Lawyer Representation for OPM Disability Claims: The price paid

That is the question, isn’t it?  In this monetary-based system of thought, we always ask that one, and the follow-up:  What was the price paid, and was it worth it? Are the two questions and issues divisible, or are they inseparably linked like Siamese twins sharing a vital organ?

As to the first, the question can encompass an entanglement of intricate complexities that flow from the second — when, in fact, it is a simple question requiring merely a fundamental answer.  We ask first, What is the price paid?

We begin to hem and haw and hesitate:  Well, it was really beautiful and I’ve always wanted it and it was worth it because it brought back the warmth of childhood memories and….  Once such explanations and justifying delineations occur, you have conflated the second issue into the first; for, the first requires a simple and straightforward answer:  the dollar-amount; a monetarily-objective response; a unit from a designated numerical set, etc.  Thus: “I bought X”.  “How much did you pay for it?”  “It was priced at X-dollars, and I purchased it for Y-amount”.

Then, the inevitable follow-up:  “Was it worth it?”  It is this second question that evokes a conflation with the first; for, such a query is not so simple inasmuch as it involves psychology, emotion, rational and irrational underpinnings, and the subjective encompassment of often-unexplainable attachments.

The worth of a thing may not parallel the price of it; for, what what paid for it can spread throughout a spectrum of differentiating circumstances:  Perhaps one got a bargain; maybe the seller didn’t realize the true market value and vastly underpriced it; or, it may be that a person needed to do a “quick sale” because he needed the cash, and was willing to part with it at a basement-bargain price, etc.

Take the following hypothetical:  At an auction, a painting is bid upon.  It is a rather unassuming piece that depicts a woman, fully clothed, with a slight smile.  It is not an exceptional painting, and is expected to be auctioned off for about a thousand dollars.  The bidding begins, and very quickly, it becomes clear that primarily 2 individuals are vying for the painting — one, a very wealthy individual; the other, a middle-class bloke barely able to meet his monthly debts.  The bidding exceeds the expected price to be gained by the auctioneer, which makes him happy beyond description.

This is the cake that dreams are made of for the auction house that expects very little:  Two or more individuals who are willing to pay a price exceeding the monetary worth of the item.  After a series of back-and-forth bids, the middle-class bloke wins the bid — at $20,000.00.  When later asked about it, he replies: “The painting reminds me of my mother.”  Bankrupt and considered a fool by everyone in the neighborhood, he nevertheless feels for the rest of his life that it “was worth it”.

Now, turn the hypothetical around and let’s say that the wealthy man won the bidding.  When asked about it, he simply stated: “Oh, I was just bored.  I plan on trashing the painting when I get home, but it was exciting to just rob someone else of his desire and pleasure.”  In either case, was the price paid “worth” it?

That is the question that Federal and Postal workers have to answer when determining whether or not to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset — the price of one’s health; whether it is worth continuing in a job or career that persists upon a track to demoralize, deteriorate and destroy one’s health; or, whether a reduced income at the price of being able to focus upon one’s health may be “worth” it.

Preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through OPM itself has a price — of the long wait, the complex administrative process and the stress of waiting; but like the painting being bid upon at the auction house, it is always the balancing of the price paid and the worth of the gain that must be considered when preparing, formulating and filing for OPM Disability Retirement benefits.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Medical Retirement from OPM: Dreams, daydreams and nightmares

Of the first in this triplet trope, the concept can envision two distinct avenues:  in a state of somnolence, to have them with minimal control of appearance; or, in another sense, to possess aspirations beyond one’s station in life or current circumstances that may impute dissatisfaction.

The second in the series is somewhat connected to the second concept branching from the first; it is a moment of reflective escape, where the reality of “now” and the encounter with Being is temporarily averted and subsumed in a meditative silence of self-repose.  Some have the capacity to embrace and become lost in such quietude of an alternate universe, despite a clutter of noises or the distraction of tumult.  Then, some would counter that it is precisely in such moments that fleeing into a parallel universe of a mental cocoon is necessary in order to maintain one’s sanity in a world replete with a curiosity shop full of random violence.

And, of the third, we again branch into a duality with the proverbial fork in the road; for, such infamy of uncontrolled images and voices while in a sleeping slumber constitutes the primary definition; but, whether in metaphorical terms or engaging in trifling hyperbole, we attribute traumatic and frightful events by describing it precisely by the term at hand.

Dreams, daydreams and nightmares are all part of our daily lives, whether awake, half-aware, conscious or sub-conscious in multiple and mysterious modalities of living; but they serve a purpose which, whether explained away by psychologists, therapists, pseudo-intellectuals or just plain people of tremendous insights and uncanny foresights, they continue to remain the foundation for maintaining the sanity preserved within the insanity of the greater universe.

Without nightmares, how would the inner psyche expiate the images and sense datum we have involuntarily ingested?  Without daydreams, what would man hope for, live for, in circumstances of squalor and decadence?  And of dreams, how would the subconscious sift through the visual and information overload experienced daily and in voluminous onslaughts of quantitatively overwhelming constructs?

Or of the second branch, where aspirations and hope for a better tomorrow, though derailed by screams of destitution and unhinged by crying babies, drunken realities and unsavory circumstances, yet to dream for a better tomorrow is sometimes the only thread which separates the crumbling heart from a tinge of a fading smile.  It is precisely these that allows for man to wake up the next morning and seek a better tomorrow.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who find themselves with shattered dreams, escaping into a greater cauldron of daydreaming, or rustling in sleepless fits of nightmares unavailing, all because one’s career is on the proverbial “line” resulting from a medical condition which may cut short one’s dreams, daydreams and creating a chaos of nightmares, preparing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, to be filed with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, may be the first step in the aspirational discourse needed to regain one’s equilibrium.

The importance of trifurcating between dreams, daydreams and nightmares is a prescient step towards recognizing that the reality of one’s present circumstances may be described as a “nightmare”, and perhaps those sleepless nights are filled with them; but in order for the Federal or Postal employee to dream of a better tomorrow, the leisure of daydreaming must be allowed, but always tempered by pragmatic steps which must be undertaken in the reality of day-to-day living, in order to reach a specific goal:  That of getting an approval from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, in order to reach that light at the end of the proverbial tunnel, which is neither defined by dreams, nor attained by daydreaming, and certainly not a nightmare to avoid.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Postal & Federal Employee Medical Retirement: When coincidence ignores sensitivity

What if a ‘special day‘ falls upon an unfortunate date? What if one’s birthday, for example, happens to be on 9/11, or on Christmas eve, Valentine’s day, etc?  Or, for those who strictly proscribe the Sabbath Day, what happens if one’s birthday happens to fall coincidentally upon the concurrent segment of solemnity?  Does one set aside the significance of the unfortunate date, and celebrate that special day as if the former is an irrelevancy, trumped by the latter?

Is that what others tend to do, but somehow — when properly reminded — suddenly awaken from the stupor of perversity, shake off the sober face of grimaces and furrowed brows, and begin celebrations in earnest with painted faces and balloons of joy?  Can we turn it on and off like a button switch, reminded of smiles with saddened eyes and inverted to frowns with the window’s soul full of happiness?  Certainly, some presidents (unnamed, of course) have been able to do that; but for the ordinary actor upon the stage of life, are we able to perform with such aplomb?

Of course, people with medical conditions experience that encounter often, and no more so than Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition which prevents them from performing the essential elements of one’s positional duties with the Federal agency and the U.S. Postal Service.

For Federal and Postal employees who suffer from a medical condition, each day where the Federal or Postal employee can come into work and be productive is a ‘special day’; but because of the reputation which has already grown, and the whispers and gossip which have been imparted like a trailing cloud of dust surrounding Pig-Pen in the Peanuts comic strip, the furrowed brows and grim faces of solemnity abound, still making it into an unfortunate event.

Full well does the Federal employee and the U.S. Postal worker know, of that which we speak; where every special day is still an unfortunate event, and the coincidence of being pain-free or otherwise without debilitating symptoms of the medical condition can somehow be ignored with lack of sensitivity by everyone around.

But, then, this is a daily and common occurrence for the Federal and Postal employee who must endure the sufferings of both the medical condition itself as well as the constant harassment from the Federal Agency and the the U.S. Postal Service; and that is why filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, becomes an important event — one which could potentially turn that unfortunate condition into an otherwise special day, once the OPM Disability Retirement application is approved and the Federal or Postal worker can ‘move on’ where coincidence is no longer ignored by sensitivity.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

FERS & CSRS Medical Retirement: The False Option of Extremes

-The choices we make are contingent upon the knowledge we possess; thus, if we choose between a tripartite offering of x, y & z, when (as perhaps illustrated by Venn Diagrams within a rectangular border representing the “universal” set of possibilities) actual and available options may extend beyond the known quantities available, then we have made our decision based upon an ignorance of alternatives.

Offerings are generally made based upon self-centered care; in negotiating with an adversary, it is normally the option of extremes which are granted:  Either X, or Y, but not both, and if neither X nor Y, then consequence-T.  No mention is made concerning the availability of sub-options Xx, or Yy, to the remaining result of T1, 2 or 3.  Furthermore, when the concealment or unrevealed alternatives fail to be presented, it is often the case that only the extreme of options are conveyed, which makes the entire set of non-universal choices false in their very definition.  This can be exponentially quantified when a medical condition is introduced into the equation, precisely because mental acuity and sound judgment become influenced by desperation of circumstances.

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 positional duties in the Federal agency or the U.S. Postal Service, the false option of extremes can very likely be attributable to fear, lack of knowledge, combined with loss of confidence in the fair distribution of justice and good sense.

It is indeed troubling that so many Federal and Postal workers know nothing about Federal Disability Retirement, or its availability after having worked just 18 months in the Federal sector (under FERS), or 5 years under CSRS.  The confusion can sometimes arise in the availability of Social Security Disability, which is distinct and separate from Federal Disability Retirement benefits from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

The two are distinct and different in multiple ways:  the criteria to qualify; the nature of the benefit; the rules concerning employment after approval of either, etc.  Yes, if under FERS both SSDI and FERS Disability Retirement are granted, there is an “offset” tantamount to a coordination of benefits between the two, but for those who do not seek outside employment, the combination of both (despite the offset) will normally net the (former) Federal or Postal employee more in terms of a monthly annuity.

Whatever the reasons, the age-old adage (attributable to Sir Francis Bacon) that knowledge is power, and lack of it injustice and contempt (the addendum clause is merely added by this author) by those who possess but offer mere false alternatives, is but a pervasive truism abounding despite the Internet, Google and other information-searching technologies of modernity.

In the end, the false options of extremes should be countered by a deliberative intent and real curiosity to know — know that the “other side” is never truly looking out for your best interest; that in making spur-of-the-moment decisions, to take a further moment to investigate and reflect may be fruitful, and in the end, to recognize that for the Federal or Postal employee suffering from a medical condition, working on at the expense of one’s health, or resigning, are not the only two options available, but preparing, formulating and 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, is also within the subset of universal alternatives available to the Federal or Postal employee.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire