Federal Worker Disability Retirement: The Proverbial Cup, Half Full or Half Empty

It is the classic metaphor by which we judge a person’s outlook and perspective on life; and whether influenced or determined by nature or nurture (and whether we repackage the issue by surrounding ourselves with linguistic complexities of scientific language encapsulating DNA, genetic predisposition, or social welfare conversations), the judgments we place upon people are more likely based upon mundane and commonplace criteria:  Does he uplift or depress?  Does she smile or frown?  Do you see the world around as a cup half empty, or half full?

But such stark bifurcations which colonize individuals into one classification or another, are rarely statements of ultimate truth or reality.  More likely, life is often a series of missteps and opportunities unclaimed.  Even waiting too long in making a decision can then result in an option lost, an alternative missed.  The complexity of life’s misgivings often confound us.

For Federal and Postal employees who are beset with a medical condition such that the medical condition prevents him or her from performing the essential elements of the official positional duties one occupies, the choices are not always clear precisely because the prognosis of future abilities and capacities cannot always be predicted with accuracy.  But at some point in one’s career, the choice between the half-filled cup and the half-empty one becomes more than an encounter with a proverb.

The medical condition itself may mean that one’s cup is half empty; but what one does in response, will determine whether the future bodes for a half-filled cup.

For the Federal and Postal worker, filing a Federal Disability Retirement application with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether under FERS or CSRS, is a step which can become a positive direction forward, or a misstep because of hesitation, procrastination, or even a predisposed genetic determination of an inability to engage in decision-making.

But nothing is ever forever; today’s half-filled cup can be refilled tomorrow, and Federal Disability Retirement can help to ensure one’s financial and economic security for the future.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

Federal Disability Retirement: Approaching the Entrance to OPM’s Thought Process

The attempt to predict an opponent’s approach in an endeavor — whether in competitive sports; in debate; in an adversarial forum — is a practice which can have favorable results, or one which ends with disastrous consequences.  For the prediction itself must be based upon known factors, such as the applicable standards which the opponent will rely upon, relevant elements which will be utilized, and human, unpredictable quirks which seem to always come into play.

In approaching an opponent, it is always a good idea to study the opposition; but too much reliance upon attempting to out-maneuver the opposition can have the negative impact of taking away from valuable preparation-time one may need in order to prevail.

In preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether under FERS or CSRS, many Federal and Postal applicants attempt to analyze the questions posed on the Standard Forms (SF 3107 series for FERS employees; SF 2801 series for CSRS employees; SF 3112 series for both FERS & CSRS employees) perhaps too deeply, in attempting to “understand” the opponent — the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Yes, the questions must be analyzed; yes, there is an implicit trickiness to many of the questions (especially on SF 3112A); and, yes, a cautious approach must be taken in answering the questions.  But such caution should never detract from spending the necessary time in preparing the crux and foundation of one’s Federal Disability Retirement application — that of formulating the logical nexus between one’s medical condition and the positional duties which one can no longer perform.

Ultimately, the substance of one’s Federal Disability Retirement application must be given the greatest of focus and effort:  attempting to approach the opponent’s thought processes — in this case, that of the “collective” efforts of multiple individuals at the U.S. Office of Personnel Management — may be an act of futility; better to spend the needed hours solidifying one’s own case than to try and understand an incomprehensible entity.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

CSRS & FERS Medical Disability Retirement: These Economic Times

Do outside influences other than “the law” impact upon benefits applied for?  Depending upon what particular perspective one has, the human animal can be characterized as either extremely simple, or supremely complex.  In comparison to other animals, one needs to only look at the vast civilization of architectural magnificence, artistic beauty, and acts of compassion and empathy, to arrive at the latter conclusion.  But human nature often overrules the complex beauty of such accomplishments, leaving one with the unmistakeable conclusion of the former.

In preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, one must proceed and assume such an application based upon the legal criteria as applied, and expect a fair and impartial review based upon the statutory implementation of such rules and regulations.

But in these economic times…   Does the Federal Government want to limit the number of applicants approved (the unspoken “quota” argument)?  Is there an underlying motive other than medical reasons, as to why the Federal or Postal employee is filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits (OPM’s suspicions)?  Do “unofficial policies from on high” ever apply?

Such questions and concerns are often asked, but ultimately they are irrelevancies.  For, in preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits from OPM, one must move forward regardless, and put together the best case possible, based upon the evidence one has.

Any other approach, or becoming unduly concerned with collateral issues, will only detract and distract from the essence of a Federal Disability Retirement case.

Sincerely, Robert R. McGill, Esquire

Medical Retirement for Federal Workers: Attempting to Time Submissions

Timing is more of an art form than a science; it is the coalescence of knowledge, experience and an instinctive sense of when the most effective moment of fruition will occur, rather than an empirical analysis of sequential propositional logic.

In preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether under FERS or CSRS, many Federal and Postal employees attempt to “time” the submission of a Federal Disability Retirement application, for various purposes and reasons, some rationally sound, others rather dubiously proposed.  Whether it is because of a set goal of a date certain; or of funds reserved in order to survive a specified period of time; or of a belief that certain months have a higher probability for a successful outcome; all such attempts are neither based upon certitude, nor upon a sound methodological basis.

The best timing for any Federal Disability Retirement application submitted to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (first, through one’s agency if one is still an employee or not yet separated from Federal Service for over thirty one (31) days) is the one which files it properly, in a timely manner, in as complete a format as possible, and which satisfies the legal criteria as set by statute, regulation and case-law.

Now, there may be some truth to the idea that submitting an application just before Christmas, or during the week of the 4th of July, may not be the most intelligent thing to do, as such a packet may sit in the agency mail room while most of the Federal or Postal employees (or both) are off doing other things.

Aside from such exceptions, attempting to “time” a Federal Disability Retirement application, whether under FERS or CSRS, should be a secondary matter; the primary focus is to prepare a case well, in substantive form, and let the winds of time determine the course of future events.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire