The following information was compiled by the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) staff and legal counsel.
Schedule Policy/Career (PC) Executive Order
This action will transform the professional civil service into an army of political appointees loyal to Trump, not their mission. It dismantles the merit-based civil service, jeopardizing professionalism and impartiality.
Key Details:
- Creates a hiring authority in the excepted service (Schedule PC) for policy-influencing decisions.
- Could make hundreds of thousands of non-partisan roles into at-will positions.
- Purports to remove due process protections and collective bargaining rights.
Legal Estimation:
Nothing in this Executive Order, as written, should abrogate existing collective bargaining agreements (CBAs), which remain in full force and effect. If agencies attempt to violate CBAs, unions should notify the appropriate parties. Members are encouraged to comply and grieve to ensure rights are upheld.
Return to Worksite Directive
Telework isn’t new—over half of federal employees never worked remotely, even during the pandemic. Smart telework enhances productivity, recruitment, and retention. Rolling it back disrupts operations and progress.
Key Details:
- The directive allows agencies discretion in implementation, with no specific timeline.
- Hybrid schedules negotiated in contracts remain binding.
Legal Analysis:
This directive does not, as written, violate collective bargaining agreements. Hybrid telework schedules detailed in CBAs remain legally binding. Should agencies implement policies contrary to CBAs, unions must notify their Districts, Councils, and AFGE National, comply, and grieve.
Federal Hiring Freeze Memorandum
The federal workforce hasn’t grown since the 1970s, while the U.S. population has skyrocketed. Freezing hiring worsens workforce shortages and skills gaps, undermining vital services.
Key Details:
- Freezes civilian hiring for up to 90 days, with exceptions for national security and public safety roles.
- Prohibits outsourcing to circumvent the freeze.
Legal Analysis:
The hiring freeze does not, on its face, abrogate CBAs. However, agencies’ implementation must alignwith negotiated agreements. If violations occur, unions should escalate, ensuring compliance and filing grievances as necessary.
Targeting DEI Programs
Merit-based systems require fairness for all, ensuring opportunity regardless of background. Federal agencies have the lowest gender and racial pay gaps because hiring decisions are based on ability, not bias.
Key Details:
- Ends all DEI initiatives and reviews federal employment practices for compliance with the EO.
- Risks undermining workplace equity and military readiness, as per defense leaders.
Legal Analysis:
The EO’s directive to review employment practices must comply with existing CBAs. If agencies attempt to implement changes that conflict with CBAs, unions escalate, comply, and grieve to uphold the negotiated terms.
Reforming Federal Hiring
Replacing objective criteria with vague ideals is a path to cronyism. Federal jobs should go to the most qualified, not the most connected. Merit-based hiring ensures federal employees serve the public, not political interests.
Key Details:
- Proposes subjective hiring criteria tied to “American ideals” and “efficiency,” undermining the current merit-based system.
Legal Analysis:
This EO, as written, does not eliminate protections afforded under CBAs. Should agencies adopt hiring practices inconsistent with CBAs, unions must escalate issues, comply, and grieve to protect merit-based hiring systems.
0 Comments