FERS Medical Retirement from the OPM: For better or for…

Do we consider what follows the ellipses when making such a vow?

In youth, when the days of summer are endless and the rainfalls are merely seen as sweetness in dancing folly, do we ever consider the meaning, the phrase, the serious connotation of the “worse”, or do we just focus upon the “better” as in, “This is good, tomorrow is better, and the day after will only get better than better”?

Perhaps it is a genetic advantage inherent for survival’s sake that youth never considers the dark side of the moon; for, to be young and innocent of thoughts forsaking a future yet to become is to move forward with bold forthrightness, and only the fittest would survive such folly of thoughtless advancement.

Would armies have defeated the odds if trepidation of thought were to dominate?  Would the genetic pool of the daring be muddled if not for the foolish stumbling into a future unknown?  What fool thinks about the “worse” when the “better” is right before your eyes?

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 thought of “worse” never came to mind until the medical condition first appeared, then remained, then worsened, then became a chronic condition like an uninvited guest who overstays the welcome of niceties left unstated.

Filing for OPM Disability Retirement benefits takes into account both perspectives of the vow that was once stated but never thought of: It is because of the “worse” but it is for the “better”.

The “worse” is the ongoing medical condition that has deteriorated such that it necessitates filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management; and the “better” is that, once your Federal Disability Retirement application is approved, you can focus upon your health, the tomorrow of a future yet uncertain, and the commitment to another vow left unstated: To take care of yourself.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Retirement for Psychiatric or Physical Incapacity: One among many

Does it tell us anything that we recognize that we are merely one among many?  Does such an awareness actually add anything to one’s conscious life, or is it just another one of those pithy egotistical “self-realization” statements that purports to sound profound but adds little, if anything, to any existential intuition beyond the words themselves?

Does a lone dog pampered by its owner have a similar awareness when it is taken for a walk, encounters other dogs or sees rabbits scurrying across the suburban landscape?  Does it pause and reflect: I am merely one among many?  Is language a prerequisite to conscious awareness of one’s place in the universe, or is the mere fact of existence enough to bring about an instinctive realization of the same relevance?

To be “one among many” certainly brings about a certain perspective, does it not — perhaps of one’s significance or irrelevance; that each has a burden or part to play, but is not necessarily responsible for the entirety of the problems encountered; and perhaps even of a sense of community or sharing-ness, that one is merely one cog in a complex multitude of wheels spinning about in a universe that is often impervious and uncaring?

Medical conditions, however, have a way of destroying even that perspective, in that it makes loners of us all.  When a medical condition hits, it leaves one with a profound sense of isolation, where one begins to think and believe that no one else in the universe experiences the pain, tumult, angst and loss of joy, and that the one suffering from the medical condition is all alone in the universe.  To that extent, the statement that one is “one among many” helps to remind one that, No, others too have gone through similar trials and circumstances, and such suffering is not unique in this world.

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, it is important to recognize that while each person’s condition is unique, it is also shared by many others.

Federal Disability Retirement itself is a recognition that the frailty of the human condition must sometimes allow for an end to a career, but that further, productivity in some other career or vocation is still possible.

Federal employees and Postal workers are one among many, and preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, to be filed with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, is to share the burden of self-realization that while your medical condition may indeed be unique to you, you are not alone in the need to change direction and move on into another and more promising future where the one among many may be many more than you first thought.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Disability Retirement under FERS & CSRS: DDD

It is what Moynihan said so many years ago, of constantly reinterpreting normative constructs such that the subtle, insidious reduction of acceptance allows for normalization of that which was rejected and repugnant just a few years before, a generation ago, or never at all.  Or, it may refer to a medical condition of the spine – of the condition identified as “degenerative disc disease”; but in either case, the acronym used as a convenient route for linguistic economy has some similarities involved.

For, in both cases, DDD allows for the slow and steady deterioration of a process – the former, of a cultural rot and standards once ensconced firmly in the very fabric of society; the latter, of a slow process of debilitating “eating away” that reveals a condition progressive over time, decaying by crumbling of bone, cartilage and repetitive overuse traversing time’s despondency due to labor’s unnatural pose.  Or, one can just make it up and ascribe it to a tripartite conceptual compound; for instance, “dual deficit denominations” or “dark, dim and dumb”, or other such consternations of linguistic accolades.

In any event, it is the original of the two that seems to share a common ground of meaning; for, in both, it is the essence of a slow process of change; one, cultural in nature, of an acceptance of lesser standards whether by willful determination or accidental submission; the other, the debilitating disease that – over time and resulting from old age – progressively worsens.  One could simplify the concepts by dismissing the first as “cognitive” and the other as “physical”.

In either case, for Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical conditions, such that the medical condition impacts the Federal or Postal worker’s ability and capacity to continue in the same position and compels one to consider filing for Federal Disability Retirement, both concepts can apply.

For, an expansive and liberal interpretation of Moynihan’s argument is similar to the Federal or Postal employee’s acceptance of the lower standard both in terms of his or her quality of life, as well as in seeing the adversarial nature of the Federal agency or the Postal facility as “normal” in the treatment of its employees.  And, as to the “other” definition of DDD – of the chronic neck or back pain – whether in a sedentary job or a very physical one, the high distractibility of pain that impacts upon one’s capacity and ability to safely focus, concentrate and attend to the job itself is often a qualification for Federal Disability Retirement benefits.

Thus, the acronym itself – whether for “defining deviancy down” or as “degenerative disc disease” – can fit the proverbial bill in considering the option of Federal Disability Retirement benefits, submitted through another acronym of sorts – OPM – otherwise known as the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Medical Retirement from Federal Government Employment: Of Karl Popper’s ‘World 3’

Karl Popper’s division of the world into three clean segments of definable universes was, on the one hand, quite controversial — especially as the esoteric world of philosophy had been steadily ‘progressing‘ towards pure materialism and scientism; and yet, on the other, self-evident to almost a simplistic, tautological fault.  Perhaps that is the very implication of profundity: it is that which appears so basic and elementary as to presuppose idiocy, but containing such inherent complexity as to remain beyond the reach of most.

In simple terms, the division of the world followed the classic lines of human history and linear development of evolutionary concordance: ‘World 1’ referred to the physical universe surrounding us; ‘World 2’, the purely psychological make-up of human beings, with a special concern to Popper concerning the internal pain and anguish which we feel; and of ‘World 3’ — that universe which is the subject of this short blog, the aggregate of human products and man’s creative injection into the world, comprised of art, literature, cars, buildings, customs and normative behavior, including dress, style, fashion, etc.

There is, of course, inevitable interaction and intersecting between the bifurcated ‘worlds’ — for example, a book of literature (say, Salinger’s The Catcher in the Rye) would be both an object existing in ‘World 1’ as well as a product of human creativity from ‘World 3’. But note the peculiarity of the overlap, which makes for a unique phenomenological observation: Say you had 2 copies of the book, but one which was published in January, 2015, and another with the stated date of July, 1951.  Consider further the added element that in the latter edition, a scribble appears, which happens to be the autograph of the author.

From the perspective of Popper’s ‘World 1’, both objects would appear to be essentially identical — with the former intact, and the latter somewhat damaged because of the graffiti defiling a clean page.  However, from the vantage point of the person who possesses and ‘owns’ (a concept which would clearly belong to Popper’s ‘World 3’, as well) the autographed object, a sudden recognition of value, wealth and uniqueness would immediately attach — leaving aside intersecting points with ‘World 2’ involving envy, jealousy, awe and disbelief (which would be shared by the undersigned writer).  Thus do the various and variegated ‘worlds’ of Karl Popper posit for our study, agreement/disagreement, and further reflection.

Such division and segmentation of worlds and universes are often proposed merely for esoteric and pedantic purposes; of ivory tower conceptual constructs which have little to do with the day-to-day lives of ordinary human beings who struggle to make a living, maneuver through the complexity of the world, and attempt to survive the manipulative machinations of a society governed by microcosms of powerful but unnamed sources of evil and collusion.  But there is a recognizable worth and value to some of us, for pointing out the existence and demarcation of artifice as opposed to the natural environment from whence we came.

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, such a bifurcation of the universe into clean segments of definable compartments, is to recognize that the complexity of the administrative and bureaucratic process encapsulating the entirety and aggregation of the process cumulatively entitled, “Federal Disability Retirement under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset”, is ultimately a product of Popper’s ‘World 3’, and not merely a nightmare emanating from the deep recesses of our troubled psychosis self-contained in ‘World 2’, but of an intersection between the universe of madness created by our own desire to further separate ourselves from the simplicity of ‘World 1’, from whence we came.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement: Extending the Vibrancy of Life

Much of life is spent in avoidance and protective retreat; it is only in the ignorance of youthful exuberance that we recklessly run into the streets without looking for oncoming traffic.  Sports reflects the truth of that human essence; it is not an accident that we witness the repetitive folly of gaining an early lead, only to act in fear of losing and thereby fulfilling the prophesies of our own making.

The question, then, 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 positional duties — is it an option to remain?

If the answer to that question is an unequivocal “no”, then the two other choices harken: File for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, or wait until the agency fires you or forces you to resign.  If the latter, then the Federal or Postal employee still has up until 1 year to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits from the date of separation, whether through termination or separation by voluntary (or “forced”) resignation.

Avoidance of the issue will not do; at some point, either the decision to move forward in life will be made by the central actor in the cast (you), or by the supporting residue surrounding the play (the Federal agency or the U.S. Postal Service).

In the end, the vibrancy of one’s life is not determined by blindness or disregard of one’s circumstances, but by recognizing the steps necessary to enliven daily value.  One’s career and the extension of worthwhile work is always important to one’s life, but when a medical condition begins to exacerbate and devalue the substantive content of one’s life, then it is time to move beyond and search for an extension of that vibrancy of life.

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 often a “first step” in achieving and resetting that youthful exuberance we once felt, but lost along the way, precisely because it allows for a base security of the foundational needs of living:  an annuity obtained, then time to recuperate from one’s medical conditions and determine a course for the future.

One need not be looking back with fear of losing the game, as the repetition of sports history will reveal; rather, the future still can hold the key to extending the vibrancy of life once grasped, but somehow lost in the morass of our busy lives.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Medical Retirement for Federal Employees: Narrative for the Ages

The Age of Modernity is too cynical to believe; or, at the very least, too arrogant not to disbelieve.  It was once thought that information is all that is necessary to propel humankind into a state of sophistication, but time has revealed that Orwell’s reverse effect merely compels us to rely upon devices more and more, and that neither knowledge nor greater wisdom is gained by the wide dissemination of data and content.

We want a “cause” to believe in; yet, each day, we encounter those who allegedly toiled throughout their lives for just such a motivating core, only to find a shell of a person, neither interesting nor interested, and grubbing for amassing of life’s toys, like everyone else in the neighborhood.  Is it, in the end, true that the one who “wins” is defined by the last person standing with the toy and a smile?  We seek for the narrative which fits, and one which declares truth for all ages; but whether we would even be able to recognize “the One” if we passed by it, is doubtful.  This is a time for reflection and re-dedication to one’s core belief-system, despite the world’s agony bereft of such a centrality of intuition.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal Service workers who must contemplate changes in the coming year because of a medical condition which is impacting the Federal or Postal worker’s ability and capacity to remain in the Federal or Postal position, the narrow focus of formulating one’s statement of narrative on SF 3112A is an important microcosm of effective conveyance.  The questions asked on SF 3112A are simple enough; but the narrative which the Federal or Postal employee must prepare, formulate and submit, will determine the future course and causal impact in getting an approval of an OPM Disability Retirement application.

Prepare it carefully; formulate it thoughtfully; submit it only with wise counsel and guidance, wherever and whatever the source.  Yes, perhaps one’s narrative on SF 3112A is not as “grand” or “timeless” as the narrative for the ages of which we seek; but for the individual life of the Federal or Postal employee who is searching for answers for an uncertain future yet to dawn because of a medical condition, the significance and importance may be just as great.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire