OPM Disability Retirement under FERS: The Disjunctive

In classical logic, the disjunctive can be posed in syllogistic form: Either A or B but not both; Not A; Therefore, B.  Jack lives in either Apartment A or in Apartment B, but not in both.  He does not live in Apartment A.  Therefore, Jack lives in Apartment B.

It is, in many ways, a crossroads, where the proverbial fork-in-the-road requires a decision.  What the disjunctive syllogism does not do, of course, is to take in the third option — of doing nothing; of not moving from decision-making to action; in which case, that third option often results in paralysis, further deterioration and consuming negation.

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, inertia at the crossroads of one’s career can result in the devastation of further ruination: Being placed on a Performance Improvement Plan; further deterioration of one’s own health; Termination from Federal Service.

Filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS is option B.  Option A is to remain at the job at the cost of one’s health, and that is certainly no option at all.  And option C?  To resign and walk away with nothing after all of that vested time with the Federal Government?  That, too, is not really a viable option.

Contact a disability lawyer to discuss the further particulars of your case, and consider the syllogistic value of the disjunctive.

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.

 

Long-Term Disability Retirement from Federal Government Employment: Incompatibility

It is essentially the “fourth” criteria in a Federal Disability Retirement case — the first three being, whether or not a Federal or Postal worker can show to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management a deficiency in performance, conduct or attendance.

Unfortunately, the performance-review system is often one of an afterthought — of Supervisors and Managers giving “Outstanding” or “Fully Successful” ratings for all employees just to get through the process and avoid the headache of an appeal or grievance response.

So long as the Federal or Postal worker is healthy, such favorable performance reviews are great.  However, when a medical condition hits a Federal or Postal employee, and the need arises to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, then that is the time that such favorable performance reviews are scrutinized and used against you by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

The argument goes thus: Your Agency says you are doing such a good job; so, how can you now say you cannot do your job?  It is that fourth criteria — one of incompatibility — which often forms the foundation for filing a Federal Disability Retirement application.

Contact a FERS Disability Retirement Lawyer who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law and begin the process of determining whether you meet the criteria to qualify for Federal Disability Retirement benefits with OPM.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

FERS Disability Retirement from OPM: How You are Viewed

Perhaps you are one of the rarest of breeds; the “rugged individual” who cares not what others think, how you are viewed, what people consider, etc.  Most who claim such a stance use it merely as an implacable facade; how many tears are shed and frustrations are voiced in the privacy of one’s home, we will never know.

“Self-image” is a running movie within one’s head, constantly updated by the feedback generated through daily discourse.  What we think of ourselves; the image of the individual in the mirror in front of you; the morning picture reflected back as you brush your teeth, comb your hair, etc.  Who is that person.  He/She is: Profession X; Gender Y; Relationship Status Z; Known within the community as A & B, etc.

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 continuing in his or her career, “How you are viewed” will change.  No longer are you the competent worker, the one who has dedicated him or herself to a career; no longer that Supervisor, Co-worker or colleague; now, to be deemed as a Federal Disability Retiree.

It is a transition that is often difficult, because it alters the self-image you have held for so many years.  But “difficult” was derived from “necessity”, and the reality is that the essence of the “real you” will not change despite filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Medical Retirement for Federal Employees: Stresses

The bombardment of stimuli is an unavoidable constancy.  We may not even “know it” or may not be conscious of the surrounding and indirect data being taken in, but the lights, sounds, peripheral data and sources of distractions all vying for our attention nevertheless impart their silent screams for our reaction and response — and our “subconscious” selves take it all in, process it, and determine which course of action will appropriately take care of it.

Tolerance for it depends upon each individual.  The level of one’s capacity to withstand it; to avoid it; to ignore it; to subsume it into the body of our everyday existence is likely dependent upon one’s DNA and the circumstances of our upbringing.  Does everyone have a “flashpoint” of breaking?  Likely.  Are some able to tolerate greater levels of stresses than others?  Yes — although, most of us think that we are that “exceptional” individual who can withstand to greater heights than others, when we are more likely no different; we just hide it better.

It is often the foreboding of an uncertain future which provokes the greater stress; that, combined with the unexpected, together portend an intolerable level of heightened fear.

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 stresses that one must tolerate are multiple and overwhelming: Dealing with the medical condition itself; the uncertainty of one’s future with the Federal Agency or the Postal Service; the stresses of the demands made by the Federal Agency or the Postal Service; and the unpredictability of a Federal Disability Retirement application with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

While such stresses can never be completely eliminated, it is the confidence going forward that certain of them may be contained, restricted or ultimately resolved, may be better dealt with by getting some answers by consulting with an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Disability Retirement from the Office of Personnel Management: Proteus

In Greek mythology, he is considered as a god of the oceans.  Homer refers to him as the “Old Man of the Sea” and is known for change, adaptation and alteration.  He can alter his shape and appearance, depending upon the circumstances surrounding.  Changing of forms, of course, becomes the essence of Plato’s philosophy, and Aristotle’s later search for that substratum which allows for continuity and stability.

