Help with Disability Retirement from Federal Agency or USPS: Fences

“Good fences make good neighbors” — a proverb we are all familiar with.  It is a saying which recognizes with suspicion and realism the inherently evil nature of man in his natural state.

It draws up, encapsulates and summarizes well the philosophical lineage of Hobbes, Rousseau and Locke concerning the distinction between Man’s State of Nature and the contractual empowerment achieved by the constraints of agreement, laws, civil society and the collective powers gained and applied with the rise of a government, state, and nation.

Fences establish the first border separating anarchy from civil society.  It recognizes the line which cannot be crossed; the restraint which is imposed in favor of both sides; and reduces the tensions resulting from misunderstanding and misapprehension.  Laws do the same — they provide the acceptable demarcations and impose a standard and criteria for decision-making.

The “fences” in a Federal Disability Retirement case are comprised of the statutes, regulations and case-laws handed down both from the U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board, as well as from the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals — which constrains and restricts the otherwise unfettered and capricious decisions render by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Contact a FERS Disability Retirement Attorney who specializes in OPM Disability Retirement Law, and make sure and impose the necessary fences upon OPM in a Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Lawyer

 

Federal & Postal Employee Medical Retirement: The Mistake Unrecognized

We can always quibble about what constitutes a “mistake” — but, generally, there are circumstances described which fall into the center of the conceptual definition, those which border on the periphery, and then the remainder which, while having a consensus that they stray outside of the boundaries, nevertheless are often described as a “mistake”, but only in a retrospective manner.

Examples: A man is driving down a road and makes a left turn instead of a right.  He thought he knew where he was going, but clearly did not.  He made a mistake.  A clerk in an ice cream store thought the customer said, “Give me a scoop of Godzilla Ice Cream” — a specialty of the shop comprised of chocolate and large fudge bits. Instead, the customer had said, “Give me a scoop of Vanilla Ice Cream.”  In the din of the noisiness, the clerk misheard and made a mistake.

An individual purchases some stolen items from a street vendor.  She suspects that they are stolen, but because of the extraordinary price for which the items are aggregately offered, represses such thoughts and agrees to the purchase.  Later, the police raid the woman’s home and confiscate the property.  Was it a “mistake”?  In what way?

Here are several: It was a mistake to repress the suspicions aroused; it was a mistake to purchase such items from a street vendor; it was a mistake to fail to connect the dots of illogic; but had the person never been caught, and the value of the items later increased a hundredfold and was legitimately sold at Sothebys for an eye-opening profit, would the transaction be characterized as a “mistake”?

And finally: A similar transactional relationship; but let’s change the hypothetical somewhat.  In the new scenario, the person about to engage in the transaction asks for advice before concluding the deal.  Everyone tells him, “Don’t do it.  It is clearly fenced goods.”  A friend — a retired police officer — gives the following advice: “You know it’s gotta be stolen. You can be arrested for participating in receiving of stolen goods.  Don’t do it.” Multiple family members say t he same thing.  The person goes ahead and attempts to close the deal and, in the process, the police raid the establishment, charge the individual and place him in jail.  Was it a “mistake”?

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 — don’t make the mistake of unrecognized scenarios.

Contact a FERS Disability Lawyer who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and avoid those “mistakes” which are clearly there and which can — and will — defeat a Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Lawyer

 

FERS Disability Retirement: The House that Happiness Built

Later in life, we tend to get into the “preservation mode” — of trying to hold onto the house that happiness built.  We don’t want to move despite the fact that steep stairs and multiple floors are never conducive to old age.  Youth was full of dreams and hope; happiness was the dream of building, of starting a family (or so it once was) and doing things for the future.  No problem could be foreseen that could not be overcome, for the future was bright, hope sprang eternally and the sunrise each morning was something to behold.  But that life could remain in such an optimistic mode of living.  Divorce, tragedy, death, illness, loss of career — such pablum is often unthinkable, until it becomes a reality.

For Federal employees or U.S. Postal workers who have had a setback because of an illness or a medical condition, filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS is a way of preserving the house that happiness built.  Sometimes, a medical condition begins to prevent the Federal or Postal worker from performing the essential elements of his or her job, and thus must file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits. When that time comes, FERS Disability Retirement is a benefit that is meant to help those who may be able to remain productive in some other capacity, but not in the particular type of job that he or she works in.

Consult with an OPM Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law for further details, and don’t let the problems of life threaten the house that happiness built.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Medical Retirement: The Process of Decision-making

Have you ever wondered how decisions are made?  What is the process, and who determines whether or not the methodology engaged is the “right” one or the “wrong” one?  What data is analyzed?  How is the evaluative input assessed, and to what extent does “missing” information impact the process?

On a spectrum of decision-making, there is on the lower side of an imaginary graph the “process” of choosing a flavor of ice cream.  Most would agree that it is based upon a purely subjective, appetitive basis, where the foundation of the process of decision-making (if you can even call it that on such a rudimentary level) is based upon one’s taste for a particular flavor, and whether or not one has a present desire for the intended food.

Can other factors come into play?  Of course – for example, say you just read an informative article that all flavors in category X contain a carcinogenic compound, however slight in volume, that over time may cause harm, whereas all other flavors (“Category Y”) are exempted and are considered “safe”.

Now, how much of that data enters into the decision-making process of choosing the ice cream flavor?  For, in order for such information to enter into the equation, one must first engage in the prior decision-making process upon the article itself – i.e., is it factual or does it contain unfounded opinions?  How “scientific” is the evidence?  Does the author have a conflict of interest – i.e., is he being paid for writing the article, and by whom?  Perhaps the author works for the industry that produces all Flavors Y and wants to advance a competitive edge over all Flavors X by harming or destroying, or placing seeds of doubt into the minds of customers who might consider those other flavors?

Placing weight and credibility upon the article itself must first involve a process of decision-making; then, even after such a judgment on the information received, how much of it will impact upon the decision-making process of choosing a flavor of ice cream?  One might conclude, for example, that the article on carcinogenic ingredients is pure bosh and disregard it – but even in that instance, if you chose the category of Flavors Y, can you ever be sure that you discarded it completely, or perhaps in your subconscious mind you attached your allegiance out of fear and caution?  How will you ever know?

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 process of decision-making in preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application can be a complex and complicated one.

One’s future is involved; one’s investment in a career; the health concerns, the deteriorating capacity to continue in one’s chosen line of work, and the increasing difficulty of hiding the medical condition – all, and so much more, must be considered before initiating the process of a Federal Disability Retirement application.

With all of this in mind, of the jumble of information and the complexity of the process itself, the best and first step is to consult with an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement law, in order to gain a balanced perspective, receive all of the necessary information, and to begin to gather the foundational data necessary in order to ultimately make the “right” decision in the process.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Medical Separation and Retirement under FERS or CSRS: The nose beyond which

The human animal has reached a point of evolutionary pedigree where constant vigilance with the outside world is generally thought to be unnecessary; although, still when an individual walks through an unlit parking lot in the dead of night, the hairs which straighten and stand at attention on the nape of one’s neck would belie such an expression of civility amongst the savagery of newsworthy crimes printed daily.

Most of us live and walk about completely immersed within our own thoughts and reflections; and when encounters with the “outside” world suddenly jolt into an awareness just beyond, to focus upon the individual, event or incident which indicated a need for such engagement, the capacity to readjust and comprehend the alien nature imposed by a cacophony of sight, sound and a compound admixture of both, often confuses and torments.

Kant and Wittgenstein were correct in questioning the conventional views of a philosophical approach which wedded language to reality (to even combine both names into a single sentence is blasphemy, and an oxymoron of conceptual contradiction); the former, by proposing that there were human dimensions and constructs imposed upon an impervious universe of objectivity where the “thing-in-itself” bore little relation to how we perceive them; and the latter, by deconstructing the link between language and reality.

How we engage the world; what level of comprehension and understanding we bring to the fore; whether and what “success” we achieve in tackling the problems we face in a society that neither cares nor thinks about empathy and comity of human endeavor and suffering; the volume of questions posed and queried always surpasses the answers derived.  The nose beyond which we recognize is rarely embraced.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, such a statement of truism is rarely denied.  Others fail to notice; the chasm between knowing that a medical condition is impacting a fellow worker, leaving aside the greater and universal perspective of a “fellow human being”, expands exponentially in a proportional widening defined by the intersection between title and pay grade, and the level of empathy lacking and sympathy non-existent.

Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who think that having a medical condition, after years and decades of loyal and dedicated service to the Federal agency or the U.S. Postal Service, will automatically inspire a return of such vaunted conduct of responsive grace, become quickly and sorely disappointed and disillusioned.

Filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, is often the best option to take, if only for the sake of preserving one’s health, whether psychological, emotional or physical.

For, in the end, the nose beyond which a person may suddenly see, is that neighbor waving across the street, the lost child crying on the corner of the next block, the homeless person wandering the inner city desolation past the invisible lines of suburban sterility, and the infirm dilapidation of rotting humanity abandoned in old people’s homes which we euphemistically deem as “retirement communities“; and that which circles back to the Federal or Postal employee who remains unaccommodated by the Federal agency or the U.S. Postal worker, who must prepare, formulate and file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits because the shame of humanity has dissipated into an uncaring universe of ethereal space defined by an unperturbed imaginary deity.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement: Explicit versus Implicit

The former leaves no room for confusion or doubt; the latter, a bit of “wiggle room” where insinuations, hints and suggestive openings are characteristic invitations of open regards.  They are not mutually exclusive within a paragraph or even a sentence; they are, however, antonyms, and should be used with context-defined relevance.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who are filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal employee or the U.S. Postal worker is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, the choice of either can determine the future viability of one’s Federal Disability Retirement application.

Certainly, there are times in life when one chooses the latter methodology, for various reasons — perhaps being forthright and blunt is not the “right” approach; perhaps there is fear of offending, or mere laziness and sludge of confrontation prevents one from being straightforward.  In the legal arena, the former approach is preferable, if only to squeeze out the light of linguistic malleability and flexibility in supercilious argumentation.  But in the context of an OPM Disability Retirement packet, there will often contain multiple usages.

One’s Supervisor, in completing SF 3112B (Supervisor’s Statement), may present contradictory information by checking a box which is relatively unequivocal (is that an oxymoron — to use the terms “relatively” and “unequivocal” in the same breadth of a sentence?) but placing remarks implying the exact opposite in response to “explanatory” and more expansive questions.  Or, for the Federal Disability Retirement applicant, in completing SF 3112A, the “Applicant’s Statement of Disability”, there may be a strategy in mixing both explicit statements and providing for implicit openings for meanings and connections.

Certainly, the “law” of Federal Disability Retirement allows for it; but one must always take care in addressing the nature, extent and susceptibility of statutory interpretation in formulating one’s Federal Disability Retirement application.  Ultimately, as in most things in life, the former is preferable to the latter; though, wiggle room and the dictates social conventions may sometimes require one to be explicitly implicit in order to be inefficiently efficacious.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Medical Retirement: The Other Side of Darkness

Darkness can take many forms; of the physical omission of light, the loss of visual capacity, or the mood of a person within the context of modernity, complexity and loss of moral intransigence.  Light provides the energy of life, and when that core vibrancy is sapped and depleted by either or all of the sources of light, then darkness prevails.  Once extinguished, the last remaining flicker persists only through sheer self-determination, a plan for future reigniting, or the delicate cherishing of a hope still unforeseen.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, such that the medical condition endangers the ability and capacity to continue with one’s chosen career or field of opportunities with the Federal Government or the U.S. Postal Service, the daunting task of securing one’s future while simultaneously dealing with the medical condition itself is often of overwhelming proportions which floods with constancy of darkness without the hope of light or flame yet extinguished.

Filing 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, is often the best and wisest course for the Federal or Postal employee to undertake, in order to escape to the other side of darkness.  For, to remain is to wither; to pursue is to tire; to attain is to relive and realign the priorities which once foretold of future hope, but which now must be readjusted in order to attenuate the challenges which life has brought, and for which this side of light and the other side of darkness become one and the same.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Disability Retirement: The Trinkets We Hold Dear

If value of item determines retention of possession, then few trinkets would survive the test of economic viability; but a quick perusal of one’s home will often discover large caches of sentimental liabilities strewn throughout.  What determines value, then?  Is it the monetization of an item?  Or perhaps the psychological attachment, combined with the economic forces in capitalism of supply and demand?

Real estate values soar and plummet daily, and when one considers the “high end” fluctuations where market reductions may comprise differences in the millions, one wonders about “true value” and “false valuations” of goods and services whether small or large.  If you go through your house and begin to account for the trinkets we have amassed, is it because of the monetary value attached that we continue to retain it, or the memories and golden threads of psychological ties which bind?  Is it not often the same with other issues in one’s life — of even friendships, pets and jobs?

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer 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 positional duties, the question one needs to ask at the outset is:  Why are we holding onto this trinket for dear life?  Is it really worth it?  At what cost?  What are the ties that bind?

Filing for OPM Disability Retirement is always a traumatic event; for, it is a dramatic change, often within a context of caustic and hostile circumstances.  But to remain is rarely an option; to walk away with nothing is not a wise one; so, one is often left with the best alternative possible:  to prepare, formulate and 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.

And like the trinket which holds one bound to memories of yore unblemished in their reflective delights of past warmth, they remain so, like the pitter-patter of a soft summer day’s cloudburst, stopping only to reveal the misty haze of a childhood dream.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire