IFPTE Strongly Objects to Anti-Federal Union Anti-Good Governance Bills Being Considered in House Oversight Committee
IFPTE sent a letter on several misguided bills being considered in the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee that would allow for the Executive Branch to destroy federal union collective bargaining agreements and union rights , the dismantling of federal government services and critical functions and attack federal unions official time and dues deductions.
Democratic Members of the Oversight Committee are offering amendments to some of these bills to make sure critical government services, civil rights and public safety, and the federal workers that provide those services and protections are not cut, bargaining rights and features of federal labor law that provide for productive and consolatory labor relations are not destroyed, and new expansive authorities to override bargaining agreements are not extended to an Executive Branch that has not been held to account by Congress. Watch the debate and votes on the bills and amendments here.
IFPTE’s letter communicates the union’s deep disappointment that this Committee has thus far taken no action and initiated no investigations about the extraordinary executive branch actions of the Trump Administration in the last two months. In particular, the Republican leadership of the Committee has blocked investigative efforts and bringing Administrator officials before the committee to answer for White House actions and the role of multi-billionaire Elon Musk in the Administration that federal courts continue to block and overturn. The Committee is tasked with providing oversight of and transparency for government operations in the Executive Branch, accounting for mismanagement and fraud, and scrutinizing possible violations of ethics and fair procurement policies.
The Tuesday meeting is a full committee markup, which means all Members of the Committee will have an opportunity to debate, amend, and vote to advance or disapprove legislation that is being considered in the meeting. IFPTE signaled strong support for two House Resolutions being considered at the markup: H.Res 187, sponsored by sponsored by the Committee’s Government Operations Subcommittee Ranking Member Kweisi Mfume (D-MD) and H.Res 186 sponsored by Committee Ranking Member Gerry Connolly (D-MD). H.Res 186 would call for the White House to provide Congress with information on “Musk’s role in the Trump Administration, his possible conflicts of interest, and his businesses, including any federal contracts of those businesses.” IFPTE’s letter notes that
“[t]his resolution is necessary because this Committee has thus far failed to provide oversight on Mr. Musk’s unprecedented role in the Executive Branch. The Administration continues to contradict itself when referencing special government employee Elon Musk’s role(s) in the White House, described as both a ‘special advisor to the President,’ ‘in charge’ of DOGE, ‘tasked to “oversee the DOGE effort,’ and “not an employee of the U.S. DOGE Service or U.S. DOGE Temporary Service.” Meanwhile, Mr. Musk maintains his role as Chief Executive Officer at Tesla, SpaceX, and Neuralink, serves as the Chief Technology Officer and Chairman of X.com (formerly Twitter), and is deeply involved as a founder in several other firms. Mr. Musk’s businesses have received at least $38 billion from the federal government over the last several years and at least $6.3 billion in 2024. Several lawsuits and judgments in federal court have raised alarming concerns about whether DOGE employees have appropriately accessed sensitive and protected data at federal agencies, many of which regulate and award contracts to Mr. Musk’s businesses.”
H.Res 187 would call the Trump Administration to account for the firing of 18 Inspectors General in the first hours of the Trump Administration. The letter notes that IFPTE is disappointed that this oversight issue is not a bipartisan priority and the Administration’s “blanket firing of IGs undermines the independent role of agencies’ Offices of Inspectors General (OIGs), risks creating a chilling effect on OIGs whistleblowing functions, and increases the threat of waste, fraud, and abuse across the federal government.”
