OPM Disability Retirement under FERS: The Long Slog

Whether impatience is a uniquely American characteristic (a flawed one?) or is merely something inherently inseparable from the human species generally is a debate for anthropologists and similar academic theoreticians to engage; but in any event, it does appear to pervade the American character in pervasive plenitude.

We are impatient about almost everything — and appear to be willing to abandon all “old ways” in favor of the “new”.  This leads to some disastrous results — as in our impatience for conflicts that last too long and our quick willingness to abandon our efforts because our goals were neither quickly nor easily achieved.

The Long Slog is always problematic for the impatient — for, it means that we must commit time and resources for periods beyond a murky, endless timeframe.  How long something takes cannot always be clearly quantified, and often the anticipated length must be ignored and, instead, achievement must be measured not in terms of time, but in light of merely remaining and showing a steadfast commitment to honoring a timeless commitment.

This is often difficult because other thoughts begin to intrude during the endless lull — Are we wasting our time?  What if we are throwing away good money after bad (a very common thought);  What if we never achieve our goal?  And many more such concerns, besides.  How do we counter the natural concerns of the Long Slog?

First, by clarifying at the outset one’s commitment to a process, and recognizing that the stated goal can only be achieved without regard to time, and Secondly, to accept that any timeframe anticipated should be multiplied by a factor of 10.

Commitment is a difficult value to uphold, and that is why a marriage covenant is so often broken — for, who can even conceive of honoring a promise “Till death do us part” without knowing the particulars of what a lifetime will entail?  All that goes into a “lifetime” — of joys and sorrows, of happiness, suddenly overshadowed by sickness and tragedies unforeseen — in short, the normal history of all of mankind.

Thus do so many people end in divorce and, similarly do long-term commitments become abandoned and forgotten human detritus.

Likewise, when a Federal or a Postal employee decides to engage in the process of preparing, formulating, and filing a Federal Disability Retirement under FERS through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM), one must mentally prepare for the Long Slog.  It is a long and arduous, complicated bureaucratic process involving potentially 3 stages, and with an “almost certainty” of an initial denial from OPM no matter how well-crafted and fully documented the initial filing is composed.

Contact a FERS Disability Lawyer who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and begin to prepare for The Long Slog.

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 Disability Retirement from OPM: Options

We all have them; they are ‘out there’ in the objective, nether world.  Since they exist, the only remaining question is, Will we effectively exercise them?

Recognition is the first step; identification of the various ones in their plenitude is the second one; and finally choosing which one is the best course as the final and best decision.  Most of us fail to take the first step, and often skip over the second, and rush into the third without much thought.

In every challenging circumstance, there are almost always multiple options o choose from; it is up to us to seek them out, sift through them, analyze the potentiality of each, and then to make the best choice, whether based upon prudence or idealized empowerment.

It is this last step which often befuddles us;  For, the resulting consequences may require courage and fearless sacrifice — a giving up of something substantial for the short term in order to keep one’s eye upon what past philosophers have described as the “good, the true and the beautiful”.

And what if we run out of options?  Sometimes, patience is then required.  Time allowed to solve or resolve some issues is often the best option to choose, and likely to be the hardest to recognize, as patience often requires the most difficult of actions — that of inaction.

For Federal and Postal Employees contemplating preparing an effective application for Federal Disability Retirement under FERS, patience is sometimes called for; for, the process itself is a long and arduous bureaucratic morass, and it must be prepared carefully and meticulously.

If you have a medical condition which prevents you from performing one or more of the essential elements of your Federal Gov. or Postal job, contact a FERS Disability Retirement Lawyer who specializes in Federal Disability Law and know what your options are before you take the next and most important steps.

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 Disability Attorney Help: The Hammer or Screwdriver

They are two different tools or implements; of the latter, a connotation not of the tool itself, but the approach to take.  In grammar (do we even teach that in schools, anymore?), the term “implement” can be either a noun or a verb.  As a noun, it is a tool, utensil or other piece of equipment.  As a verb, it means to act upon a decision made or plan devised.  In either meaning, it is the application of X upon Y, as a tool to use or a decision to move forward upon.

As to the specific tools — the hammer or the screwdriver — the application of either depends upon the work to be done.  As metaphors, they denote differing approaches.  The way of the hammer is to pound whatever it is which needs to be driven in; the approach of the screwdriver is to slowly and methodically twist and turn the screw until it attaches and secures the two or more surfaces which previously remained separate and apart.  The manner and approach between the two differ considerably, but both in their completion manage to do the job required.

In Law, the two approaches require thought and planning.  The “hammer” approach, of pounding the law aggressively; the “screwdriver” way, of a quieter, more persuasive tone.  The choice between the two depends upon the circumstance, the audience, the goal and the plan.  For Federal Disability Retirement applicants, the manner and approach of applying the law is important.  What you say; how you say it; the hammer approach or the screwdriver manner — that is the province of an experienced lawyer.

Contact a FERS attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and consider whether in preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal or Postal Disability Retirement application under the Federal Employees’ Retirement System (FERS) with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, you should use the hammer approach, or the screwdriver methodology.

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 Disability Retirement Law: The Pulp of Dread

The definition of “pulp” is consistent in either context: Whether describing a mass of shapeless form, or a second-rate work of whatever genre, it describes an entity or fictional work — and perhaps even a mood or an environment — which is undesirable.

Pulp is the stuff in drinks which has not been filtered out; it is the leftovers of a fruit drink; it describes the mass-generated works of a failed author; or of a movie without any intellectual content, but merely for the entertainment of the lower senses.

The Pulp of Dread, similarly, is that sense of overwhelming disgust, fear or enmity which exists when something is about to happen, when a future event is about to come upon us, or of an expectation of foreboding disaster.  Perhaps it is about the “Holidays” upcoming, where we must put on our best faces and smile with aplomb, no matter how we feel or how we are.  Or, perhaps it merely refers to another workday because one’s medical condition prevents the Federal or Postal employee from being able to perform all of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job.

In the event of the latter — of the sense of pulp of dread for the Federal or Postal employee trying to hang on to his or her Federal or Postal career because of an ongoing medical condition — contact a lawyer who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law and consider getting rid of the pulp of dread.

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.

 

OPM Disability Retirement Law: Foreign Lands

Reading essays about foreign lands is often challenging where reference points and contexts are often presumed.  One immediately reaches for one’s Smartphone in order to Google the locations in relationship to a country — is it in the south of France, close to Spain?  It is near Paris?

Why that matters is another issue — for, somehow, if we can recognize a known entity, it makes us more comfortable in reading further about a strange area unknown.  Even if we have never been to Paris, we recognize that it is a large metropolitan city and can therefore relate it to our own experiences.  Context is important; reference points to that which is familiar somehow makes for greater understanding, comprehension, and appreciation.

Entering or reading about foreign lands is somewhat akin to preparing an effective application for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS.  The entire concept is strange and foreign to somehow whose life has been dedicated to work and advancement.  To suddenly have to stop working because of a medical condition, and then to file for early medical retirement, is tantamount to traveling to a foreign land.

To be successful in a Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS, it is advisable to contact a “tour guide” — a disability attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and thereby show you the familiar reference points in order to maneuver through the best sights, avoid the dangerous areas and pitfalls within the law, and to get you to the endpoint of the entire process: An approval from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

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.

 

Postal & Federal Disability Retirement: Opening Up

Flowers do it; shy individuals, traumatized children, people who feel ashamed; and societies, especially our own, as ours is a country that can stay bottled up only for so long.  Whether the opening up of our country will, in retrospect, be deemed to have occurred too soon, will be determined by the coming weeks.

The concept itself — of “opening up” — necessarily implies a previous state of have “closed down”.  It is an interesting combination of words, where a positive term (“opening”) is related with a direction (up) that is often associated with a transcendent location (i.e., heaven), whereas the “other” term (closing) implies a negative concept associated with hell, damnation, the source of punishment and grief, etc.  In either event, we shall see how history views the opening back up of our society.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition that has impacted his or her ability and capacity to perform all of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, “opening up” has always been part of the problem, because to do so would mean to admit that one’s career may have to be changed.

Consider filing for Federal Disability Retirement under FERS, and consult with an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law.  Opening up to an attorney will always be a confidential matter, and it may result in positive advice that can be usefully applied.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Medical Retirement for Federal Employees: The real me

Are there societies in which the non-existence of the concept of “self” reveals a qualitative difference in approaching life in general?  Does the fact that language embraces the singular personal pronoun in contradistinction to the plural, communal form (i.e., “we” or “us”) make a difference in the manner in which we see the world?

If “I” as the subject/nominative form or the “me” as the objective (accusative and dative form) were to be expunged from the English Lexicon, would the universe be shaken and the axis upon which rotation occurs be shattered such that earth would no longer remain as we have known it?  Or — beyond the modernity of linguistic philosophy, where there are no substantive philosophical problems which cannot be solved by Wittgensteinian means of clarifying, modifying or overhauling the language game utilized — will we merely go on as before and act “as if” the “I” and “me” did not exist, but carry on for selfish purposes, anyway?

There is always that hankering by each one of us that “if only…”.  If only people knew the “real me”; if only she could recognize the uniqueness of the “I” that doesn’t quite come out right because of my nervousness, shyness, etc.  If only the boss knew; if only my wife knew; if only my husband knew….

The cynic, of course, would counter with: Good thing no one knows the real you….  Or, is it really just another form of the philosophical conundrum that we have cornered ourselves into — sort of like Ryle’s “Ghost in the Machine” argument where Cartesian dualism doesn’t exist, and so there is no “real me” beneath the surface of what we present to the world — that, in fact, we really are boorish, one-dimensional and unsophisticated creatures who put on a good show, and that is all there is to the “I” and “me”: A composite of the Neanderthal who puts on a necktie and pronounces words and phrases in monosyllabic forms of grunts and groans?

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition and who must consider filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, the real “I” or “me” is certainly not the person whom the Agency has tagged as “less than whole” because of the medical condition itself.

Yet, that is how the Federal Agency and the Postal unit will often approach the unfortunate circumstances of the Federal employee or Postal worker who reveals an intent to file for OPM Disability Retirement benefits under FERS.  No longer as part of the “we” or “us” team of Federal employees or Postal workers, the Federal Disability Retirement applicant is often shunned and sequestered, and generally harassed and placed under administrative sanctions — merely for revealing a vulnerability resulting from a medical condition.

That is essentially where the problem of the “real me” resides: Of how we pigeonhole one another.

To avoid that as much as possible, it is a good idea to consult with an Attorney who Specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, to fight back against the notion of the real me that the Federal Agency or the Postal Service wants to depict, as that malingering worker who once was X, but is now seen as Y.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Lawyer Representation for OPM Disability Claims: The Cynic’s Corner

The Cynic’s Corner is that part of the mindset that has encountered the worst of human behavior; where sunshine is merely a prelude to a dark cloud; when brightness is predicted to last for only a short while; and where — when a declaration is made with a joyful sound of delightful exclamations like, “It’s the weekend!” — is immediately followed by the undermining postscript, “Yes, and then Monday follows.”

The view that life’s brutish perspective can be seen in stark contrast with the idealist’s naïveté that everything has a bright side to it, that human depravity always wins out by love, and sunshine always follows a cloud burst or a week of rainy Sundays.  Is moderation always the answer to the charge that truth never fits upon the spectrum of excessiveness, and it is the extremes of perspectives that defy the logic of truth?

The Cynic’s Corner is attained and reserved by and for the aged; for it is only by experience of life’s encounters with daily human depravity that one can come to the conclusion that the Cynic’s Corner has reached.  The fresh smile of youth’s hope; the innocent eyes for the swan in flight or the fawn in the hunter’s headlights; these will dissipate like time, wrinkle-less laughter and the fresh bones of a healthy body; and then the cynic whispers, “But in the end, we all wither and die.”

Perhaps.  Or, more to the point, Yes, there is certainly an end to everything, but isn’t the point not of how it ends, but of the manner it is lived?

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition where the medical condition itself has reached a critical point of “no return”, it is important to prepare an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, whether you are under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, and submit it in a timely manner with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

If you are already a member of the Cynic’s Corner, then you will have already concluded that everything that could go wrong in the preparation, formulation and submission of the Federal Disability Retirement application, can and often does go wrong, and that is why consulting with a FERS Disability Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement law is an essential feature and component of the entire administrative process, lest you have renounced your seat at the Cynic’s Corner and have instead joined that “other” club — the Knights of Naïveté.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Employee Disability Information: Favoritism

There was an interesting article the other day, where certain public schools were attempting to banish the use of the term “best friend” from the ordinary and daily usage by students.  Now, the immediate reaction by some would be:  Uh-oh, here comes another “politically correct” movement that is based upon the foolish idea that social engineering can be attained merely by manipulating language’s daily discourse by simply expunging the vocabulary we engage.

That is what Orwell’s point was, isn’t it — in that part in his novel, 1984, when there is the discussion of the New-speak dictionary that would be coming out in the fictionalized society of Oceania — of a dystopian world that determines thought by controlling the available words we use?  By expunging and extracting, diminishing and destroying certain words, phrases, concepts, etc., we then limit the ability of an individual to engage in certain thoughts — thereby restricting and ultimately erasing any capacity to discuss and communicate such conceptual constructs.

Some positive idealists would believe that human creativity would somehow remain victorious over such totalitarian methods, and find ways to communicate, then create “new” ideas — newer than the anomaly and counter-insurgency of New-speak — and still come up with alternative words and phrases to replace any such attempt at erasure and extinguishment.  But even Orwell doubted the success of such an endeavor, no matter how hard we try; and thus the dark ending to the novel, 1984.

But back to “outlawing” the references made on the playgrounds all across the country or, likely, across the spectrum of the world — would two or more children still engage in the behavior of “best friends” regardless of the expungement of the language identifying it as such; and if so, what would be the purpose of extinguishing the language if the underlying act itself continues to remain?  Won’t children on playgrounds the world over engage in favoritism and concomitant exclusion because unexplainable attraction is the natural order of the universe?

Of course, social engineering initiated at an early age has a purposive direction which can be seen in later life — as in the Federal employee and U.S. Postal worker, where favoritism prevails no matter how many laws, statutes, regulations etc. are imposed and upheld.  Fiefdoms of every kind will always exist, and totalitarianism will often prevail.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition where the medical condition begins to prevent the Federal or Postal employee from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, the concept of “favoritism” — growing out of the tender years of “best friends” but taking on another name and form — begins to take on greater meaning.  For, its opposite — disfavor — begins to be applied for the Federal employee or U.S. Postal worker who is no longer “as productive”, not fully a “member of the team”, and shows signs of slowing down; and then the harassment begins, just like when we were children and the pecking order always favored the bully and disfavored the weakling runts of the world.

At that point, it may be time to consult with an experienced attorney and begin the process of initiating a Federal Disability Retirement application, to be submitted to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset — sort of like going and “telling” on that bully.  Maybe so — but it is a necessary next step.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Medical Retirement under FERS: In the end…

What is it about a phrase that predictably tells us about the mood, content or direction of the mindset?  If a person begins with, “Well, it all began when…” — we will often stifle a yawn, try to make excuses and begin heading for the exits.  Self-aggrandizing, prefatory remarks that set the stage for a narrative delineation that includes private details of individual lives often bore the pants off of most people, and yet many will “tell all”, as if such intimate details trigger a prurient interest within each of us.

Then, of course, there is the opposite, as in: “In the end…”.  What fills in the ellipses?  In the end…the world will all go to the trash bin of history’s footnotes; In the end…we all die, anyway?  Such opening phrases and closing remarks leave out the vast chasm of filling in “the middle”, of course.  How does a story begin, tell the narrative in an interesting manner in “the middle” and end with a bang?  That is the problem, isn’t it?  Most of us don’t have a clue as to how to tell an interesting tale.

And what about non-fiction — of a historical narrative or of a biography?  What makes for an interesting “telling” of it — of what details of a person’s life; what incidents should be included?  What peripheral, tangential details will make for an interesting and engaging read?  Is a biography incomplete if the author leaves out certain details, or does it matter?  What “events” are presumed and should therefore be excluded, and can it really be said that certain excluded moments are considered to be excluded at all?

For example, it is presumed that a person goes to the bathroom a few times a day, at least — but what if, during the narrative of a biography or a historical period, such activities are never mentioned?  Can we call up the author and demand to know why such historical “facts” were excluded from the biography of, say, an important figure?

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 Federal or Postal job, it may be necessary to begin to formulate an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, to be submitted to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset.

As part of that “administrative process”, it is necessary to complete SF 3112A, Applicant’s Statement of Disability.

In preparing the narrative story of one’s medical condition, it is important to convey the essential “story” — a historical account; a prefatory introduction; a “middle”; and an “In the end…”.

What details to include; the choice of words; whether in the first-person or 3rd-person narrative; of what legal arguments to include; whether to “exclude” certain details without being charged with “falsifying” a claim, etc. — these are all important considerations in the proper, complete and sufficient preparation, formulation and filing of an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, and it is vitally important to do it “the right way” when preparing SF 3112A — the core and essence of a FERS Disability Retirement claim — which, in the end, is the story of your tale that needs to be told.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire