FERS Disability Law: From Sanity to Madness

How quickly does it appear to disintegrate; and, yet, upon closer reflection, evaluation and inspection — of the signs missed; the indicia ignored; the greater positivity of perspective misplaced.

On the microcosmic scale, the seemingly “happy” family — of the regular routine of school, work, activities and the busy schedule confined to the kitchen table’s calendar marked with fulfilling lives; and then, the “sudden” disintegration by infidelity, followed by accusations, signs missed, evidence ignored, of claims to underlying unhappiness and a world gone awry.

On a macro-scale — of dealing with a rogue nation; of lavishing with red carpets, acceptance into the greater “league of nations” and believing that by encouraging comfort and affluence, the core of authoritarianism will diminish.  Then — invasion, mayhem, cruelty and bestiality of warring stratagems; and we “suddenly” awaken to a universe where yesterday appeared sane and today became madness.

From sanity to madness can occur in an instant — from individual lives to geopolitical spheres.  But of the signs we missed, the indicators ignored.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition where the the medical condition prevents the Federal or Postal employee from performing one or more of the basic elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, the sanity of daily living can quickly become interrupted by the emergence of an injury or medical condition impacting one’s career, daily living, and general livelihood.

Sure, there were probably some indicators early on about the severity and chronic nature of the developing medical condition, but more importantly, it is of relevance to evaluate and assess in the immediacy of its impact upon your ability and capacity to perform the essential elements of your job.

Contact a Federal Disability Retirement Attorney to discuss the viability of preparing, formulating and filing an application for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under the Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS), through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, before the quick-step marching band which plays to the silence of the crowd doesn’t turn the relative calm of sanity into a mad-dash of madness.

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.

 

Postal & Federal Employee Disability Retirement: Aimless Wanderings

Aimless”, of course, points to the lack of an aim — as in a target or a specific destination point.  “Wanderings” can refer to either a mental state or a physical experience of moving from Point A to “somewhere else”.  As a mental state, we all daydream and meander about in a thoughtless fashion; of traveling within our inner consciousness from one conceptual bubble to the next; and sometimes — or often — these thought processes are “aimless” insofar as the creative mind does not necessarily involve a strict, logical sequence of thought.

Aimless wanderings are considered, generally speaking, in a negative sense inasmuch as any action which lacks a purpose is often judged to be pointless.  However, not all aimless wanderings, whether of a physical nature or of a mental state, are intentional.  Sometimes, being lost is a phenomena where fault cannot be ascribed, and so we aimlessly wander about in an attempt to find our bearings.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition such that the medical condition itself makes a person feel as if he or she is aimlessly wandering about concerning one’s future, career goals, etc., you may want to consult with a Federal Disability Retirement Lawyer and consider the options available for your future.

Aimlessly wandering about in the morass of a bureaucratic process — that of filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS — will not necessarily point you in the right direction.  Rather, get the advice of an OPM Disability Retirement Lawyer and have your aimless wanderings become more focused and purpose-driven; for, the future is not some fuzzy destination out in the wilderness — it is an aim just around the corner.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

FERS Employee Disability Retirement: The Legacy of Achievement

We all dream of having contributed to society in greater or lesser ways.  Whether individual achievements are enough, where private satisfaction is gained through a restricted circle of those “in the know”, is doubtful; and even of leaving a name behind on a building, a statue or a commemorative stamp — what difference does it ultimately make, the cynic would wonder aloud?

When we pass by a building with a nameplate in one of the bricks or chiseled into the mortar, do we even acknowledge it, let alone recognize who that person was or what contribution he or she had made to the world?  Do we stand and Google the name and ooh-and-ah at the achievements bestowed?  Or of a statute with the proverbial fountain spewing daily freshness of recycled water, of perhaps a general who had once-upon-a-time led a charge and captured or killed a great opposing force — is that what we consider an achievement worthy of a bronze emblem?

And how about the more subtle legacy, of leaving imprints and personality traits, whether positive or negative, in one’s children or grandchildren?  “Oh, he is just like his father!”  “She reminds me of her mother.”  Or of those quiet achievements by challenged individuals daily around the world; we know not what effort it took, but for the person making the effort in the silence of his or her private suffering.

Achievement is a funny animal; it is ultimately a feeling; otherwise, why would we build statues to declare it to the world if we truly believed in the legacy entombed?

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition such that the medical condition no longer allows the Federal or Postal employee to perform all of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, perhaps the achievements one had hoped for in one’s career are no longer achievable, and thus the “legacy” of achievement is no longer possible.

In that event, the Federal or Postal worker needs to reconsider the values once sought, and to re-prioritize the goals pursued.  Perhaps “health” was not part of the original list, but should be; and that is where an effective preparation of a Federal Disability Retirement application comes into play: One’s career was never the legacy to achieve; it was merely down on the list of priorities to be sought, where one’s health and well-being should have been higher on the list to begin with.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill
FERS Disability Lawyer

 

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

 

Filing for OPM Disability Retirement: Palatable possibilities

We often hear of that which is “possible”, then immediately pause to consider the probabilities of such declared possibilities.  For, isn’t it possible that there are martians on the far side of the moon, or that we all live in a dream, dreamt by the fragile whisperings of a butterfly, or that everything that we see, hear and experience is just nothing more than pure bosh, and Bertrand Russell was quite right after all, that our rumblings of metaphysical yearnings were merely a result of a stomach virus that needed an antacid to cure?

At what point are possibilities presented no longer palatable, and where are the limits of our imaginations such that reality clashes with fantasy and the medium between the two becomes so stretched that we cannot fathom their practical effects?  Have we come to a point now where supermarket tabloids are just as believable as mainline newspapers that cross the thresholds between truth and opinion?  Is virtual reality just as pleasurable as “real” reality, and does the realness of reality depend merely upon one’s perspective and opinion and how we view things?

Then, of course, there is the reality of a medical condition, and everything comes crashing down into a singular reality: mortality and health tend to bring us “back to the basics”.

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, what possibilities are palatable; whether possibilities presented are meaningful; it all comes down to the pragmatic choices from three: Stay, walk away or file 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.

The real possibilities in life are generally quite simple; it is the luxury of the healthy to entertain the greater expanse of palatable possibilities, but for the Federal or Postal employee who is faced with a chronic and progressively debilitating medical condition, the choices are stark and limited.  It is within those limitations that the palatable possibilities must be carefully chosen, and such course of actions to be chosen should be advised and guided by a consultation with an attorney who specializes in OPM Disability Retirement, lest the palatable possibilities turn out to be an unpalatable probability chosen out of a mistaken belief in the existence of palatable possibilities.

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