Federal Worker Rights

UPDATE: A federal Judge has imposed a temporary block on RIFs during the shutdown, saying the Trump administration has: taken advantage of the lapse in government spending, in government functioning, to to assume that that all bets are off, that the laws don’t apply to them anymore and that they can impose the structures that they like on a government situation that they don’t like. And I believe that the plaintiffs will demonstrate ultimately that what’s being done here is both illegal and is in excess of authority.

Federal Judge blocks shutdown layoffs.

DOJ lawyer refuses to defend cuts, merely argues jurisdiction.

Judge: “This hatchet is falling on the heads of employees all across the nation, and you're not even prepared to address whether that's legal?”
donmoynihan.substack.com/p/the-shutdo...

When the Government was sued for making late wage payments to employees working during prior shutdowns, it defended the suits by arguing that "government officials would have been subject to... possible criminal penalties" if they made wage payments.

RIF = reduction in force. Also known as a layoff
RIFed = terminated in a RIF

TRO = temporary restraining order

In an attached declaration, the Government sets forth how many employees have been RIFed today:

The Government's lead argument is that the Court should deny the TRO because employees don't face immediate harm since their terminations won't take effect for 30 or 60 days

Table of contents of government brief opposing a TRO of Shutdown RIFs. Where page numbers should be, the document says, "ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED"

Here's the error-filled table of contents of the Government's brief opposing a TRO of the shutdown RIFs

American Federation of Government Employees, AFL CIO v. United States Office of Management and..., 3:25-cv-08302 - CourtListener.com Docket for American Federation of Government Employees, AFL CIO v. United States Office of Management and..., 3:25-cv-08302 — Brought to you by Free Law Project, a non-profit dedicated to creating hig...

Judge Ilston previously scheduled a hearing for October 16 on a TRO to stop the shutdown RIFs. Lawsuit filed by AFGE and AFSCME. Docket here: www.courtlistener.com/docket/71502...

Nick Bednar's bottom line on the shutdown RIFs:

"[A]n administration official granted anonymity to discuss the layoffs said they hit agencies including: Interior, Homeland Security, Treasury, EPA, Commerce, Education, Energy, HHS and HUD."

Vought sounds layoff siren: 'The RIFs have begun' At least nine agencies appear to be affected.

From Politico: Vought sounds layoff siren: 'The RIFs have begun' www.politico.com/news/2025/10...

Impact of Government Shutdown on Federal Workers' Cases Learn how the federal government shutdown impacts filing deadlines for MSPB, EEO investigations, and EEOC cases. Stay informed and prepared.

All MSPB filing deadlines will be extended over the course of the government shutdown. Learn more about how the shutdown will impact federal workers' cases here:
federalworkerrights.com/2025/10/03/w...

🚨 BREAKING: HUD just fired 2 of the 4 civil rights attorneys who blew the whistle on illegal discrimination, political interference & the dismantling of fair housing protections.
This comes just one week after Sen. Warren called for an IG investigation. #ProtectWhistleblowers #FairHousing

New post: responding to OPM Director Scott Kupor on probationary employee terminations federalworkerrights.com/2025/09/15/r...

The case is real, but Kupor’s description of the case is not accurate. It is specific to the termination of a small number of immigration judges at DOJ.

Assessing the MSPB’s approach to class actions in the first six months of Trump II The second Trump administration has sought to terminate federal employees in unprecedented numbers, using mass terminations of probationary employees, reductions in force (RIFs), and other initiati…

New blog post discussing the MSPB's approach to class actions in the first six months of the administration. Why has the MSPB entertained class actions for terminated probationary employees, but not RIFed employees? federalworkerrights.com/2025/08/04/a...

Over at @lawfaremedia.org, I explain the new Schedule G and some broader trends that signal an effort to make a significant portion of the federal workforce subject to at-will removal.

www.lawfaremedia.org/article/the-...

Are you a lawyer interested in litigating against the Trump administration in defense of federal employees? This job might be for you: www.jamhoff.com/jhrecruit/. Feel free to DM for more info.

This is the second case where the MSPB has certified a class for probationary federal workers who were mass fired by the Trump Administration and DOGE. We are proud to stand with them by filing this class action and will continue fighting for federal workers' rights.

DOI probationary class includes all DOI “employees serving in a probationary or trial period who were issued termination notices between February 14-18, 2025, in response to a January 20, 2025, guidance memorandum issued by the Office of Personnel Management.” Exceptions discussed in blog post.

Federal Worker Rights Visit the post for more.

Exciting news: our class action for fired probationary workers at the Department of Interior was just granted! DOI workers can learn more about what will happen next at federalworkerrights.com

LINK: www.reuters.com/legal/govern...

Supreme Court Intervenes to Allow Trump’s Unlawful Reorganization of the Federal Government to Continue as Case Proceeds The U.S. Supreme Court has granted another emergency stay request from the Trump-Vance administration to stay the injunction two lower courts had approved in AFGE v. Trump that halted the unlawful reo...

And here is the statement from the unions, nonprofits, and localities that brought the case: www.afge.org/publication/...

Guide from Civil Service Strong on next steps after the Supreme Court's RIF decision: www.civilservicestrong.org/resources/yo...

Blocking my column because it was too opinionated was a shock. I’ve authored many pieces over my 17 years writing the Federal Diary (renamed the Federal Insider in 2016), that were at least if not more opinionated as the now dead one. In that piece, I argued that “one hallmark of President Donald Trump’s first three, turbulent months in office is his widespread, ominous attack on thought, belief and speech.” The piece contained specific examples, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s alarming memo supporting deportation of Columbia University pro-Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil. Rubio said Khalil could be expelled for “expected beliefs…that are otherwise lawful.” What immigrants might believe in the future now can make them federal law enforcement targets. Another far-reaching example I cited is Trump’s aggressive attack on speech promoting diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI). His executive order commanded federal agencies to “excise references to DEI and DEIA [“A” for accessibility] principles, under whatever name they may appear.” Also, Tufts University student Rumeysa Ozturk, of Turkey, was abducted off the street by masked officers because she co-wrote an op-ed critical of Israel. It was a terrifying sight, caught on video, which previously would have seemed more applicable to George Orwell’s dystopian and cautionary tale against totalitarianism and thought police in is novel “1984.” This is America in 2025. Killing that column was a death blow to my life as a Washington Post columnist. But I wrote two more articles to see if I could cope with the restrictions. That’s when I learned just how severe the policy is. In my next piece, I was not allowed to describe a potential pay raise for federal employees as “well-deserved” because of Post policy. As a columnist, I can’t live with that level of constraint. A column without commentary made me a columnist without a column. I also was troubled by significant inconsistencies in the implementation of the p…

Joe Davidson, longtime Washpost columnist, quit due to editing restrictions. He couldn't call a pay raise for fed'l employees "well deserved" or say that a hallmark of Trump’s "turbulent months in office is his widespread, ominous attack on thought, belief & speech”

www.facebook.com/story.php?st...

Why didn’t the Supreme Court address channeling in its RIF decision? An interesting aspect of yesterday’s Supreme Court decision on RIFs is that it doesn’t mention the so-called “channeling doctrine.” This doctrine provides that federal employees generally cannot go…

We have another post on yesterday's RIF decision: Why didn't the Supreme Court address channeling? federalworkerrights.com/2025/07/09/w...

Posted late last night regarding the Supreme Court’s RIF decision:

Here's our post on the Supreme Court decison permitting RIFs to move forward at 22 agencies. It's a major setback for federal employees, but many options remain open for challenging RIFs. federalworkerrights.com/2025/07/08/w...

“One Big, Beautiful Bill” Has More Provisions That Violate the Byrd Rule, According to Senate Parliamentarian | U.S. Senate Committee On The Budget The Official U.S. Senate Committee On The Budget

The senate parliamentarian has ruled against a 50-vote threshold for reorganization of the executive branch and pay-for-job protections plan, among other provisions in the republican budget bill: www.budget.senate.gov/ranking-memb...

Some folks have asked how to receive blog posts by email. We've added an email subscription option here: federalworkerrights.com/2025/06/17/r...

Senate strips most retirement cuts from reconciliation, but anti-civil service provisions remain Under language released by a Senate panel Thursday night, new federal workers who decline to serve as at-will employees will pay nearly 15% of their paycheck toward their pension benefit.

"Senate strips most retirement cuts from reconciliation, but anti-civil service provisions remain" www.govexec.com/pay-benefits...