The bills being considered that IFPTE’s letter asks the Committee to oppose are:
OPPOSE the “Preserving Presidential Management Authority Act,” H.R. 2249, sponsored by Committee Chair James Comer (R-KY). By allowing the President to unilaterally terminate or nullify legally binding Collective Bargaining Agreements (CBAs), this bill will fundamentally erode the protection and stability that these negotiated legal agreements provide. Such authority would effectively grant any President a line-item veto over negotiated labor terms and whole CBAs, bypassing the collaborative process that collective bargaining facilitates. This bill also allows CBA provisions to be struck if a conflicting presidential directive or agency rule goes into effect. When considering the recent executive actions have been rushed, poorly defined or drafted, and legally dubious, we can easily imagine this authority being abused when federal employee unions turn to bargaining, grievance procedures, and other provisions of their CBAs to provide the agency and the workforce ensure presidential directives are implemented in a way that allows the workforce and the agency to succeed and meet its mission. In the first two months of this administration, we have seen executive orders and presidential memorandum sideline agency leadership, managers, and human resources and labor relations offices, and already sparked court challenges, temporary restraining orders (TROs), and created operational chaos at agencies. By stripping agency managers and experts of their role in critical decisions, these directives force agencies to implement policies that contradict statutory obligations, harm agency missions, and cripple their capacity to deliver public services, only to backtrack when courts deem the actions unlawful. But even in these circumstances – where Executive Branch overreach degrades trust in leadership, destabilizes and demoralizes the workforce, and runs counter to efficient and productive government – CBAs and the labor-management relationship provide recourse so that abrupt changes do not undermine negotiated working conditions that support the workforce’s ability to succeed. This bill would enshrine the distrust, instability, and inefficiency throughout federal labor relations and would render CBAs unenforceable and void by the Executive Branch with the stroke of a pen.
OPPOSE the “Reorganizing Government Act of 2025,” H.R. 1295, sponsored by Chair Comer (R-KY). By authorizing a fast-track review and privileged Congressional approval of federal agency reorganizations that are proposed by the Executive Branch and expanding the scope of those organizations to include whole departments and to reduce federal employee headcount, the legislation would undermine Congress’ deliberative process, harm transparency, and risk enacting costly and counterproductive reorganizations that lack the needed Congressional oversight, authorization, public input, and bipartisan collaboration. In the first two months of the Trump Administration, Americans have witnessed the Executive Branch carry out poorly thought and hastily executed downsizing and shuttering of agencies, agency offices, and appropriated and authorized functions. Setting aside the legality and legitimacy of these actions, the Administration’s slash-and-burn approach to agency reorganization and mass terminations is already showing a lack of care that threatens to destroy the ability of the government to deliver government services and functions that Americans count on and support critical economic activity. Recent polling shows that a majority of Americans want the Administration to either slow down and study the impact of DOGE cuts or stop the cuts before more damage is done. The last few weeks have made clear to us that a Congressional fast-track process for federal reorganizations is absolutely the wrong approach and would short-circuit Congress’ role, forgo the checks and needed oversight that Committees provide, shut out the public from the debate and increase public distrust, and increase the risks of Americans and the American economy losing the essential services that are vital to maintaining safe and prosperous communities and our quality of life.
OPPOSE the “Protecting Taxpayers’ Wallets Act of 2025,” H.R. 1210, sponsored by Rep. Scott Perry (R-PA). This legislation proposes to bill federal employee unions for the cost of “official time,” but it fundamentally misunderstands the purpose and function of official time. By law, federal employee unions must represent all employees in their bargaining units, including non-dues-paying members, and cannot charge non-members fees for these legally required services. In exchange for the legal obligation to provide the same services to all employees regardless of union membership, the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 grants union representatives the right to use Official Time for representational duties to enhance workforce efficiency. Agencies and unions negotiate the appropriate use of this time so that Official Time is limited to an amount that is reasonable, necessary, and in the public interest. As stated in the law under 5 USC §7131, “Official Time,” “Any activities performed by any employee relating to the internal business of a labor organization (including the solicitation of membership, elections of labor organization officials, and collection of dues) shall be performed during the time the employee is in a nonduty status.” Official Time enables union representatives and managers to collaborate, leveraging the workforce’s expertise and perspective to improve government operations by resolving workplace issues amicably and cost-effectively, avoiding costly legal disputes, developing health and safety programs, and enhancing mission-critical activities through joint training and innovation.
OPPOSE the “Paycheck Protection Act,” H.R. 2174, sponsored by Rep. Eric Burlison (R-MO). Banning automatic payroll deductions for union dues not only forces union members into burdensome alternative payment methods, but it also unfairly singles out unions while ignoring restrictions on charitable payroll contributions that make use of the same payroll deduction forms. The legislation cynically harasses unions for collecting voluntary dues through a routine and well-established process that does not burden the government.