UPDATE: The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) has just clarified its stance regarding federal employee union contracts, creating a wave of confusion among agencies. In a recent memo, OPM Director Scott Kupor instructed agencies to proceed with terminating collective bargaining agreements, but emphasized that this should not violate existing court orders.
This urgent development comes after a pair of executive orders signed by former President Trump last year aimed to exclude unions from most federal agencies, citing national security under the 1978 Civil Service Reform Act. These orders stripped approximately two-thirds of the federal workforce of their collective bargaining rights. While many agencies complied and terminated contracts last summer, some have held off due to judicial rulings protecting union representation.
On October 31, 2023, Kupor’s memo raised alarms among unions, prompting the National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU) to take action. They notified appellate judges about the memo, emphasizing that their status should remain protected under current court rulings. In response, OPM revised the memo to clarify that agencies with court orders must adhere to those decisions. “This guidance does not apply to bargaining units where there is a currently-applicable court order preventing implementation of the executive orders with respect to those units,” Kupor stated.
The implications of this situation are significant. Agencies named in the executive orders are now at a crossroads, as they must navigate between OPM’s directives and legal mandates. An OPM spokesperson declined to disclose how many agencies have refrained from terminating contracts for reasons other than court orders, directing inquiries to individual agencies instead.
The NTEU has argued that agencies are “no longer subject to” federal sector labor law due to the executive orders, complicating their ability to pursue administrative claims. The union pointed out that the termination notice template provided by Kupor’s memo explicitly states that “the provisions of the FSLMRS no longer apply” to the agencies mentioned in the orders.
Meanwhile, the U.S. Department of Justice has countered these claims, asserting that unions can contest any filings made with the Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) and argue against the validity of the executive orders. The administration maintains that the OPM’s guidance is based on the premise that the executive orders are lawful, which raises further questions about the unions’ rights moving forward.
This complex landscape highlights the ongoing struggle between federal agencies and labor rights. With unions seeking to protect their members and agencies attempting to comply with conflicting directives, the situation remains dynamic. As federal courts continue to deliberate, the outcome of these legal battles could redefine labor relations in federal workplaces for years to come.
Moving forward, stakeholders will be monitoring developments closely. Unions are prepared to challenge any actions taken based on the OPM’s guidance, while agencies grapple with the operational implications of these conflicting mandates. The stakes are high, and the impact on the federal workforce could be profound.
Stay tuned for further updates as this story develops.