Perhaps the malleability of Proteus is in response to the tumultuous nature of the oceans; one day beset with the calm of quiet tides, and in the next instance, rising and falling with fury by the storms of unpredictability.  To be able to change, adapt and become chameleon-like is to be able to withstand the vicissitudes of life’s misgivings.

That is what we have to do when a medical condition hits us, and impacts one’s career and circumstances — to be like Proteus and have the capacity to adapt and modify the pathways we have followed.  Stability is always a necessary prerequisite for success.  While wide spectrums of change may be called for in the early days of a “start-up” or initiation of a new project, at some point, a calming effect must come about in order for daily living to occur.

Similarly, while youth may allow for the exuberant embracing of daily excitement in change, middle age and beyond yearns for a greater serenity of redundancy.  When a medical condition suddenly and unexpectedly reminds us of our vulnerability and mortality, it is to stability that we cling and not for the inconstancy of the ocean’s fury.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition such that the medical condition prompts one to consider filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS, it becomes necessity to act and think like Proteus — the “Old Man of the Sea” — and to consider a change of careers precisely because an incommensurability has arisen: No longer are the medical conditions compatible with the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, and that is the proof that one must provide to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management in order to fight for, and win, a Federal Disability Retirement claim.

To find out more about the further particulars of winning the Protean battle against the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, it is best to consult with an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal OPM Disability Retirement: The Office of Personnel Management (OPM)

It is the acronym that represents a Federal Agency whose “headquarters” is located in Washington, D.C., but has an intake office in Boyers, Pennsylvania.  There has been somewhat of a “reorganization” of sorts, where — in the past — the Boyers Office was merely where all Federal Disability Retirement applications were received, initially processed for identification and assignment of a “case number”, then shipped to Washington, D.C. for further consideration, evaluation and determination.

However, in recent months, the reorganization at the U.S. Office of Personnel Management has involved shipping cases back to Boyers, PA where the actual assignment to an administrative specialist, an initial medical review and ultimate determination have been made.

The U.S. Office of Personnel Management has thus been in somewhat of a “transitional” mode as cases have been, and are being, divided between the two locations, with the ultimate goal of transferring all cases back to Boyers, PA.  Telephone numbers have been changed, some internal turnover and turmoil have occurred in the meantime, as happens with all organizations that experience and undergo changes.

However, the good news is that there appears to be some movement in issuing decisions on some older cases that have been sitting at OPM for quite a while, and such minor indications give many Federal and Postal employees a glimmer of hope that his or her Federal Disability Retirement application will soon be favorably resolved.

Wherever your individual case is at — at either the Boyers location or still at the Washington, D.C. location — always remember that Federal Workers throughout are attempting to do their jobs to the best of their capabilities, utilizing the tools provided and the manpower available, and while frustrations may be justified because of the thin line between patience and panic, courtesy in speaking with anyone at OPM should always be the first, middle and last line of a successful inquiry.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Disability Retirement: “I would rather. . .”

The ellipses that follows is from the Ancient Greek that denotes “omission” or “that something which follows which is left blank”, and allows for wandering thoughts and meandering reflections to complete the lack.  What is the range of an acceptable addendum?  Does it matter what the prefatory statement allows for, and does the logic of its completion depend upon the spectrum of grammatical technicalities that confine and maintain boundaries of meaningful discourse?

For example, what if a person was asked to complete the incomplete sentence, and the response is:  “I would rather [red, blue, pink and all of the flowers in the universe].”  Would we say to the person, “Wait a minute, I asked you to complete the thought and you have provided me with gibberish.”?  And he/she comes back with:  “That’s how I would finish the sentence, because that’s how I feel.”   Would that be allowable?  Or, should the rules of grammar confine and restrict, so that the formality of completion should reflect a coherence that is expected and anticipated, such as, “I would rather [be at the beach than going into work today]”?

In the insular universe of private thoughts, of course, we can add whatever fanciful thoughts that infringe upon the uncertainty of our subconscious minds; but when the breach between private/public dichotomy occurs, suddenly we are thrown into an arena that restricts and confines, and compels us to follow the rules of conversational efficiency, including grammatical rules, traditional sense of coherence, logical consistency and meaningful conceptual constructs.  Exiting the arena of private thoughts right into the concentric complexities of the public world alters the rules of engagement.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, such that the medical condition begins to impact, prevent and block the Federal or Postal employee from performing all of the essential elements of the Federal or Postal job, the critical point of departure — from breaching that dichotomy between the insular world of the “private” and stepping over into the “public” — begins when first there is an admission that a “problem” exists.

Preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, to be submitted ultimately to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, is likened to completing the fanciful thought that begins with, “I would rather…”.  The replacement of the ellipses can have many forms, restricted and delimited by grammatical constrictions and  restrictive contexts, but no Federal or Postal employee who begins the process ends such a sentence with, “I would rather … [be on disability retirement than be healthy and continue to remain in my chosen career].

Those who believe that there is a scintilla of coherence or meaningfulness in such a sentence do not know Federal and Postal employees.  Instead, it is a choice resulting from limited options, but sometime the best one available, as filing for an OPM Disability Retirement may be the only alternative where other such contingencies have already been exhausted.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement: Comfort Zones

For animals, they are often designated as “arc of flight” — that invisible periphery where violation results in immediate retreat or thoughtless stampede.  For humans, it is identified as one’s “space”, or “privacy bubble”, and while self-control and societal norms have curtailed and somewhat dulled the thousands of years of evolutionary refinements to reactive instincts, the palpable discomfort manifested, the shifting unease of taboos violated, and for some, an onset of panic and heightened anxiety are the resulting characteristics of Darwinian antecedents.

Comfort zones apply to the generic aegis of such unseen safety nets.  For most of us, it is comprised of predictability and the security which comes from repetitive monotony.  That is why, even to one’s detriment, one will cling to the known quantity, even if the attraction of the unknown outweighs with obvious benefits and accruals.  Like the frog which sits calmly in a pot of water ever increasingly rising in temperature, the person who walks about within the confines of one’s comfort zone is in danger always of violative harm.

For the Federal employee and the U.S. Postal worker who suffers from a medical condition, such that the medical condition begins to impact one’s ability to perform all of the essential elements of one’s positional duties, the question of the flashpoint — the intersection of continuing in one’s capacity and the harm it inflicts by doing so — is a complex admixture of needs, wants, comfort zones and the desire to persist.

Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers are a hard-working bunch who, in their collective stubbornness, refuse to give up.  Whether under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset matters not; it is not the system, the benefits nor the years of service; rather, it is often the career itself and the involvement with the “mission of the agency”.  It is a sense of belonging, of being part of a group of individuals, an agency, a department, and always with a sense of purpose and sometimes with a clarity of future endeavors.

Having gone to work for these many years, the value of daily routine cannot be underestimated, and therein lies the essence of one’s comfort zone:  life and the foreseeable future.

Filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management is a violation of one’s comfort zone.  It is tantamount to entering the arc of flight for a flock of sheep, or the privacy bubble at a social gathering.  But when a medical condition mandates the necessity of a step for self-preservation, any consideration for one’s comfort zone should be set aside, as the road to attaining the purposive end of an OPM Disability Retirement annuity may test the very fabric of invisible characteristics yet to be revealed.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Medical Retirement from the U.S. Postal Service and Other Federal Government Agencies: The Tincture of Qualia

Information about disability retirement for employees working for the Federal Government and the U.S. Postal Service

Tinctures only provide a slice of elements which constitute a whole; and while it is the essence of the plant, herb or other matter which is extracted, the substance itself does not represent the entirety of the thing from which it is received.

Qualia, in a similar definitional vein, concerns the subjective mental states which one experiences based upon the encounters with the objective universe, but is contained within the parameters of experiential phenomena unique to each individual.  Such personal, private experiences do not necessarily constitute or represent the fullness of the individual, but through a shared process of that which we experience, we can relate to, and engage in intellectual discourse, with others in a community of experiences.

Both tinctures and qualia, then, represent only a portion of the greater whole, and when the conceptual compound is aggregated, it is a cautionary metaphor for each of us.  Medical conditions have that same sense of part-to-whole; a recognition that we can never quite grasp the fullness of the other’s experience; a sense that while historical similarities may provide a window of understanding, one will never be able to completely comprehend the extent of an experiential trauma.

That is why Nagel’s essay encompassing the experiential uniqueness of another animal is relevant even today.

That is also why, for Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, such that the medical condition prevents one from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s job, the issue of hostile responses from one’s work environment, the lack of empathy, and the unequivocal discriminatory practices of the Federal agency or the U.S. Postal Service is often so difficult to comprehend — precisely because what the injured or medically handicapped Federal or Postal worker experiences, can never be anything more than a tincture of qualia for the agency or the U.S. Postal Service.

Federal Disability Retirement is an option which should always be considered in such circumstances, precisely because the lack of empathy or understanding on the part of the Federal agency or the U.S. Postal service will only get worse, as more needs aggregate for the Federal or Postal worker.

Federal Disability Retirement benefits are filed through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, and must be done so with precision, care, and an accuracy of legal criteria such that one meets the necessary standard of proof. And like the singular experience of pain, or an encounter with a carnivore during a quiet walk in the woods, relating an event has its limitations, akin to the tincture of qualia we face in our everyday lives.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire