Federal Employee Medical Retirement: The Comfort of Stagnation

It is easy to embrace it; and though we recognize what it may do to the water we drink, it appears not to bother us when it comes to our daily living.  Stagnant water can breed diseases and cause intestinal discomfort, but for our lives, it is often the default mode of surviving.  The monotony of reverting to old habits; of refusing to change; of mere existence replacing ambition, motivation, negation of newness and refusal to entertain different ideas, foreign concepts — in a word, to become an amoeba.

There is comfort in stagnation.  Yet, there is an obligation and a duty as one grows older, to listen to youth; to consider new ways and progressive ideas; to not allow the old to rule merely because it has “always been done that way”.  Yes, tradition is important; habit it comforting; sitting in the same sofa day after day and taking a nap provides a secure sense of monotony.  But in the end, is it good for you?

Medical conditions tend to push a person into that state of stagnation.  With pain, with cognitive dysfunctions, one wants to curl up in a fetal position and allow for stagnation to rule.  But the point of life is to live; it is to embrace the future, where the future is the palatine of the “self”.

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 worker to perform all of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, consider refuting, refusing to submit to, and recanting the concept of stagnation.

Consider preparing an effective Federal or Postal Employee Disability Retirement application under FERS through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, and turning away from the comfort of stagnation.  Contact a Federal Attorney who specializes in Federal OPM Disability Retirement Law, and begin the process of turning away from the comfort of stagnation, and instead, traveling the path of the stunning — of a yet brighter future.

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 Medical Retirement: Consider What Was Lost

In modernity, there is an obsessive fetish to be positive; to ignore negativity; to maintain a smile throughout, and ultimately, to have “happiness” as a goal.

Roger Scruton, the late great English Philosopher and one of those under-appreciated giants of thoughtful intellect, wrote a book about the importance of pessimism, entitled, The Uses of Pessimism and the Danger of False Hope.  In it, he argues essentially that pessimism is a characteristic required for survival, and the abandonment of it is a dangerous artificiality which goes against the natural instincts of man.

Rousseau, similarly, cautioned against artificial accoutrements which posed a danger to man’s survival.  In accepting and adopting unnatural characteristics, consider what was lost — of a sense of community; of a humanity replaced by selfishness.

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, consider what is lost — was lost — when you pushed yourself to keeping working: Health; joy; ability to enjoy even the least of life’s offerings.  Is it all worth it?

Consider preparing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS, through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, and consider what was lost just in the struggle to maintain what you have.

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 under FERS: Societal Paralysis

At every turn, society seems to have become paralyzed.  Nothing seems to “work”, anymore — and fear abounds, whether about the collapse of moral norms and the ethos of behavior, or in the bureaucracies of government.

Perhaps it is just a perception — of having been constantly fed a steady diet of dystopian novels, movies and video programs, and we now are paying the price where virtual reality feeds upon a dim-lit perspective embracing such a viewpoint, and further self-actualizing such a perspective.

The national debt grows; subversion of government seems to be embraced by half of the population; and the basic foundations of society often appear to lack the focus of a goal-oriented character.  In the end, we seem to be left to our own devices.  Of course, the macro is merely the aggregation of the micro, and so societal paralysis is merely the compendium of individual inability.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition such that the medical condition paralyzes one from continuing in one’s Federal or Postal career, the option to prepare an effective Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS is a consideration and step forward beyond the paralysis of individual inaction.

The U.S. Office of Personnel Management is alive and well, and exists in order to subvert and stop a Federal Disability Retirement application — another form of societal paralysis, where one is prevented from gaining a benefit for which one is entitled to.

Contact a FERS Disability Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and don’t let the societal paralysis abounding to prevent you from asserting your individual right as a Federal or Postal employee to a benefit which should not be impacted by the greater societal paralysis.

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: The Vigilant Life

This is a life which requires vigilance: Constant, consistent, persistence acuity, both to rebut stagnation and encourage progress.  Life is a vibrancy — physically, of cells regenerating; mentally, of recognizing and fending off dangers; of a society which cares not for personal tragedy; within a context of a crumbling community.

Vigilance throughout is required — vigilance in guiding one’s family; vigilance in helping your children to maneuver through the difficult times; vigilance in maintaining one’s career, benefits earned and livelihood acquired.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition such that the medical condition no longer allows you to continue in your Federal or Postal career, vigilance is required both in obtaining your FERS Federal Disability Retirement benefits, and in protecting and maintaining them.

Whether you are seeking to secure your FERS Disability Retirement benefits, or are in danger from OPM taking them away because they claim that you have been “restored” or “recovered”, contact a FERS Disability Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement benefits and recognize that this vigilant life oftentimes requires vigorous legal representation.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Employment Disability Retirement Benefits: At Least…

At least I have my dog; at least we all have each other; at least it wasn’t a complete loss; at least I have my health….  Is it because of the base-line of life’s fortunes that we may maintain our sanity and allow for hope to thrive?  And if we were to ever lose the “at least” — is that when life becomes too unbearable to withstand, or will we simply find another replacement “at least”?

Take the following hypothetical: A tornado or other natural disaster destroys a home; everything is lost; the person who survived stands with his or her dog and says to the reporter, “At least I survived”.  The next moment, the survivor suffers a heart attack and is bedridden for the rest of his remaining days.  Once the “at least” was taken away, was there a replacement?  Is the final “at least” the one which goes thus: “At least I am still alive”?  And when that is taken away and silence follows, is that the answer to the question: Is there anything beyond the last “at least”?

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 job, the question of “at least” is an important one.  For, when the medical condition strikes, the “at least” question is not: “At least I still have my health”, but might rather be, “At least I still have my job”.

It is the latter concern — when the medical condition begins to impact one’s ability and capacity to perform all of the essential elements of one’s job — that may lead to consideration in filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, ultimately leading to the further “at least” declaration: “At least I have my Federal Disability Retirement annuity.”

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Filing for OPM Disability Retirement: Keys to the universe

When a metaphor turns into a reality that we all begin to believe in, the fantasies of our own making have become distorted and we need to begin the process of regaining the sanity once embraced but which is now lost in the surrealism of time’s warped viewpoint.  It is by simile, analogy and metaphor that one gains a greater understanding of circumstances, fields and subjects, but it is also by such vehicles that we can misplace reality with a virtualized representation of a universe nonexistent.

Sermons abound with metaphors involving a “key” to this or that; or even of those positive thinkers and corporate motivational speakers who talk about the 10-steps to this or that, the “ultimate key to success”, and similar such drivel that makes one think and believe in the existence of a singular implement that needs to find that lost sliver of hope, insert it into the corrugated slit cut into the brass knob that stands between success or failure — and suddenly, the doors unlock, the entranceway is cleared and one can step into the future yet unanticipated by the fullness of contentment.

Do we really believe that there is such a key?  How often do we speak in terms of a metaphor, a simile and an analogy, but over time our spoken words lose the clear distinction that the simile was meant to ascertain?

We begin with: “It is as if there is a key to the universe,” or, “It’s like having the keys to the universe.” Then, gradually, the “as if” and the “like” are dropped, quietly, unnoticed, like the short-cut that assured one of arriving earlier if only the right turn into the thick fields of the wild forest is taken with confidence: “I need the keys to the universe.”

No longer the metaphor, and certainly without the distinctiveness of the simile; the keys become the reality without the padded divide of recognizing that existence cannot be forced to appear in reality; our minds have tricked ourselves into believing.  Then, we often come to realize that the metaphor which purported to “unlock” (a metaphor itself following upon another) whatever it is that we believed was previously inaccessible was nothing more than a mundane process or methodology that we could have figured out ourselves — sort of like (there we go again with a simile) the Master Burglar who spends hours trying to determine the combination to a safe that had all along been left open by a careless bank clerk.

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, whether under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, the “keys to the universe” of obtaining an OPM Disability Retirement are quite simple and straightforward: Prove that the medical condition prevents you from performing one or more of the essential elements of your job.

However, as the devil remains in the details, the simplicity of the metaphorical “key” to a successful outcome is not dissimilar (a double-negative that turns out to mean “similar”, sort of “like” a simile) to most such Keys to the universe: a systematic, methodological compiling of proof combined with legal precedents to cite in presenting a compelling tale to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, such that the “key” is effective enough to “unlock” an approval from them.  Of course, as with all metaphors, the analogy is like the simile that refuses to be like other such metaphors, or so it is often said in the vicious circularity of language’s mysteries.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

Medical Retirement under FERS & CSRS: The option of nothing

The path of least resistance is often to simply do nothing.  To make an affirmative choice is sometimes a painful one involving sacrifice and steps taken which will determine an outcome, later to be judged by retrospective insight, as to whether it was the “right” one or a “wrong” one.

To negate, refute or otherwise do the opposite, and to say “no” in the choice-making process, is also an “affirmative” one, if only in the negative sense.  It is still a call made, a judgment asserted, and while the “no” may not be able to arrive at a retrospective viewpoint as to whether it was the “right” one or the “wrong” one (precisely because, in the very negation of making a choice, one may never see any further consequences, but merely a nothingness that prevails from the option to not do that something, which is essentially a double-negative that results in nothing).

The worst option to assume is to allow lapse to occur – to do nothing, neither affirmatively nor negatively, and allow outside circumstances to determine the course of fate.  In taking such a path of least resistance, two things occur: First, you have left it in the hands of circumstances, and failed to take any affirmative steps in the allowance of lapse; and Second, the fact that you will never know it was a good or bad idea to allow for the lapse means that you have forsaken the entire decision-making process, and thus you disengaged yourself from the importance of life’s major participation.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who are considering 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, the Statute of Limitations that imposes a restriction upon post-separation filing is One (1) Year.

Thus, the law is as follows: Upon separation, whether by termination or resignation, of a Federal employee, that Federal employee has up until 1 year to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits.  If the Federal employee files for Federal Disability Retirement within 364 days of the separation from Federal Service (give yourself at least 1 day, just to be on the safe side), then no harm is done.

If the Federal or Postal employee determines not to file (i.e., a negative – affirmative decision), then so be it, and after the 365th day, that Federal or Postal employee is forever prevented from asserting his or her rights under the Federal Disability Retirement laws, acts, statutes and regulations.

If the Federal or Postal employee simply does nothing – neither making an affirmative or a negative decision, and simply allows for the time to lapse and the opportunity to pass – then the path of least resistance has been taken, with the opportunity to engage in the decision-making process forever lost.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Medical Retirement from Civil Service: Envy without hope

Can a footman in former times, or a scullery maid while scrubbing the floors, experience envy when class structures forbade any hope of advancing beyond?  In days before of rigid demarcations of social and class differentiations, where terms in modernity like “upward mobility” or “moving up the ladder” (have you ever wondered at the condescending connotation of such terms, where “up” is the direction of the movement, as if one were ascending to the heavens, even when such barometric activity often corresponded to moral degradation and sacrifice of one’s character?) were unheard of, was there an inner intimation of envy between watchful eyes by servants who observed the plenitude of decadence and obscene abundance of wasteful riches?

We can, of course, comprehend such sensations of jealousy and comparative desires in our times, for there is no inherent cultural device firmly implanted within the normative constraints, anymore.  As stories abound of the proverbial “rags-to-riches” narratives; and whether by intensive efforts of self-will and do-good stories, or of Wall Street wolves clawing and cheating, or even of the occasional lottery winner who accidentally wandered into a corner mart and took a chance with a last dollar, the conceptual animation within the realm of possibilities exists as to changing one’s circumstances, and with that comes the concomitant feeling or awareness of comparative lack.

But can such a sensation exist in a universe, both in the material realm as well as in the cognitive recesses of one’s imagination and creative thought processes, if one has not a concurrent concept of the possibility, or even the minimal probability, of hoping for an expectation of change?  If there is such hope, how then can there be envy, unless nature allows for an emotion of pure futility where hopelessness can incentivize a pathway towards an unfulfilled nothingness?

Nature is purposive; the teleological sense within us requires that instinctive sensations inherently existent follow the rule of Ockham’s razor, and refuse to allow for futility’s baseless conduct of entrance to nothingness.  Now, one might argue, as Rousseau did, that evils created by society’s influence beyond man’s natural innocence while in the state of nature, engendered by malevolent devices surfacing as appendages upon convoluted addendums not otherwise found except in complex civilized settings, go counter to such arguments; and, certainly, just as H.G. Wells and all dystopian writers since, and others such as Jules Verne possessed imaginations beyond the societal constraints imposed upon the creative mind, and so one might still be able to project such negative feelings without hope or expectations.

Again, however, it would be one based upon a deep chasm of futile exchanges.  That is the question and concern that the Federal employee or U.S. Postal worker must contend with, when a medical condition begins to prevent the Federal or Postal worker from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal position.  Can the Federal employee or U.S. Postal worker project into the future, a life without the chosen career to keep one occupied, and still remain happy?

Envy is the killjoy of distracted minds, and hope is the antecedent nectar that allows for poverty and discontent to continue.  For the Federal employee or U.S. Postal worker, however, it may not be a question of envy without hope; rather, it is often just a pragmatic choice compelled by circumstances of chronic and debilitating medical conditions, and the hope resides in the promise that a Federal Disability Retirement application, filed with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, will be approved and allow for the Federal or Postal employee to focus upon the priority of a future not without hope – that of regaining one’s health, stamina and capacity to regain one’s equilibrium.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement Attorney: Uncharacteristic Behavior

It is the clash between an expectation and the actualization of an encounter, which determines one’s perspective of self-fulfillment of a belief, or a resulting dismay from failure of verifying the basis of a paradigm.  Characteristic behavior is thus that type of human encounter which meets with, or exceeds, one’s predetermined paradigm of what one has already believed to be so; to act out of that previously considered belief system, by definition makes it fall outside of the realm of such expectation.

For the Federal employee and the U.S. Postal worker, the bureaucratic complexity of the entire administrative process of 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 normally not a surprise, and meets with or even exceeds, the expectation of an already-formed paradigm of what constitutes the “characteristic behavior” of the system as a whole.

It is the anomaly of the century when efficiency, helpfulness and pleasantries prevail throughout the process of filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, where one hears with surprise and shock that it was “uncharacteristic”.  Sadly, that tells us something.  While somewhat unfortunate, we must always remember that the road of every bureaucratic process is paved with personalities of every type.  We tend to lump the entirety of an administrative process into a single cup and cauldron of judgment, but the reality is that there are multiple categories, just as there are different types of people throughout the universe, distinctly compartmentalized into:  helpful; friendly; efficient; nasty; backstabber; fair; unfair; loyal; unpredictable; just to name a few.

The process of filing a Federal Disability Retirement application through OPM can be a stressful one, if only because it is based upon an obvious stressor to begin with:  a medical condition which impacts one’s ability to perform one’s Federal or Postal job.  But it is not the bureaucratic process itself which adds or detracts from the inherent complexities of the process, but the behavior — characteristic or not — of those who must help along the way or hinder the necessary transition of the Federal or Postal employee, from one of active Federal or Postal employee to that of disability annuitant.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Disability Retirement Lawyer: Time Was, When…

Reminiscences represent a harbinger of the state of existence and the mental attitude of individuals; once engaged, they reveal the past-oriented focus, as opposed to the future dreams of youth.

Do young people reminisce?  At what point does one engage in such leisurely exercise?  And the spectrum of historical context, or the lack thereof — does the limited span of a past life determine the narrow course of future remembering?

It is always a danger to place too glowing and positive a light on the past; for, as present circumstances may be a pocket of discontent, so the warped perspective may, by contrast, create a fictional scenery of the past by unknowingly diminishing and extinguishing less notable events once experienced.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who are subjected to the hostility of one’s own agency because of the manifested impact of a medical condition upon one’s capacity to perform the essential elements of one’s positional duties, it is natural to embrace the refrain, “In the good old days”.  Health often brings that careless attitude of flippant fortitude; it is when we have something that we unknowingly take for granted, and when it becomes diminished, or is suddenly gone, the human tendency of regret and return of rectitude begins to pervade.

Filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, is often the pathway out of the muddle of reminiscence; there is, perhaps not yet known to the Federal or Postal employee, life beyond the Federal government or the Postal Service.  If too much time is spent in the past, then the robber barons of yesteryear pervade in the present, to rob one’s future.

Filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through OPM is not merely for escapism from a current “bad” situation; it is to secure the future such that there will be one, where one day in the twilight of a life, one can look upon the current negative circumstances and begin with the reminiscence of, “Time was, when…”

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire