Federal employees' supporters strongly oppose the revival of Schedule F, a controversial policy.
The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) has proposed a new rule titled 'Improving Performance, Accountability and Responsiveness in the Civil Service', which has sparked a wave of criticism from federal workers and advocacy groups. The proposed rule, if implemented, could severely undermine the career civil service that has been protected and preserved for over 140 years.
Rob Shriver, a former acting OPM director during the Biden administration, has voiced his concerns, stating that the American people deserve a government led by independence, fairness, and expertise, not fear and political retaliation. He argues that the president cannot dismantle the safeguards of the federal civil service just to install loyalists.
The proposed rule, if enacted, would effectively shear the distinction between political appointees and career workers. The Environmental Protection Network (EPN), a group of former Environmental Protection Agency workers, has expressed concern that OPM's proposal would obliterate this distinction. EPN states that all of these career employees, including those providing background information and analyses, could be considered 'policy-determining or policy-making' positions.
The National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU) has also voiced its opposition to the proposed rule. Under OPM's proposal, agencies would be able to engage in personnel practices against employees without repercussions, according to the NTEU. The union has gone so far as to sue to block Schedule Policy/Career, arguing that it jeopardizes the merit system that undergirds the federal civil service.
Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) has warned that OPM's plan could have a chilling effect on employees whose job is to inform policymakers. PEER argues that without adverse action protections, civil servants like scientists, forecasters, and statisticians may fear retaliation if they deliver potentially bad news. Statutory adverse action rights, according to PEER, allow civil servants to challenge removals from service, suspensions or demotions, and are essential to the effective functioning of agencies.
A coalition of over 100 nonprofits and advocacy groups, led by Democracy Forward and Protect Democracy, has also filed comments opposed to the regulations. The group warns that the measure would undo over a century's worth of federal law aimed at protecting the federal workforce from politicization and favoritism.
As of Friday afternoon, more than 30,000 comments had already been submitted, the majority of which appear opposed to OPM's proposal. The American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), a group that filed and critically opposed comments on the OPM's proposals to revive Schedule F on Friday, March 16, 2023, is among the groups that have voiced their opposition.
Experts warn that the actual number of federal workers impacted by the proposal could be higher than OPM's estimate of 50,000. The EPN's concern is that this could potentially strip protections from a large number of career employees.
The deadline for public comments on the proposal is Saturday. The outcome of this proposal will significantly impact the future of the federal workforce and the independence and fairness of the government.
Read also:
- Tobacco industry's suggested changes on a legislative modification are disregarded by health journalists
- Uncovering Political Ad Transparency: A Guide to Investigating opponent's Political Advertisements in the Digital Realm
- Elon Musk praises JD Vance's debate performance against Tim Walz
- Right-wing Israeli minister supports controversial plan for West Bank settlement expansion
