FERS Disability: Formulating the Reconsideration Rebuttal

It is a frustrating process when the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) issues a denial and the Federal employee or Postal Service worker must respond effectively within a limited prescribed time.  OPM has all the time in the world to prepare the denial letter, and will often take as long as they want in preparing a lengthy denial letter.

Once received, the denied Federal applicant has 30 days from the date of the denial to “Request Reconsideration” and will be granted 30 additional days beyond the time requested in order to submit any legal response and additional documentary evidence in support of your case.  Then, within that prescribed time period, a response must be prepared and submitted.

It is this formulation of substantive responsiveness that will determine the future course of the next steps — whether a subsequent denial will require a further appeal to the U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board, or with approval of the application, the end of the bureaucratic process has occurred and the next frustrating phase of waiting for the payment department to begin issuing annuity payments will ensue.

As with all things with unlimited time on one’s hands, OPM will extract every word and phrase from doctor’s notes and office visits, take them out of context and interpret everything in favor of denial.

It is often an overwhelming process of a “shotgun approach” where OPM attempts to make it appear as though (A) You were ridiculous in even trying to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits and/or (B) what you had submitted previously was entirely insufficient and need not even be considered any further.

The net effect of the denial letter is to leave you with the impression that you should forget about the whole thing and just give up.  Don’t be fooled by this tactic, because that is all that it is — a ploy to just convince you to give up.

Instead, break down OPM’s arguments into manageable categories, of which the two primary ones are: (1) lack of showing of a deficiency in performance, conduct, or attendance and/or (2) insufficient medical documentation.  Then, attempt to gather any further documentation to reinforce those weak links and argue how the caselaw or statute is met with the additional supportive documents.

One other reminder: So long as you have met the timeframe of requesting reconsideration  within that 30-day period, you have a chance at winning your case —so, make sure you file the request in a timely fashion.  And, furthermore, you may want to contact an OPM Disability Lawyer who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law to help you formulate an effective response.

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.

 

OPM Medical Disability Retirement: Effectiveness

What does it mean, to be “effective”?   The dictionary definition will always include some synchronicity between “outcome” and “desired result”, but can one still be effective if one falls short of the goal desired?

If a football team goes through an entire season with a perfect record, but loses in the first round of the playoffs, has it failed to achieve its mission of “effectiveness”?   Similarly, if an up-and-coming company places a milestone-goal of 1 Billion Dollars in sales by year’s end, but misses its mark just shy of it, has it failed to be “effective”?

One may, of course, conclude that such analogies don’t always apply, as it often depends as to whether or not the goal itself is an “all or nothing” desired end, as opposed to a spectrum upon which success or failure depends and where there are varying degrees of differences which may result in a wide range of relativity.

For Federal Gov. employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a disability, and where “effectiveness” is first gauged by looking at whether or not you can perform all of the basic elements of your job despite your ongoing medical conditions, the consideration as to whether it is time to initiate the process of filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS, must in the end depend upon multiple factors.

Are you becoming deficient in performance?  Have there been any “conduct” issues?  Is your attendance becoming less than satisfactory?  Do you have a doctor who is willing to support your case?

In the end, “effectiveness” in a Federal Disability Retirement application has only one (1) desired result:  An approval from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, under the FERS system.

In order to reach that desired result, contact a FERS Retirement Attorney who specializes in Federal Medical Retirement Law and let the synchronicity between “outcome” (an approval from OPM) and the “desired result” (early retirement based upon your medical condition) meet without a gap in between.

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 Help: Formality of Speech

What is the purpose of language?  Is it merely to be able to maneuver within and through this world — to be able to point to Object-X and declare, “I want that”; to issue commands; to engage in conversation; to argue a point?  Does it matter “how” one speaks, so long as the message is adequately conveyed or, is the formality of speech important?  Are there circumstances where formality is significant, even important, as opposed to the informal languages games which are bantered about among friends and intimate partners?

Does the language game of “Law”, for example, lend itself naturally, or even by necessity, to a semblance of formality, as opposed to the linguistic informality observed when a group of friends watch a football game?

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, you must understand that Law as Formality of Speech lends itself to a seriousness of tone — of application of the legal rulings; the mandate of “must” in statutory language; and the logical argumentation which expresses a tenor of authoritative commandments within a specific language apparatus.

It is the job of a FERS Disability Attorney to convey the formality of speech as a lawyer, and it is in the very content and context of such formality which often wins the day in a Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS, before the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

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 Disability Retirement: The Inevitable Constancy of Change

Change is a constant.  If you have lived long enough, the slow and incremental changes all around us — in the political sphere; employment; personal lives; the inevitability becomes palpable, and sometimes of concern.

Seasons change (unless, perhaps, you are in Florida); but the cyclical rhythm of returning to warmth after a long spell of Winter’s dread is a welcomed change.  When change becomes a forethought to dread, there is an inkling that something is wrong.

There are obviously changes for the good: Of new friends or family members (excepting the visiting uncle who arrives unannounced and expects to stay for a few weeks which turns into months); a child or a grandchild; of newfound wealth; of good luck suddenly encountered, etc.  Then, of course, the changes which undermine and impact with negative results: Loss of any kind; a sudden death; a medical condition.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition as a result of the inevitable constancy of change, contact a FERS Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and consider whether or not the change to becoming a retiree might not be the best response to the change resulting from a medical condition.

For, if change is an inevitable constancy, why not turn the bad into a good, and render unto the inevitability the rhythmic cycle of a season yet to be, of a greater preference than the static state of now?

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.

 

Disability Retirement from Federal Gov. Employment: The Viable Argument

In this postmodern era, is there such a thing?  What was once illogical — or, even worse, absurd — is now considered an acceptable and viable argument.

Logical fallacies are accepted; non-sequiturs are fully embraced; whether or not the “middle term” is carried over from the major premise to the minor is irrelevant; and “just because” is nowhere blinked at, as the final conclusion to every argument these days is that “everyone is entitled to his or her opinion” and it matters not whether specific facts undermine a viewpoint expressed.

Thus, does it even make a difference whether or not an argument is “viable” enough?

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who are considering filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management under FERS, an argument used in attempting to persuade OPM to approve your Federal Disability Retirement application is one which must appeal to the Statute, the Regulations, or to MSPB and/or Federal Circuit Court of Appeals Case-Law precedents.

Yes, there is still a distinction between an irrelevant, weak and inconsequential argument, and a viable one.  The viable argument is one based upon facts, the law, and an irrefutable delineation logical fortitude.  In order to make the viable argument, contact an OPM Disability Attorney who specializes in Federal Medical 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 Employees Retirement System (FERS) Disability Retirement: What We Don’t Know

Age brings us closer to realizing the truth of Socrate’s refrain: That I really don’t know anything or, more to the point, much of anything.

Youth allows for brashness of arrogance; in middle age, perhaps some slight hesitancy; of getting older, one realizes the extent of or lack, and the vast knowledge which we will never be able to understand.  Most people “wing it” — in other words, act “as if” they have some knowledge, that they possess an “expertise” or some secret to an apparent success attained.

Social Media, Facebook, Instagram — these, of course, mask and hide the inadequacies behind the facade of competency.  Few people nowadays admit to an imperfection, a lack of, an ignorance for, etc.  Thus do we no longer have the Socratic Method where questions are peppered in order to reveal the disguised ignorance which most people walk about with.

But let’s be clear: What we don’t know can, in fact, hurt us, and to fail to acknowledge one’s lack of knowledge can have dire consequences.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal Service employees who intend on filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS, you should take the time to read the case-law which has developed and evolved over many decades, in order to at least understand the underlying issues which can complicate a Federal Disability Retirement application.

Or, contact a Federal lawyer who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law and let him inform you of what you don’t know.

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: The Difficult Road Ahead

It is not different for much of life; it is always a “difficult road ahead”.  Whether viewed in a poetic pentameter or in long, Faulkner-like narratives, the troubles, traumas, upheavals and disappointments felt, experienced and injured by most, is simply the cost of living an ordinary life.  There may well be lives out there which are untouched by troubles or tragedies; but as every family has a closet full of skeletons, so the “perfect family” as portrayed on social media is likely a mere facade concealing secrets of unstated hurts.

If given an opportunity, what 3 wishes would be asked for to blunt the difficult road ahead?  Wealth?  Yet, having unlimited financial resources will not necessarily make you “happy”.  Fame?  Will adulation and recognition bring about lasting contentment?  How about good health?  Yes, but if everyone around you is susceptible to the scars of illness, what good would it be if you are the only one left and all of your loved ones become debilitated?

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition such that the medical condition begins to prevent you from performing one or more of the essential elements of your job, the difficult road ahead is not merely the deterioration of your health, but the long process of trying to become approved by OPM for a Federal Disability Retirement application.  Perhaps neither wealth nor fame were ever a goal for you; perhaps good health was always hoped for; but in the end, the loss of our health makes the other two rather insignificant, and the difficult road ahead magnifies even more the value of good health.

Consult with a FERS Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law and consider that the difficult road ahead may require someone who not only knows what direction to take, but which road will lead you back to fulfilling the wishes of your dreams.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement under FERS: The Kettle’s Whistle

Why do we invent such irritating devices?  When the jarring whistle of the kettle’s boil screeches to gain our attention, is it precisely for that reason — in order to remind us that there is water boiling, that a fire or burner is causing it, and that you cannot just leave it like allowing for the needle on a record-player to turn endlessly upon a music-less disc with soft scratches upon a rotation that is going nowhere (ah, those days when music was truly enjoyed!).

