Go to Wolters Kluwer VitalLaw.comGo to Wolters Kluwer VitalLaw.com
VitalLaw®
  • Find answers to your questions
  • Log in to access your subscriptions
In depth. On point.
In depth. On point.
  • Home
  • Legal Directory
  • Home
  • Legal Directory
In depth. On point.
  • Articles
    • Articles
  • Law Firms
    • Law Firms
  • Organizations
    • Organizations
    • LABOR—UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES—D. Nev.: Court declines casino’s request for injunction to halt ‘unconstitutional’ NLRB proceedings
    • AGENCY NEWS—EEOC, NLRB, and other agencies announce closure during appropriations lapse
    • DISCRIMINATION—RACE—E.D. Mich.: Security guard fired for sleeping on duty will get trial on bias claims
    • DISCRIMINATION—RACE—M.D. Ga.: Black employee, fired under hair height policy, cannot advance race-based claims
    • DISCRIMINATION—SEX—M.D. Pa.: Fired prison employee advances claims of retaliation, discrimination based on sexual orientation
    • DOL NEWS—WHD issues opinion letter on FMLA leave calculations involving voluntary hours, fixed ‘Pitman Schedules,’ and mandatory overtime
    • EEOC NEWS—New suits target bias in hiring and leave, as well as harassment
    • EMPLOYEE LEAVE—E.D.N.Y.: Termination letter, sent to employee at the end of her maternity leave, bolstered FMLA claims
    • EXPERT INSIGHTS—California lawmakers send ‘Workplace Know Your Rights Act’ bill to governor
    • EXPERT INSIGHTS—What does the government shutdown mean for employers? Answers to your top questions
    • FEDERAL REGULATIONS—DOL has issued interim final rule relating to methodology for determining the hourly AEWRs for non-range occupations
    • LITIGATION NEWS, TRENDS—Court concludes that EO purporting to eliminate collective bargaining rights of suing federal employees is unlawful as applied
    • VITAL BRIEFING—“No Tax on Overtime” deduction included in new draft form released by IRS, but questions remain about taxpayer eligibility
  • Articles
    • Articles
  • Law Firms
    • Law Firms
  • Organizations
    • Organizations

    Labor & Employment Law Daily Wrap Up, LITIGATION NEWS, TRENDS—Court concludes that EO purporting to eliminate collective bargaining rights of suing federal employees is unlawful as applied, (Oct 2, 2025)

    Organizations Mentioned:Office of Personnel Management | U.S. Coast Guard

    By Brandi O. Brown, J.D.

    The court granted the unions’ motion for a preliminary injunction.

    Yesterday, a federal district court in the District of Columbia issued an order following up on an announcement made in open court granting a group of unions representing federa ...

    By Brandi O. Brown, J.D.

    The court granted the unions’ motion for a preliminary injunction.

    Yesterday, a federal district court in the District of Columbia issued an order following up on an announcement made in open court granting a group of unions representing federal employees a motion for a preliminary injunction against implementation of Executive Order No. 14251, issued by Trump on March 27, 2025, as well as the Office of Personnel Management’s guidance related to that order.

    Judge Paul Friedman concluded that both the EO and the guidance were “unlawful as applied” to the plaintiffs’ bargaining units and all employees in those units. Included are units from the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Defense, the U.S. Coast Guard (Department of Homeland Security), and the Department of Energy.

    Previously, Judge Friedman likewise ruled against the lawfulness of the EO in National Treasury Employees Union v. Trump, No. 25-0935 (PLF) (D.D.C. Apr. 28, 2025) and Federal Education Association v. Trump, No. 25-1362 (PLF) (D.D.C. Aug. 14, 2025).

    The case is No. 1:25-cv-02445-PLF.

    News: LitigationNewsTrends PublicEmployees WhiteHouseNews AgencyNews LaborNews Labor

    © 2026 CCH Incorporated and its affiliates and licensors. All rights reserved.

    • Manage Cookie Preferences
    • Privacy Statement
    • Terms of Use