Labor & Employment Law Daily Wrap Up, LITIGATION NEWS, TRENDS—Executive Order cannot be enforced by heads of agencies with employees represented by NTEU, (Apr 28, 2025)
Organizations Mentioned:AFL-CIO | National Treasury Employees Union
By Brandi O. Brown, J.D.
“[I]f Trump was allowed to do it to federal workers,” said AFL-CIO President Liz Shuler, “he would be able to do it to every worker in America, in every workplace and every industry.”
On March 27, President Trump attempted to single-handedly outlaw collective bargaining with federal unions at many federal departments and agencies, specifically those deemed to have national security missions. In particular, in section 2 of Exclusions from Federal Labor-Management Relations Programs, Trump purported to amend a 1979 Executive Order (EO) that contained certain exclusions, to add a list of “Additional Exclusions” that encompasses a few dozen additional agencies and departments. The agencies and subdivisions encompassed within the March 27 EO are no longer required to collectively bargain with federal unions. The White House also issued a fact sheet on the EO, and OPM issued a detailed guidance document.
President overstepped the bounds. After the order was issued, the National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU) filed suit in federal district court in the District of Columbia, alleging the new EO “guts Congress’s federal sector collective bargaining regime” and “strips the collective bargaining rights of hundreds of thousands of federal employees across a number of agencies.” The union alleged that, while Congress gave the President narrow authority to exclude some agencies from the collective bargaining statute, the President “may use that authority only if the agency primarily does intelligence, counterintelligence, investigative, or national security work, and only if the statute cannot be applied ‘in a manner consistent with national security requirements and considerations.’” However, they contended, the “sweeping Executive Order is inconsistent with this narrow authority.”
Order issued. On Friday, Judge Paul Friedman, who is presiding over the suit, issued an order granting NTEU’s motion for a preliminary injunction, promising a later opinion to explain his reasoning. Section 2 of the EO, the order states, is “unlawful as applied to the Defendants who are heads of agencies with employees represented by” the union, and OPM’s guidance document on the EO is “unlawful as applied to the Defendants who are heads of the agencies with employees represented by” the union. It further orders that, “with the exception of Donald Trump,” the defendants are enjoined from implementing Section 2 of the EO and enjoined from implementing the OPM guidance. The order states that the parties should meet and confer and file a joint status report by May 2, 2025.
NTEU, other unions respond. “Today’s court order is a victory for federal employees, their union rights and the American people they serve,” said NTEU National President Doreen Greenwald. “The preliminary injunction granted at NTEU’s request means the collective bargaining rights of federal employees will remain intact and the administration’s illegal agenda to sideline the voices of federal employees and dismantle unions is blocked. NTEU will continue to use every tool available to protect federal employees and the valuable services they provide from these hostile attacks on their jobs, their agencies and their legally protected rights to organize.”
AFL-CIO President Liz Shuler applauded the ruling. “We commend the court for recognizing the Trump administration’s executive order stripping collective bargaining rights for what it was: illegal, retaliatory union-busting. This was the most significant attack on workers’ rights in history, and if Trump was allowed to do it to federal workers, he would be able to do it to every worker in America, in every workplace and every industry.”
AFGE National President Everett Kelley congratulated NTEU on its victory, stating, “This ruling is a major step toward restoring the collective bargaining rights that federal employees are guaranteed under the law,” and adding that "AFGE looks forward to arguing our own case against this unlawful executive order in federal court.”
The case is No. 25-0935 (PLF).
MainStory: TopStory LitigationNewsTrends WhiteHouseNews AgencyNews LaborNews PublicEmployees GCNNews