Are noises created to always reflect the reality of its source?  Does the sound of the waives match the soft lapping of the ocean’s beauty, just as the raging storm’s fury mirrors the torrent of rain and thunder?  When first a child hears the sound of a distant train, and only later sees the monstrosity that forms the engine and the caboose, does he or she reflect, “Well, that certainly didn’t turn out to be what I thought” —? Similarly, does pain match the warning of a body’s injury?  Does a voice that sounds purring parallel the gruffness of a wrestler’s weight?

If the kettle’s whistle is meant to irritate and to alarm, it is doing its job; and the kettle that fails to so whistle is one that has lost its purpose and utility, even though it still boils as well as the next one purchased in replacement of the one which lost its capacity to irritate.

Medical conditions are like that, as well — of the capacity to alarm, to trigger warnings, to possess a reason thereof.  We resist it; of the voice that says that change needs to be forthcoming.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal employees 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 his or her Federal or Postal job, it may be that the kettle’s whistle is warning of an impending need — of a change.

Getting up, taking the kettle off of the burner and stopping the whistle is akin to preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management under FERS: For, in the end, the kettle’s whistle is merely the warning we needed, prompting us to act when all around us are indicators that what once was can no longer be.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

FERS Medical Retirement from the OPM: That cup of tea

It is the symbol of a quieter life; of a pastoral time of past remembrances, where the slower pace accorded a tranquility now lost forever.  It is referred to in many of William Trevor’s short stories — of that time in England when people still sat around and had “that cup of tea”.  For, somehow, the notion of fine china, the curling wisps of winding steam and the aroma of warmth and comfort retain a resonance of civility, quietude and the sentiment of calmer times.

Coffee, on the other hand, betrays a greater americanism — of forging ahead, forever seeking progress and movement, a person on steroids who cannot take the time, will not, and in fact has no time for the silliness of having that cup of tea.  That is why coffee is taken on the road, in plastic or styrofoam cups; in mugs and sturdy, thick jugs; whether plain, with a bit of milk and with or without sugar.

The two represent different times; of lifestyles gone and replaced; of civility and crudity.  Starbucks and others have tried to gentrify the cup of coffee, of course, and to create different “Internet cafes” with sophisticated-sounding names for lattes, “XY-Americano” or some similar silly-sounding names; but in the end it is the bit of coffee painted with a lipstick on the pig, and it remains the shot of coffee that provides the taste.

People are like that; and we all reminisce about times past, of “good old days” and for some, we miss that cup of tea.  For the greater society, the two contrasting flavors of a drink represent a bifurcation of sorts: One, for a kind of life we long for; the other, the reality within which we find ourselves.

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 distinction between the cup of tea and the mug of coffee is like a metaphor of one’s own circumstances: the body and mind requires that cup of tea; the reality that swirls around demands the mug of coffee.

Preparing, formulating and filing a Federal Disability Retirement application, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, is perhaps the antidote to the growing problem.  While it may not be every person’s cup of tea, it is something that — given the environment of the Federal Agency and the Postal Service in requiring every worker to act like a caffein-induced maniac — may medically indicate a change from the coffee-centered culture that cannot sit even for a brief moment to enjoy that distant reverberation of fine china clinking amidst the calm of a quiet morning.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Attorney for Federal Disability Retirement Claims: The Whisper of Discontent

Seasons come and go; it is one of those ponderous “throw-away” lines that people utter without much thought, somewhat akin to the customary “hello, how are you” declarative that is stated without a pause as the speaker rushes quickly past without waiting for an answer.

Yes, and there are also winters of discontent — borrowed from the line in Shakespeare’s Richard III, and also, by happenstance, the title of the last novel by John Steinbeck; but more often, it is the whispers of discontent that prevail more pervasively, for “discontent” is not necessarily a lasting emotion, or even one that endures for a season; rather, it is whispered precisely because of its fluctuating characteristic.

We whisper it because we know that, like seasons and emotions, time may heal and further time will alter it; and others may whisper it because the fleeting nature of it may not stand the test of objectivity.  And when the whispers of discontent turn and become the louder shouts of adversity, we often failed to listen carefully and instead ignored the voices that forewarned of foreboding toils.

Medical conditions have a tendency to provide such preludes, as well.  One often knows well before a doctor tells us, whether and to what extent the chronicity and severity of the condition foretells; and whether and to what extent the impact upon one’s Federal or Postal career will be.

The law concerning Federal Disability Retirement requires that the medical condition must “last at least 12 months” — but that does not mean that one must endure a 12-month period of suffering before filing a Federal Disability Retirement application; rather, that the treating doctor or medical provider must provide a prognosis that the medical condition will last, at a minimum, that length of time.

For the Federal or Postal employee who is considering filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, the whisper of discontent comes about with the realization that the medical condition suffered is impacting upon one’s career by preventing the Federal or Postal employee from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s job.

Although seasons do indeed come and go, and there may well be winters of discontent, the Federal or Postal employee who hears one’s Federal Agency or the Postal Service whisper utterances of discontent, may deem it advisable to begin to prepare an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, to be filed with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, before such whispers become a winter of discontent where the avalanche of a proposed removal becomes initiated.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire