chalkboard sig reading "new regulations"

OPM to agency leaders: Implement workforce EOs ASAP

The Office of Personnel Management just issued further guidance on instructing agencies to move forward with implementing the president’s controversial workforce executive orders.

“[A]s a matter of law and policy… agencies should thereby take all necessary and appropriate steps to incorporate applicable provisions of these [executive orders] as soon as possible…” reads a Nov. 26 guidance.

The injunction dates back to a federal district court ruling in August 2018, which determined that three orders were contrary to the intent of Congress in the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations statute. However, an appeals court determined that the unions opposing the executive orders were required to take their complaints to the Federal Labor Relations Authority on a case-by-case basis rather than dispute the whole orders in court. FLRA judgments are appealable to federal court, and it appears likely that many such cases will be pursued by unions in the future. In the meantime, the judgment overturning the orders was vacated, and, after some further appellate machinations, the injunction blocking the orders was lifted.

“Accordingly, these three executive orders, including their previously enjoined provisions, are in full force and effect and should be implemented by agencies as soon as feasible consistent with the requirements and guidance contained in the EOs and consistent with law,” the guidance continues, adding, “Key provisions no longer enjoined and therefore fully effective…Agencies should take steps to implement these and other EO provisions at the soonest possible opportunity consistent with law.”

New policies in the orders include restrictions on time unionized feds are permitted to spend on union business during work hours (called "official time"), union use of federal facilities, new time frames for grievance negotiations, new 30-day limits on turnaround plans and more.

Read the full guidance here.

Reader comments

Tue, Dec 10, 2019

I was working in Massachusetts and had a union leader tell me work at home was a vacation in front of the whole office. That's where are union dues are going apparently. What a nitwit.

Fri, Nov 29, 2019 ArmyVet1970

Trump may have been a “businessman” but he was a lousy one. Bankrupt Dix times running casinos! 🙄

Wed, Nov 27, 2019

Even the federal unions have been neutralized to an organization that collects dues and pays bloated salaries and benefits to the executives while going along with the current administrations whims. Examine the lack of cost of living increases during the supposed pro-federal employee Obama administration and of course the current administration that is trying its best to derail federal employment.

Tue, Nov 26, 2019 John Columbus

Trump's a businessman. Businessmen DO NOT LIKE UNIONS. They DO NOT LIKE WORKER'S RIGHTS. The less unions, the more they can run roughshod over workers and they can deal with it or leave. Look at what has happened in private industry. They have neutralized unions and profits are growing but wages and working conditions not so much. I still don't understand how people can vote against their interests and allow big companies and now the government to reduce the number and power of unions.

Tue, Nov 26, 2019

A contract is a contract is a contract.

Please post your comments here. Comments are moderated, so they may not appear immediately after submitting. We will not post comments that we consider abusive or off-topic.

Please type the letters/numbers you see above


Edward A. Zurndorfer Certified Financial Planner
Mike Causey Columnist
Tom Fox VP for Leadership and Innovation, Partnership for Public Service
Mathew B. Tully Legal Analyst

Free E-Newsletter


I agree to this site's Privacy Policy.

Stay Connected

Latest Forum Posts

Ask the Expert

Have a question regarding your federal employee benefits or retirement?

Submit a question