; unending harassment from one’s own agency; and the fear of a future yet to be decided.

Consult with an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and begin to consider whether or not Federal Disability Retirement might return you from the atypical days of today, to those boring, typical days you once knew.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Disability Retirement for Federal Workers: Perfection in the details

Why is it that we never question the statement, “Well, this is an imperfect world; but in a perfect world…”.  What is “perfection” and who defines it?  Doesn’t it all depend upon the details within the definition?  Is a “perfect world” the same for everyone, across all cultural lines and within every community?  Or does it vary depending upon one’s background and upbringing?  Would a picture of a “perfect world” be the same, say, for a pious, religious zealot as opposed to a hedonist?  How about the contrast between a Libertarian and an Authoritarian?

So, in a recent description about an individual who was known to have held conservative religious beliefs, but who concurrently believed in weapons production and advanced technological weaponry, the question was asked by a student whether there was a contradiction between faith held and work engaged, and the answer was: “Well, in a perfect world, we wouldn’t need any such weapons; but this being an imperfect world, we would have to defend ourselves.”

To this answer, of course, there appeared no “follow-up” question; but shouldn’t there have been?  Such as: What is your vision and definition of a “perfect world”?  Well, one might answer, a perfect world is one in which everyone is allowed to be free to do what he or she wants without fear of retaliation or offense.  But is that a viable vision of a perfect world?

As freedom and liberty is never a license for unfettered actions, so a Hobbesian State of Nature cannot be the foundation for perfection.

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 lack of perfection achieved is already self-evident: One’s health is a testament to that; and the manner in which the Federal Agency or the Postal unit has reacted to one’s health, is also an indicator of an imperfect world.

Filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management may not be the perfect solution for the circumstances one is in, but then, we neither live in a perfect world nor must contend with a semblance of one.  Perfection matters in the details of every endeavor, and it is the striving towards perfection that matters, not in the achievement of it.

In preparing a Federal Disability Retirement application, always remember that there is never a “perfect case” where OPM will unquestionably approve it; but in preparing an application for Federal Disability Retirement, it is wise to seek the counsel of an experienced attorney in order to reach a level of perfection where, in retrospective regret, one does not have to needlessly say, “Well, in a perfect world…”

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire