OPM Disability Retirement: The Fear of Tomorrow

There is, of course, the other statement — of replacing the preposition “of” with “for” — which alters the essence of meaning at its core, and not just in some ancillary manner.  The fear of tomorrow pits our relationship of a being in the present to an uncertainty of a time beyond; whereas, the fear “for” tomorrow magnifies the present in the context of recognized circumstances and current issues that must be analyzed as against a future possibility.

Perhaps the distinction in the prepositional modifier is too subtle to make a difference.  Yet, the first sense of the statement — the fear of tomorrow — places one with an angst as an object-to-object antagonism, much like a person’s fear of spiders or creepy-crawlies, where there is no cure for such a response.  The other form — of a fear for tomorrow — allows for rational discourse and a “talking about” not only tomorrow, but of the fear itself, their underlying reasons and the potential solutions to objectives not yet met.

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 fear of tomorrow must by necessity be replaced with a fear for tomorrow, and that is when the next step can be taken: Preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, to be filed through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Do not let the fear of tomorrow stop you from asserting your employment rights and eligibility for a benefit that is offered; instead, determine the underlying basis of the fear for tomorrow and begin to take the necessary steps to assert your legal rights by consulting with an Attorney who specializes in FERS Disability Retirement Law.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Lawyer Representation for OPM Disability Claims: Hypotheticals

Why do lawyers, above most other professions, utilize the tool of hypotheticals?  What is their evidentiary value, and in what way does it help to advance the cause of one’s case?

Say, for instance, you need an architect or an engineer (yes, yes, the humor here is that in speaking about hypotheticals, we are preparing to present one), would you be at all impressed if, after describing with precision the type of product you desire to have built, or in requesting a blueprint of a model house you are interested in, the architect or the engineer presents you with a hypothetical?

What, first of all, is a ‘hypothetical’?  It is, first and foremost, a proposition of non-existence, but with components of reality that may or may not have occurred or existed except in partial or disparate forms, delineated in an attempt to make or prove a point.  It is the tool of the attorney, just as the pencil and the blueprint are the resources of the architect, and the mathematical calculations the reliance of the engineer.  Often, it is used by means of analogical content to prove a point and to enhance the evidence gathered.

Take, for example, the lawyer who defended a bank robber.  He meets his client for the first time, and the criminal defense lawyer puts up a hand in order to stop his client from speaking, and says the following: “Now, take the following hypothetical, Mr. Dillinger: A man walks into a bank and hands a note to the teller that says, ‘Give me everything in your drawers.’  Now, that man was subsequently arrested.  No cash was ever exchanged; no weapon was ever found.  The question, then, is: What was meant by the words?  Only you know.  If, by way of a hypothetical, the man meant to obtain the contents of the teller’s drawer, it might mean 10 years in prison.  If, on the other hand, the note meant to be a lewd proposal about the teller’s anatomy beneath her undergarments, it would likely be a misdemeanor offense.  Now, Mr. Dillinger, which is it?”

Now, aside from some who would view such a presentation as somewhat unethical for “suggesting”, on the part of the lawyer, which intended “meaning” the defendant possessed at the time the note was passed, such a hypothetical is intended to denote the importance of hypotheticals within the purview of “the law”.  Hypotheticals allow for individuals to see the differences in paradigms or examples; it allows for options by way of analogy.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition where 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, hypotheticals have quite likely become like unicorns and gnomes: no longer a figment of one’s imagination, but a reality that must be faced within a surreal universe of a Federal Agency or the Postal Service that fails to possess the humanity necessary in dealing with a person with failing health.

Words of platitudes are often spoken; and, perhaps, here and there, you come across someone at your agency that actually cares.  But for the most part, such “caring” amounts to no more of a reality than mere hypotheticals; and when that realization comes about that the clash between hypotheticals and reality must be confronted, it is time to get down to the “nuts and bolts” and prepare, formulate and file a 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.

And, as an aside, you may be asking, What was Mr. Dillinger’s response to the lawyer’s hypothetical? He punched the lawyer in the mouth, stood up and said, “Jeez, I ain’t no pervert!  Of course I wanted the money!”

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

 

Attorney Representation Federal Disability Retirement: Bureaucracies

It is an amalgamation of penultimate collectivism; based primarily upon the concept that centralization constitutes efficiency, bureaucracies exist for the sake of a mission long forgotten and forever compelling the existence of its own justified creation.  They have histories, and often historians to record and annotate the accomplishments of their own beings; and the people who work for them speak about them in objective tones of third persons.

Every now and again, a newly-hired employee will bring about a fresh sense of enthusiasm, of new ideas and different ways of doing things; but after a time, each such newbie of fresh growth begins to wilt, like flowers that bloom for a season and then die an expected and predictable death, only to wait for another to take its place.

Bureaucracies tend to do that to their own population – wilt them, kill them, stamp out any newness that might sprout for a brief moment.  And to those outsiders who require the services of a bureaucracy – well, always remember that the bureaucracy will always last longer than even the great period of the dinosaurs.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who are considering filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits because of a medical condition that prevents the Federal or Postal employee from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s positional duties, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, the exposure to a bureaucracy may be the first time; or, perhaps the Federal employee (and certainly the Postal employee) works within a bureaucracy him/herself.  In either event, suddenly being an “outsider” looking in, as opposed to an “insider” looking out, will be a new experience.

It is good to remind one’s self during this process of preparing, formulating, filing and waiting upon the “bureaucracy of bureaucracies” –- the U.S. Office of Personnel Management – that long after the Age of Dinosaurs passed and became extinct, and long, long after global warming or other such identifiable calamitous event will have altered the face of the universe, OPM and other bureaucracies will still be here.  What a thought to ponder.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal & Postal Disability Retirement Attorney: Negating the Sense of Panic

It comes upon all of us; the stealth of the sapping subtlety; the interruption of sleep, once removed in the quietude of dawn’s calm but for the far echoes of distant yearnings once deliberated, but as in the morning dew which forms soundlessly upon the bending blade of beatitude, the slow slide and dissipation tells us with an alarm that awakens:  What am I doing?

Panic is the alarm system which propels with an urgency, and often it results in the furious activity of unproductive futility.  Are we merely spinning our wheels?  A sense of one’s fate, the inevitability of timeless onslaught; these are all buttons pushed which call upon a person to act.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, such that the medical condition begins to impact and prevent the Federal or Postal employee from performing the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal position, the sense that “something” needs to be done is always just around the next proverbial corner, and leaves one with the feeling of unease and panic.  And while King Lear may admonish his daughter of brevity by noting that nothing comes from nothing, the “something” which we do should not be merely engaging in acts of futility, but constructive advancements toward a teleological embracing of an identified goal.

Preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, for the Federal employee and the U.S. Postal worker, is a concrete goal with tangible benefits to be accrued.

As panic is an ephemeral but powerful sense of the unknown, the antidote to performing non-constructive modes of activities is to recognize, identify and initiate a concrete process with actual ends; and for the Federal or Postal worker who has realized that continuation in the Federal or Postal job is no longer a viable option, preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, will help to negate that nagging sense of panic, and compel one towards a constructive and productive future.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire