Early Medical Retirement under FERS: Acceptability

At what point does it NOT become so?  Whether in marriage; in a job or career (is there such a distinction, these days?); or of life in general.  Is it the point where stress meets up with one’s desire and hope for a pictured future?  Does acceptability vary — is it different depending upon social class, background, level of education or even of cultural heritage?  Or, as with so many things — is knowledge or ignorance (the corollary between the two) what determines acceptability?

In other words, if a person has only known a certain X-standard of living, and has never been exposed to Y-standard of conditions, is it the lack of knowledge which accounts for acceptability of living conditions, or can we be content despite possessing such knowledge?

Unrest in modernity around the universe is often attributed by sociologists as indicated by the level of the shrinking globe — that, through the Internet, people everywhere are aware of everything, including the unacceptability of their own circumstances, and thus resulting in a universal sense of unease and unrest.

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 positional duties, the level of acceptability is often when the juncture between pain and illness, and the tolerance for such where “living life” is barely bearable, meet and collide.

Consider filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS, and consult with an OPM Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement, less acceptability turns into a morose sense of despair where even the weekends are barely tolerable.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

FERS Medical Retirement: Drawing Up the Battle Plans

Are they necessary?  Or, is pure talent, brawn and a willingness to sacrifice one’s life — enough?  Can a military officer simply say to his or her troops, “Well, we have overwhelming numbers; let’s just pick up our weapons and overrun the enemy”?  Or, is a “battle plan” necessary, even for a short foray to test the strength, weakness or vulnerabilities of enemy lines?

Most would contend that a battle plan is a crucial aspect for any considered conflict, and that merely relying upon strength of numbers or sheer determination of will to fight are not enough.  History is replete with examples of inferior numbers winning against great odds, precisely because a superior plan had been considered and implemented.  It is not necessarily the boldness of a plan, or even that a plan is clever or masked in subterfuge; rather, the clarity of a mission, the simplicity of protecting flanks and doubling-back in reinforcing weak links — a plan which the troops understand and comprehend as to its logic and potential outcome for success — is critical for any successful attack.

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 position, preparing well, formulating meaningfully and filing in a timely manner are all part of the “battle plan” for a successful foray into the territory of Federal Disability Retirement Law.

Consult with a Federal Disability Attorney who specializes in FERS Disability Retirement Law and begin drawing up the Battle Plans for a successful venture in obtaining your Federal Disability Retirement benefits.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

FERS Disability Retirement from OPM: A Lifetime

Isn’t that enough?  Shouldn’t it be?  Or, do we feel obligated to append a dependent clause, as in, “A lifetime of achievements,” “…of having accomplished X, Y and Z”, or even: “A Lifetime devoted to…”.  Must there always be the subsequent appendage, or isn’t living a lifetime enough in and of itself?

Was Aristotle right in depicting human beings (and everything else in the universe) as possessing a purposive reason for existence; or, as the French Existentialist had declared, does existence precede essence, and instead of being fated with a predetermined destiny and an inherent basis for being born, we can simply “make up” the reason for our essence and thrive in whichever direction we choose, in whatever endeavor we decide upon?

Is simply having a “lifetime” not enough?  Must we always have a reason and rationale for our existence?  Or, is it enough to have an ending, like Yasujiro Ozu’s tombstone which simply has the characters of “Mu” — “nothingness”?  Ozu certainly “accomplished” much; as a director, he is recognized for his quiet brilliance and insightful dialogues, as well as depicted scenes of serenity and human conflict.  In the end, it was merely a lifetime, and nothingness followed except in the minds of those whom he left behind.

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 his or her job, the “thing” that often compels the Federal or Postal worker into working beyond what the medical condition allows — i.e., of “working one’s self to death” — is a sense that having a lifetime is not quite enough.

There is the “mission” to accomplish, or the work that needs to be completed, etc.  But when it comes to the critical point of choosing between one’s health and such a perspective of accomplishments, there should be no indecision: Life itself is precious, and one’s health is the foundation for a life.

At that point, filing for FERS Disability Retirement makes sense, and consulting with an Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law should be the next step after realizing that a lifetime is, indeed, sufficient.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire