Federal & Postal Employee Disability Retirement: History and Evidence

There is much debate these days about history, revisionism, and the bias inherent in past historical analysis, and the foundation-shaking changes in the world of academia — specifically in the History Department — is an interesting phenomena to witness.

“History” has often been seen as the narrative told by the “winners” and conquerors.  Who tells it; how it is told; from whose perspective; which information is magnified and which is minimized; what should be relegated to footnotes and after-notes — these all comprise the “objectivity” of a historical narrative.

Is it, for example, “revisionism” to include more prominently the “dark side” of history?  In a strict sense, it is — for “revisionism” means to “revise”, for what reasons: Of new information previously undiscovered; of a previously acknowledged and recognized inherent biased view needing correction; of pertinent historical facts previously ignored; and even of factual material deliberately distorted.

History is an exciting field; one which is necessary to a nation’s narrative and perspective of itself; and what story is told, how it is told, and the quality of the material gathered and disseminated — all are important in the telling of a nation’s story, and revisionism should always be an integral part of it — of revising for purposes of accuracy and proper perspective, based upon the evidence available.

We should never fear revisionism based upon integrity, but should celebrate and embrace it.

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 — some history is important: History of one’s performance; history of one’s medical condition; history of the interplay between evidence and personal experience.

Contact a Federal Disability Lawyer, that is, one who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and begin the process of preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, where history and evidence coincide to create the most effective narrative possible.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Lawyer

 

Postal and Federal Medical Retirement: The Difference

Perhaps it is large and expansive; or, of such a thin, frail line that one can barely notice it; in either case, it is that difference — large or small, wide or thin, statistically insignificant or clearly discernible — that makes the difference.

How important is it to you?  What are you willing to invest in the difference in order to make the difference a difference of relevance?  What level and extent of a difference will make it significant enough that the difference will be the difference between success or failure?

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition which prompts the necessity for filing an effective FERS Medical Retirement application with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, it is important to have that “advantage” and “edge” in increasing the chances of a successful application.  The difference will likely be the lawyer you choose.

Contact a Federal Disability Retirement Lawyer who has made a difference in the lives of countless thousands of Federal employees and Postal workers, and enhance your chances of a successful outcome by preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal & Postal Employee Disability Retirement: A Sense of Worth

Wittgenstein argued that a language which is kept private — i.e., known only to one person and not shared with anyone else — is conceptually impossible.  Language by definition is a vehicle by which ideas, concepts, declarations and commands are conveyed, and to remain as an eternal soliloquy would undermine the very essence of what language is meant to be.

Similarly, does the concept of “worth” make any sense within a vacuum?  Can an individual stranded on an island have any capacity to understand such a concept — of a “sense of worth”?  As an ancillary issue, what is meant by “a sense of”, as opposed to X or Y having “worth” without the prefatory addendum of “a sense of”?  If a person were to say, “I have worth” — is it different from declaring, “I have a sense of worth?”  Or, is the attribution appropriate when a distinction is made between living entities as opposed to inanimate objects?

For example, if a person points to another person’s wrist and says, “I have a sense of worth about that watch you are wearing,” would such a statement seem odd?  Is “sense of “ attributable to a fuzziness when it comes to the object/subject of such attribution?

Ultimately, whether of worth or sense of worth, what becomes clear is that the conclusion of “worth” is derived from the interaction with others within a given community.  Neither “worth” nor “sense of worth” is a comprehensible concept in a vacuum, in isolation, or as a soliloquy.  For, in the end, both language and a sense of worth are derived not from an egoistical encounter, but by attributions from others.

For Federal and Postal employees whose sense of worth has diminished because of the silence of agencies and postal facilities as to one’s contributions to the workplace, it may be time to consider filing for Federal Disability Retirement under FERS.  Consult with an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law and consider regaining your sense of worth by moving beyond the Federal Agency or the Postal Service that no longer sees your sense of worth.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Employee Disability Retirement: Sufficiency Test

“Sufficiency” is a funny word; like other subjective experiences, one often doesn’t know when it has been satisfied, but one nevertheless knows when it has not.  Like spectrums which reveal a range, sufficiency is a point of satisfaction which is recognized to have been met only after the point of sufficiency has been passed.

What constitutes “passing” the sufficiency test?  If someone has been kidnapped and a ransom note has been received, demanding payment for the safe return of the individual, is there an amount less than the demanded amount which would be “sufficient” to satisfy the kidnapper’s demands?  Can a platoon be “sufficiently” prepared for a combat mission, although not completely combat-ready?  Can percentages be applied which establishes meeting the criteria for sufficiency, at all times and in all instances, which can be applied as having met the sufficiency test?

Say a person says, “It is 80% done — sufficient for the purposes?”  Would this apply in painting a room, building a house or constructing a bridge?  Say that a bridge has been built 80%, and the last 20% is the part of the end where there remains a gap where suddenly the bridge ends with a missing piece where the gap exists such that a vehicle traveling would crash down a 100-foot drop to a tragic end — do we still say that the bridge was sufficiently built?

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal Workers who are intending on filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, the issue of sufficiency takes on an important role: What constitutes sufficient medical evidence and how is the unspoken sufficiency test met?

Consult with an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law to make sure that the Sufficiency Test will be met. In doing so, you may prevent a leisurely drive over a bridge only 80% finished, and be provided an alternative route in order to help you arrive at your destination in a sufficiently safe and efficient manner.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Disability Retirement: The Certainty of Defeat

There is nothing more demoralizing than to “know” the certainty of defeat.  But that is the crux of the matter, isn’t it?  How does one “know”?  Certainly, one can balance the odds for and against; to take into account the factors which determine a statistical chance of success or failure; but does one ever have “certainty” in anything, or is it often merely a perspective of the glass being half full, or half empty?

Where the odds are overwhelming and objectively insurmountable: a 100-to-1 advantage that the opposing force has; a predetermined outcome that cannot be reversed; in such circumstances, then, what hope is there?  For, the only counterbalance to “certainty” is the glimmer of hope for some unforeseen “X-factor” that somehow saves the day.  On the other hand, it is the determination of “certainty” which extinguishes any flicker or flame of hope.

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 often the sense of an inevitability — a “certainty of defeat” — where the medical condition reveals a progressive march towards greater deterioration.

The counterbalance of hope is in the benefit of Federal Disability Retirement.  Yet, even that benefit — of a Federal Disability Retirement annuity — is not a certainty; it is, instead, a benefit which must be fought for.  The Agency which oversees the approvals and denials of a Federal Disability Retirement application — the U.S. Office of Personnel Management — does everything to try and find reasons to deny, deny, deny.

Does this mean that every application will face the certainty of defeat?  No — but it must be carefully prepared and effectively pursued.  To provide the greater counterbalance against the certainty of defeat, consult with an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement; for, as hope is the countermeasure to the certainty of defeat, so the lawyer is the one who can provide an objective perspective as to the potentiality for success.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement: The Task of Forgetting

Leisure activities are the tasks of forgetting; it is to engage in them precisely in order to become distracted from our work-a-day universe and replenish our “batteries” in order to go back into the fray of battle.  Battle-worn soldiers need the time away from the constant stresses of perilous missions in order to regain a sense of balance and perspective; and the lioness with her cubs sees the value of play in preparing them for the more serious ordeal of hunting for survival.

The task of forgetting is how we entertain ourselves — of reading a novel by forgetting about the reality of our lives; of watching a television show or movie and forgetting about the troubles central to our lives; of playing a video game or participating in crowd gatherings in order to watch a sport being played, or even in the direct engagement of a sport; these, and many others, require the task of forgetting in order to become a participant.

A medical condition, however, denies the task of forgetting.  That is why medical conditions are so inherently exhausting; they remain as a constant reminder of our mortality and frailty, and deny the access to needed rest and restorative peace.  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, filing for Federal Disability Retirement should be an option to be considered, if only to attain the capacity to again engage in the task of forgetting.

The chronic nature of a medical condition is what often fatigues; and as the inability to perform all of the essential elements of one’s job begins to fester and overwhelm, it may be time to consult with an attorney who is experienced in Federal Disability Retirement Law in an effort to reacquire the capacity to engage in the task of forgetting.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire