Federal Disability Retirement Law: Goodness in Dark Times

It is the famous question brought to the fore by Hannah Arendt and others in the aftermath of WWII.  The trial of Eichmann brought some clarity to the issue; of the banality of evil; of the trial of human goodness in contrast to questioning the existence of evil.  Faith was said to be lost in the aftermath; for, how could a God who purports to be pure goodness, allow for such evil to dominate?

Camus warned of humanity’s descent into further darkness; that the mass concentration camps were not the end, but merely the beginning of wider and more ferocious depravity.  The question really was never how there could be goodness in dark times; but rather, why or how there could be goodness at all.

Since WWII, modernity has strived — albeit, rather in a fumbling and ineffective way — to reeducate children to engender greater empathy for one another; to stamp out (or at least, divert) man’s inherent “evil” within; to try and prevent the predilection towards violence, etc. Then, of course, the Internet was created; Social Media exploded (or imploded); the pandemic exponentially heightened; and the rest is history — of dark times in greater numbers; the selfishness of the ultra-wealthy; the rise of autocratic regimes and the reemergence of greater evil.

In the end, it is not the question of goodness in dark times which matters, but rather, how to extend, to the extent possible, some iota of goodness within the times we live in.  Laws, in the end, and the abiding of laws, are the only hope we have.

For Federal and Postal employees needing to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under the current Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS), through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, goodness in dark times is defined by the ability to manage your life despite the dark times.  Chronic medical conditions can be overwhelming and appear to present a period of unending dark times in your life.  Fortunately, the laws governing FERS Disability Retirement provide some amount of goodness and point to a brighter future.

Contact a FERS Medical Retirement Attorney, that is a legal expert who specializes in Federal Worker Disability Retirement law, and consider that there is still some goodness in dark times.

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 Medical Retirement from OPM: Those Verdant Peaks

The metaphor of life as comprised of “peaks and valleys” is an appropriate one of changing circumstances; but within those peaks and valleys, the further question concerns the qualitative valuation of the circumstances lived.

One can find one’s self in the “lower valleys” of circumstances, but within those valleys, is the vegetation and fauna green and lush?  Or, has Summer come and gone with the luster of Spring behind?

Those verdant peaks in life can quickly pass, and when we look back after a period of distance and reflection, it may well be that while the circumstances of where we find ourselves are less than favorable, the people around us with whom we are — may make it worthwhile.

Medical conditions impacting Federal employees and Postal workers daily create circumstances where those verdant peaks of life suddenly become the darker valleys of challenging days.

Fortunately, within those darker valleys is a benefit called, “Federal Disability Retirement”.  It is a benefit available to all Federal and Postal workers under FERS who have a minimum of 18 months of Federal Service.  At a minimum, the benefit allows for those darker valleys of challenging days to have a view of a future verdant peak.

Contact an Retirement Lawyer who Specializes in OPM Disability Retirement Law, and begin the climb from the lower valleys of one’s circumstances toward those verdant peaks where the view below is from the past left behind.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Lawyer

 

Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS) Disability Law: Loss of a Cosseted Life

What does it mean to “take things for granted”?

Often, it is only when something is taken away that the value of the vanished item of vacuity vainly verifies the validity of its valuation.  Sorry for the alliterative illustration.  Similarly, the cosseted life is one where over-indulgence of protected care may have existed, and the sudden or gradual disappearance of that sense of security leaves one vulnerable and potentially open to harm.

Health, itself, offers the cosseted life; and loss of it, an overwhelming sense of vulnerability.

In youth, when health is so often taken for granted, we are apt to embrace challenging and silly endeavors.  We might jump out of planes, for instance; or engage in other acts of mindless stupidity.  We expect failing health in the metaphorically twilight days of our lives, but when it occurs in the middle years, it often catches us off guard, and the loss of a cosseted life is felt all the more fervently.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal Workers who suffer from a medical conditions 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 sequence of dealing with the loss of that cosseted life often follows a familiar pattern — First, attend to the medical condition; Next, try and accept the available treatments such that a return to a level of functionality may be attained where your Federal or Postal career can continue.

Then, if the medical condition reaches a level of chronicity such that it becomes clear that you will not be able to perform all of the essential elements of your Federal or Postal job, contact a FERS Lawyer who specializes in OPM Medical Retirement Law.  For, in the end, the loss of a cosseted life should never be the end of something, but rather the beginning of a different phase, a varying period, an alternate condition, and a future still available for adaptive living.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Lawyer

 

Medical Retirement for Federal Workers: Traps and landmines

They are not just set on the roadsides of war zones or in public squares where the greatest damage can be projected; for, by analogy, they are in existence as metaphors of human deviancy and evil intents. Traps are deliberately set with motives and intentions to capture; landmines and other devices are put in place to maim, injure or kill.

Then, of course, there are analogies used and metaphors employed — of legal traps and linguistic landmines; of contracts that “hide” language in miniature fonts that are designed by clever lawyers to mislead and draw into a cobweb of entanglements meant to enclose, corner and — like traps and landmines — either to capture or to destroy.  Linguistic landmines and traps are the ones we encounter more often than the ones in war zones.

In other countries, in far away places where we see reporters “embedded” and whispering in hushed tones of urgency to give us a sense of danger and exotic misadventures, we get a sense of what real traps and landmines are all about.  But in this country, within our universe of relative calm and peace but for the periodic tumults of tragedies in the next city, the farther town or that “big city” out there — in such relative calm, it is usually just a casual trap of language or a landmine of a metaphorical sort.

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 applicant for Federal Disability Retirement must be cautious and wary of the legal and linguistic landmines and traps in the very preparation, formulation and filing of a Federal Disability Retirement Application.

Those innocent-looking forms, such as SF 3112A, Applicant’s Statement of Disability — while they do not pose the same danger as a mousetrap to a mouse or a landmine to a wandering child on foreign soil — nevertheless, they can become problematic unless you are aware of the dangers posed, much like those traps and landmines we hopefully will never encounter in war zones and conflicts afar, in a metaphorical sense.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Retirement for Medical Incapacity: The boxes in Standard Forms

For some forms, it is a convenience to have a restrictive, limited “box” in which to put the “x” into, or maybe the needed “Not Applicable”; others, however, try and contain a limited narrative and force succinctness into the standardization of answers.  That is all well and good, and perhaps from a bureaucratic standpoint and perspective, the conformity of forms and the mandatory “answers within a box” makes for streamlining of paperwork.

The reality, however, is that some questions cannot be answered — and more importantly, should not — within the proposed space allocated, and so you have two (2) choices: decrease the font size in order to fit a greater substance of the narrative within the provided box, or attach a continuation sheet despite no indication in the standard forms for allowance of such cheekiness of presumptuous creativity.

How does one identify which Standard Form should be prepared and completed within the confines of standardization, and which ones should not?   First, a conceptual identification should be applied: Which ones are merely “informational” that request only singular answers, and which forms make queries that compel for narrative answers?  Once that initial, identifying bifurcation is made, then the next step is to determine whether an adequate and sufficient response can be stated within the “box” provided within the font-size allowing for regular eyesight that does not require extraordinary magnification, or if a continuation sheet is necessary.

Thus, in a Federal Disability Retirement application, certain Standard Forms are merely informational — for example, the SF 3107 series which asks for basic, factual information.  Then, of course, there is the SF 3112 series, and especially SF 31112A, Applicant’s Statement of Disability.

For the Federal employee or the U.S. Postal worker under FERS, who is considering filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, the greater mistake has often been to quickly annotate within the boxes provided a swift “jotting down” of the medical conditions one “feels” — as if the body parts providing temporary sensations for a given day, or even the lack thereof, will sufficiently satisfy the eligibility requirements that must be met in order to become approved for a Federal Disability Retirement annuity.

Make no mistake about it: there can be dire legal consequences if SF 3112A is not completed properly and sufficiently.  And always remember the philosophical dictum: That which is necessary may not be necessarily sufficient, and that which is sufficient may not be sufficiently necessary.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Employee Disability Retirement: Witnessing the residue

Most of us merely witness the residue; the process itself, the events leading up to the conclusion, and “during” as opposed to the “after”, and all of the miniscule details that make up “in between” are invisible, ignored, unimportant or simply not thought of.  We see the “end product”, only, and that is how it should be.  We don’t have time to watch the apple tree grow from a seedling; for sausages to be made; for politics to be compromised; and for other people’s problems to fester.  And even if we did, what difference would it really make?

We assume much – that characters we see in movies made from “based on a true story” (whatever that means – and how much artistic liberty was taken with the details of such a “true story”, and what part is true and what is not?) productions went to the bathroom in between shooting at each other and becoming heroes; or that when children are seen, there was once love between the couple (although, that can turn out to be a wrong assumption where adoption or other arrangements have been made) even if the residue we witness shows only acrimony, bickering and constant arguing.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers preparing to 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, “both sides” witness the residue – from the Federal Agency or Postal Service’s side, they witness the residue of a filing for a disability retirement, without knowing the long and arduous struggle that the employee had with the medical condition prior to coming to such a decision.  Or, for that matter, from the viewpoint of the supervisor or co-worker, such a decision may come as a complete surprise.

Conversely, from the viewpoint of the Federal or Postal employee who is filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, witnessing the residue of the Federal Agency’s reaction or the co-workers and supervisors who make comments, or say anything at all, is often an interesting phenomenon for its complete lack of understanding or empathy.  They simply didn’t know, didn’t care or didn’t take the time (or all three) in showing any concern during the long struggle with the medical condition.

The key, however, in witnessing the residue, is with respect to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management – the Federal Agency that reviews and makes a determination on all Federal Disability Retirement applications.  For OPM, it is important to formulate a concise narrative in answering the questions on SF 3112A, Applicant’s Statement of Disability.  How much of the history; to what extent the minutiae and details of the past; and the precision of establishing the nexus between the medical condition and the job duties – these are all important in the proper preparation, formulation and filing of an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, where witnessing the residue may be a void too important to neglect.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Disability Retirement for Federal Employees: Content

What do we mean when we distinguish between “content” as opposed to “context”?  Are the two always distinguishable, and if so, are there any features or characteristics that make inseparability a potential difficulty?

We have all heard the famous phrase from King’s speech about being judged by the “content” of one’s character, as opposed to the “color” of one’s skin – a deviation of sorts from the more customary reference to the distinction made between appearance and reality, form versus substance, or even of spiritual versus material (although, as to the latter, one will often hear the metaphysical argument that it is the spiritual which is the “real” reality, and that the material is merely that fleeting, temporal existence that lasts for only a limited time).

Can the two truly be separated so cleanly as to allow for harmless independence – or, like the Siamese twins that share a vital organ, would any attempt necessarily devastate both?  For, isn’t it the very appearance of a thing that attracts and allows for an investigation further into the inner depths of the thing attracted towards?  Doesn’t context always matter when looking into the content of a thing, whether it is an incident, a conversation or a person of whom one is interested in committing to for a lifetime of relational considerations?

We often like to make such grandiose claims of bifurcating distinctions, when in fact the reality of the matter is that both are needed in order to complete the picture of the whole.

One may argue, of course, that content nevertheless is “more important” than context, or that substance by definition is of greater consequence than appearance, and by fiat of ascribed significance, one often argues that the former is necessary but perhaps not sufficient without the latter, whereas the latter is not unnecessary, but nevertheless cannot be made without unless one wants to walk about through life with a missing leg or a part of one’s soul left behind.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who are considering filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, always remember that – in preparing the SF 3112A, Applicant’s Statement of Disability – the U.S. Office of Personnel Management is looking for both content and context, and thus must one always be wary and cautious about the implementation of both.

SF 3112A is a trick form.  The questions seem simple enough, but what is put in there; the legal consequences of what medical conditions are included; the result of failing to include certain other conditions that may later be of greater consequence; these, and many more pitfalls, obstacles and unknown legal impact that may or may not be made aware of – well, OPM is not going to tell you beforehand, or help you out, and will indeed judge the Federal Disability Retirement application based upon the content of what is included, and not by the “color” of contextually missing information.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Disability Retirement: When and what to file

In preparing an application for Federal Disability Retirement, multiple standard government forms must be completed.  As most Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers are under the “FERS” system (an acronym for “Federal Employees Retirement System”) as opposed to the older system of CSRS (standing for, “Civil Service Retirement System”), the applicable forms are comprised of two (2) “sets”:  The SF 3107 Series (encompassing the basic forms needed to apply for “immediate retirement”, which is part of the process of filing for Federal Disability Retirement) and the SF 3112 Series (which includes the Applicant’s Statement of Disability – SF 3112A; the Supervisor’s Statement – SF 3112B ; and the Agency’s efforts for Reassignment and Accommodation form – SF 3112D).

Both sets of forms must be completed, and it is essential that the applicant understands the complexity, involvement and onerous nature of each form, before engaging in the process of preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application.  All such forms – once completed – need to be “filed” with the appropriate agency, and this becomes somewhat tricky.

To understand the administrative process of the entire procedural phenomenon, we need to begin with the oversight of some statutory principles.  First, all Federal Disability Retirement applications must be filed with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management within one (1) year of being separated from the Federal Agency or the U.S. Postal Service.  But there are “sub-parts” to such a Statute of Limitations (so named because it limits the ability of a Federal or Postal employee from filing a Federal Disability Retirement application if one goes past the 1-year deadline).

The first “subpart” concerns the initial 31 days after separation from Federal Service.  If you, as a Federal employee or U.S. Postal employee, have been separated, but not for more than thirty one (31) days, then you should still file through your agency’s Human Resource Office or the H.R. Shared Service Office of the U.S. Postal Service, located in Greensboro, North Carolina.  As a practical matter, if the time of separation is approaching the 31st day, you should probably just wait until after the 31-day period, and instead file directly with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management in Boyers, Pennsylvania – which brings us to the second “subpart” concerning separation from Federal Service or the U.S. Postal Service:  If you have been separated for over 31 days from the Federal Agency or the U.S. Postal Service, then you are required to file your Federal Disability Retirement application directly to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management in Boyers, Pennsylvania.

Likely, if you have been separated from the Federal Agency or the U.S. Postal Service, the U.S. Office of Personnel Management in Boyers, Pennsylvania will request your SF 50 or PS Form 50, which is evidence of the actual separation from your Federal Agency (now former) or the U.S. Postal Service; but even if your former Agency or the U.S. Postal Service has not yet issued you such a form, indicating the formal separation from Federal Service, you should always make sure that you file your Federal Disability Retirement application before the 1-year Statute of Limitations has expired.

Beyond these “fundamentals” of when and what to file, are substantive and procedural issues which are too complex to extrapolate in a limited forum.  To further understand the intricacies, you as a Federal or Postal employee, if considering preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, should either exhaustively research the statutory or case-law background in preparing your Federal or Postal Disability Retirement application, or consult an attorney who is knowledgeable about issues concering the proper preparation, formulation and filing of a Federal Disability Retirement application.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Disability Retirement: How Long Can Negation Define Living?

The tipping point where negation of living constitutes greater time spent than affirmative enjoyment of the activity engaged, is determined by individual choices and preferences.  Some individuals retain a higher threshold for pain, discomfort, and capacity to endure; and the fact that an MRI reveals a degenerative or decaying physical attribute does not necessarily correlate with the capability to ignore or otherwise minimize the magnitude of pain.

To what extent one avoids “doing something” in order to contain the pain; deny the self from pursuance of an activity in order to endure; to maintain quietude and an immobilized sedentary state of being in an effort to make the worn body and troubled mind last for a day, a week, or a decade longer; such are the efforts expended in a life of negation, in order to continue to “live”.  But is life defined by a quantum?  Or, is quantity in any way related to quality?  In “elder law”, there is often a discussion about “quality of life” issues, but the fact is, such a question and concern pervades with significance throughout one’s life, and not just towards the twilight of living.

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 in the Federal Sector or the U.S. Postal Service, the question of when “enough” is already “too much” is one which haunts, tails, latches on as an appendage of inflamed emotions, and refuses mere hand-waving as an irritant to swat away.

Yes, filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management is a major step in one’s life, but at some point, the alternative left unstated and ignored must be directly confronted and faced with courage, pragmatism and prudent behavior.

Habit of negation can become so intertwined with one’s daily life, that it remains as a compromise allowed because one believed that no alternative was offered.  But as a life defined by negation becomes, at some point, a qualitative issue where all joy has been sucked out of the vibrancy of rightful ownership, so the choice to change in order to attain a semblance of a past life, memorialized in times of youth where pain and psychiatric disorders were merely hypothetical constructs hinted at by “others” in the community, so taking an affirmative step in order to be released from the confines of daily toil and turmoil is often the best and most hopeful avenue towards a life of positive images.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers, filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through OPM is often the best choice left in order to “move on” towards a greater definition of “life as living” once forgotten because of the constant harassment and fear imposed by the Federal agency and the U.S. Postal Service.  At some point, negation cannot define living, as life is more than avoidance, and there is joy to be found beyond Federal employment and the U.S. Postal Service.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Disability Retirement: Life as a Byproduct

When it happens, or how, is of insignificant notice; the incremental arrival, where past segments of time seemed to traverse epochs where memories captured mere millennia of lifetimes; and then, one day, you wake up and yawn, and your life has taken on an incidental, tertiary level of importance.  One has been living by negation for so long, any positive or affirmative step has become a ghost of not just a Christmas past, but of decades evaporated.

Can life long be lived as a mere byproduct, where time, space and the centrality of one’s essence is shoved aside, and separateness of identity is relegated to occasional hellos and furtive glances of suspicious canopies?   Can a life of negation — of avoiding pain, trying to merely survive the day, or of constantly worrying about the next adverse action which might be initiated against you — is that “living”, or merely life as a byproduct?

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, where the medical condition (whether physical exclusively, psychiatric, or a cross-combination of both) prevents the Federal or Postal worker from being able to perform one or more of the essential elements of one’s positional duties, the daily grind of avoidance, fearful of the next stressor of the day, and the constant battle to get some recuperative period of rest and peace away from the turmoil of work and one’s constant fight against the medical condition, leaves the human soul depleted and defeated, to the extent that life is merely a secondary and incidental experience; the true and focused task is intertwined with fear, angst and dread for each day.  Is that really a way to live?

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, may not be the answer to all of life’s problems; but for that segment of society, the Federal Sector and the U.S. Postal Service employees — it is at least a small step and a beginning.

Life’s problems did not aggregate in a single day; and just as the ancient Chinese proverb admonished that a journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step, so the life of a Federal or Postal employee can return to the essence of being, as opposed to a mere byproduct, when once we take steps to attain a level of restorative peace and begin to fulfill promises made but broken in past moments of progressive deterioration, when health was once taken for granted but now considered the gift of blessings forgotten in previous baskets of happiness and joy, lost but never forever regretted.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire