IFPTE Federal Sector Update on
Trump Administration Attacks on Federal Workers

Week of July 31, 2026 (Published August 3, 2026)

Past Issues (PDFs)

On Hiatus until September 14, 2026
Week of July 24, 2026
Week of July 17, 2026
Week of July 10, 2026
Week of July 3, 2026
Week of June 26, 2026
Week of June 19, 2026

EDues Reminder - IFPTE continues to encourage all federal Locals, whether dues are turned back on or not, to shift toward E-Dues. Please contact Brian Kildee (bkildee@ifpte.org) and Pavel Gerardo (pgerardo@ifpte.org), to get your Local signed up into the EDues program.

Congress is quickly approaching their summer recess period, with the House of Representatives having already left Washington at the conclusion of their business on July 23rd, and the Senate expected to recess after they complete work later this week. At the top of the list for the Senate this week is to attempt to come to an agreement, and potential vote of approval, on a funding bill to keep government agencies open past the end of the current fiscal year on September 30th, as well as attempt to pass their version of the Fiscal Year 2027 (FY27) National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). Not surprisingly the funding measure being pursued would not be FY27 funding. Rather it would be a continuing resolution (CR) extending current FY26 funding into December. Much of the Senate’s work last week, in addition to moving through nominations, was focused on these two legislative items, and it is expected that this week will be much of the same.

IFPTE is obviously focused on avoiding yet another government shutdown later in the fall, while also insisting that any funding agreement be bipartisan and provide proper oversight of the Trump Administration’s continued attempts to dismantle many of the programs and functions of government that the public depend on. At the same time, we are pursuing legislative fixes through the funding bills to erode or outright reverse President Trump’s union-busting agenda which illegally seeks to eliminate the collective bargaining rights of 1.3 million federal workers, including tens of thousands of IFPTE-represented members. In that regard we continue to urge Congressional appropriators and leaders to include language in the funding bills preventing the expenditure of funds to implement the two Trump union-busting orders, as well as include provisions that prevent the Trump Administration from illegally impounding congressionally appropriated monies for administration priorities not approved by Congress. As of Friday, July 31st, it remains unclear if the Senate will get a bipartisan funding measure over the finish line before leaving for the August recess later this week.

The same uncertainty about passing government funding legislation also applies to the Senate’s NDAA.  As was reported here last week, the House did pass their version of the NDAA (HR 8800) on July 22nd. While it was a partisan bill that passed almost exclusively on a party-line vote, it continues to include bipartisan language championed by New Jersey Congressman, Donald Norcross, and supported by IFPTE, to restore collective bargaining rights for federal employees working for the Department of Defense (DOD). The inclusion of this language, albeit in a partisan bill, does allow IFPTE, and the larger labor movement, to fight for it to be preserved in the final House/Senate reconciled NDAA. However, in order to get to this final leg of the legislative process for the NDAA, the Senate needs to first consider and pass their version of the NDAA, which, at this point, appears will have to wait for Congress to return from the recess at the end of August.

  • Rulemaking: OPM and MSPB have jointly proposed a rule, available here, that would eliminate the Douglas factors from longstanding MSPB precedent in favor of a "more flexible totality of the circumstances standard" tied to the "efficiency of the service," in addition to provisions that would limit union's rights to negotiate certain grievance procedures as well as the use of official time to represent an employee before MSPB. The proposed rule would also eliminate clean record settlement agreements and compress an employee's response window for proposed adverse actions.

    In our view, the proposed rule severely undermines civil service protections for employees while getting rid of standards that are essential to the MSPB system. IFPTE believes it is important to oppose this rule as it strips the standards used by the MSPB - which already favor the agency during the process - in favor of arbitrary decision-making authority that undermines merit system principals embodied in the civil service statutory scheme.

    In addition, OPM states in the proposed rule that it "expects that some agencies will determine and OPM concur that some negotiated grievance procedures will impair the effective use of actions covered under subpart B of part 752 and, therefore, bar the use of grievance-arbitration to challenge short-term suspensions." This encourages agencies to negate the unions' established rights to bargain grievance processes for certain adverse actions.

    Lastly, regarding representation, while the rule purportedly allows an employee to continue to be represented by an individual of their choice, the rule prohibits "representational functions while in a duty status (including while on official time authorized under 5 U.S.C. 7131), nor may the representative claim agency reimbursement for any expenses incurred while performing such representational function. The agency proposing the action may, in its sole and exclusive discretion, disallow an employee's choice of representative when the representative is an employee of the agency and his or her activities as a representative would cause a conflict of interest or position; that employee cannot be released from his or her official duties because of the priority needs of the Government; or that employee's release would give rise to unreasonable costs to the Government.

    IFPTE encourage locals and individual members to submit comments on the proposed rule here by Monday, August 3, 2026.

Even though Congress is going into a month-long recess, IFPTE, working in coalition with our Locals, the Federal Workers Alliance (FWA), AFL-CIO, and the larger labor movement in general, will continue to monitor and advocate for the specific legislative priorities of importance to the membership.  In the meantime, the Federal Update and Weekly Recap will be on hiatus from August 3 until after Labor Day, with the Recap to resume on Friday, September 11, and the Federal Update to resume on Monday, September 14. Should any major legislative developments occur during the recess period, we will certainly notify the Local leadership and the membership.

Finally, please do not forget that the IFPTE Federal Area VPs, Jamie Uyeuenten (Western) and Ben Emmel (Eastern) will host an informal IFPTE Federal Caucus meeting via zoom on Friday, August 7th, from 1-2:30pm. If you are an IFPTE member and wish to participate, please email President Biggs Matt Biggs, mbiggs@ifpte.org, to acquire the zoom link.

SOLIDARITY!

LEGISLATIVE:  

  • FY27 Appropriations and FY27 NDAA - The FY27 NDAA passed through the House Armed Services Committee on June 5th and included IFPTE-backed legislative language championed by New Jersey Congressman, Donald Norcross, to restore collective bargaining rights for the nation’s DOD federal civilian workers.  IFPTE will work on this as the NDAA moves to the Senate and towards a final House/Senate reconciled bill.

  • Protecting America’s Workforce Act - IFPTE continues to ask lawmakers to include PAWA in both the House and Senate NDAA bills, respectively, and all FY27 appropriate appropriations measures. IFPTE is also working to grow the number of Senate Republicans cosponsoring the Senate PAWA bill (S. 2837).

  • NASA Reauthorization – NASA authorizers in the Senate and House are moving toward a compromise NASA reauthorization bill.    IFPTE will continue to prioritize the protection of NASA’s science, aeronautics, and space technology research programs from efforts by the Trump Administration to dismantle them; urge Congress to protect NASA’s  amazing scientists, engineers and administrative workforce, including ensuring NASA career paths for interns and term employees, and; include language similar to that included in the FY26 House NDAA to repeal the August 28th Trump union-busting order that included NASA.  

  • 2026 Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) - The bipartisan leadership of the House Transportation Committee has met with stakeholders, including IFPTE, as they move to craft their 2026 WRDA reauthorization bill.  This biannual legislation, which provides funding and authorization for the Army Corps of Engineers, is a legislative priority for the IFPTE International and the IFPTE Army Corps of Engineers (ACE) Council.  With the help of all the IFPTE ACE Locals, and Local 561’s Michael Arendt, who represents the International on Capitol Hill along with IFPTE Legislative Director Faraz Khan on the WRDA bill, the issues of concern to IFPTE ACE membership will be worked on throughout this process.  We will keep you all posted. 

  • IFPTE continues to ask lawmakers to cosponsor HR 3093, The “Restoring Employment and Hiring Incentives for Removed Employees Act” or REHIRE Act to rebuild the federal workforce by providing a hiring preference for federal workers who were fired or otherwise involuntarily removed during the Trump Administration, and; HR 3094, the ‘‘Probationary Reduction for Employee Protections Act’’ or PREP Act would clarify that federal employees who are new to the competitive service have a 1-year probationary period, and employees who are moving to a new competitive service position from another position will have a 6-month  probationary period.  Both bills are authored by Congressman Don Beyer (D-VA), and IFPTE is encouraging Locals to also urge their House members to cosponsor these bills. 


LEGAL:

  • On May 27, 2026, the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) issued a notice of a proposal to create a standardized nondisclosure agreement (NDA) for agencies to ask both new hires and current federal employees to sign as a condition of employment. If adopted, this unprecedented proposal would chill the speech of millions of federal employees, affecting what they can say to Congress, Inspectors General, unions, and the public. OPM connects the NDA to OPM’s broader suitability and fitness regulatory changes, warning that penalties could follow both violations of the NDA and the failure to sign.  The notice also links to a proposed NDA that raises additional concerns. IFPTE submitted comments as well as signing onto coalition comments; over 31,000 comments were filed on this issue and we thank fellow unions, IFPTE locals, individuals, and coalition partners who submitted comments opposing OPM’s proposal.
      

  • Politicization of the FLRA - IFPTE joined a coalition of unions led by AFGE in a lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court of Massachusetts on April 15, 2026, challenging the Trump Administration’s interim final rule shifting responsibility for handling representation petitions, unit determinations, election agreements, and certifications out of the hands of non-partisan, career FLRA Regional Directors to the national level Federal Labor Relations Authority itself, which is comprised of three political appointees. See the lawsuit here. 

    On June 29,  Judge Casper (D. Mass) granted union plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment on the basis that the IFR was substantively arbitrary and capricious as well as having an arbitrary and capricious effective date.  She chose not to reach plaintiffs’ notice and comment claims but did suggest that the IFR was not wholly procedural.  

    The parties have until July 6 to file a proposed final judgment vacating the IFR. 

  • FMCS policy allowing unilateral agency rejection of requests for arbitrators – On April 22, 2026, the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS) published a memorandum containing a new policy requiring an affected federal agency to agree to an arbitration panel request, contrary to applicable FMCS regulations. On May 15, a coalition of unions, including IFPTE, sued to block this policy. The case was filed in DC District Court and has been assigned to Judge Randolph Moss. AFGE v. FMCS, Case No. 1:26-cv-01676 (D.D.C.).

  • Supreme Court sides with Trump administration in dispute over free speech rights of immigration judges: On May 26, 2026, the Supreme Court issued an unsigned order in Margolin v. National Association of Immigration Judges, No. 25-767. The National Association of Immigration Judges had challenged a 2021 policy requiring preclearance by their employer for public speaking engagements on First Amendment prior restraint grounds; the case had made its way to the 4th Circuit, which had remanded to the district court for proceedings consistent with its findings regarding the current operations of the MSPB, specifically that channeling claims individually under the CSRA to the administrative body of the MSPB might not be necessary if the body was not functioning as Congress intended.   
     
    The Supreme Court vacated and reversed this judgment, stating that the 4th Circuit had based its decision upon grounds that the parties had not presented. Of concern is the dissent of Justice Clarence Thomas, who wrote separately and was joined by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, to argue that federal law should be interpreted to say that civil servants must bring employment disputes to MSPB and if there is no MSPB, as was the case when the case was argued before the 4th Circuit, then federal civil servants are simply out of luck.

  • Voting Rights Act Gutted by U.S. Supreme Court - On Wednesday, April 30, in the case Louisiana v. Callais, a 6-3 vote of a divided Supreme Court gutted Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination in voting, striking down a Louisiana Congressional map challenged by a group of voters who described themselves as “non-African American” as the product of unconstitutional racial gerrymandering. Justice Alito,  writing for the majority, quoted the Supreme Court’s 2013 opinion in Shelby County v. Holder, which struck down the provision of the Voting Rights Act used to determine which state and local governments were required to obtain approval from the Department of Justice before making changes to their voting laws and practices. Alito wrote that “‘things have changed dramatically’” in the South “in the decades since the passage of the Voting Rights Act.”  
     
    Justice Elena Kagan read her dissent from the bench, a signal of her strong disagreement with the majority’s ruling. “The Voting Rights Act,” she wrote “is—or, now more accurately, was—‘one of the most consequential, efficacious, and amply justified exercises of federal legislative power in our Nation’s history.’ It was born of the literal blood of Union soldiers and civil rights marchers. It ushered in awe-inspiring change, bringing this Nation closer to fulfilling the ideals of democracy and racial equality.” And only Congress, Kagan argued, can “say it is no longer needed—not the Members of this Court.” She went on to state that the requirements now imposed upon Section 2 by the Court “will effectively insulate any practice, including any districting scheme, said by a State to have any race-neutral justification. That justification can sound in traditional districting criteria, or else can sound in politics and partisanship. As to the latter, the State need do nothing more than announce a partisan gerrymander... Assuming the State has left behind no smoking-gun evidence of a race-based motive (an almost fanciful prospect), Section 2 will play no role.” 

  • AFGE v. Trump, 3:25-cv-03070-JD - On February 26, the 9th Circuit issued an opinion overturning the (already stayed) preliminary injunction in AFGE v. Trump, 3:25-cv-03070-JD, the AFGE case challenging the 1st collective bargaining Executive Order primarily on 1st Amendment grounds. In its opinion, the  9th Circuit panel held that the district court had jurisdiction to address the challenge on its merits.  This analysis is very helpful to us in our cases in dealing with any channeling arguments the government puts forth. The  9th  Circuit panel also specifically stated that it was not opining on the potential merit of any ultra vires claim, i.e. that the EO is outside of the authority of the President.   The case will therefore continue to proceed on its merits at the district court level in the Northern District of California. This does not directly affect IFPTE's cases but is informative and helpful as far as the question of district court jurisdiction. The opinion is available here.

  • Supreme Court Decision on Birthright Citizenship - On June 30, a divided Supreme Court issued a decision striking down the Trump Executive Order that attempted to end the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of birthright citizenship.  IFPTE joined the labor amicus brief filed on February 24 in this case currently before the Supreme Court.  The Supreme Court heard arguments in this case this past Wednesday, April 1st. The decision and dissents are available here; the labor amicus brief is available here.  

  • Schedule P/C Amended Lawsuit - On March 4, Democracy Forward and co-counsel filed an amended complaint on behalf of public service organizations and unions, including IFPTE as an affiliate of the AFL-CIO and representative of MSPB administrative law judges and associated professions within the bargaining unit. The lawsuit challenges the Trump-Vance Administration's rule that unlawfully implements an executive order issued on January 20, 2025, titled "Restoring Accountability to Policy-Influencing Positions Within the Federal Workforce." The Executive Order and rule lay the groundwork to convert a significant percentage of the federal civil service from employees who can only be fired for cause to at-will employees who can be fired for any reason at all. Thousands of employees-including those who protect our public health, the environment and our food and water-who were hired for their expertise and who serve in non-partisan civil service positions could be stripped of vested job protections, in violation of their due process rights and more. See the GovExec article, which includes the amendment complaint, here. 

  • Update on Status of Second IFPTE Lawsuit Challenging Union-busting EO - In December 2025, Judge Friedman issued an order staying IFPTE’s NASA case pending the outcome of various cases brought by AFSA, POPA, and NWSEA that were consolidated with the NTEU case challenging the first national security executive order.  Oral argument for those cases occurred on December 15; we are currently awaiting a decision from the D.C. Circuit on the consolidated cases. Once the DC Circuit issues its decision, the parties will have 14 days to file a joint status report that will include proposals for how our case should proceed.
      

  • Legal Support for Federal Workers - Rise Up, Fight Back - Hundreds of thousands of federal workers have had their basic rights violated on the job—including tens of thousands who have been fired illegally. Federal workers have an urgent need for legal support and can now access a network of lawyers to help to get them the justice they deserve.   See the September 30th  GovExec article reporting on the Court’s granting of the preliminary injunction.

  • Status of all lawsuits against the current administration can be found at  Just Security: “Litigation Tracker:  Legal Challenges to Trump Administration Actions.”

GRASSROOTS:

  • “Civil Service Strong” coalition - IFPTE has partnered with the Civil Service Strong project of Democracy Forward, along with other unions, to support our members who are civil servants under attack by the Trump administration.  Alongside the 95% of people who believe civil servants should be hired and promoted based on their merit rather than their political beliefs, Civil Service Strong is committed to supporting a career, non-partisan civil service and the people who power it.  Learn more here.

  • MAKE A CALL – Restore Federal Employee Rights Now – IFPTE joins the AFL-CIO campaign asking every single American who cares about the fundamental freedom of all workers to join a union to call their member of Congress right now. Fill out the form to receive a call or dial 844-896-5059.  Learn more here.