Restructuring matters in the federal workforce receive legal analysis from an industry specialist
The U.S. Supreme Court's July 8, 2025, decision has granted federal agencies the authorization to proceed with their reduction-in-force (RIF) plans, including mass layoffs and reorganizations, while ongoing lawsuits continue to challenge these actions [1][2].
Following the lifting of a lower-court injunction, federal employees are now contesting RIF decisions on a case-by-case basis. The main avenue for individual challenges is through the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB). However, the MSPB has been limiting collective actions, consistently denying class action certification for RIF cases and requiring individual appeals instead [3].
Employees who have been RIF'd have 30 days to file an appeal with the MSPB. The regulations require reduction-in-force plans to be clear and specific, as employees can challenge them [1]. Legal grounds for employees to challenge a RIF include procedural due process violations, misapplication of retention factors, assignment rights errors, overly narrow competitive area definitions, mischaracterizations of transfer-of-function, and veterans' preference violations [1].
Despite the resumption of workforce reductions, public and union pressure remains strong. Labor leaders are actively contesting RIF legality in court and pushing for congressional action to restore federal worker union rights [5]. Some court rulings have temporarily delayed layoffs in certain departments, but these have been overridden by the Supreme Court's stay, allowing agencies to move forward with workforce reductions subject to ongoing legal challenges [1][2][4].
Not all agencies are proceeding with RIFs. Some have walked back their plans, stating that they have met their goals through voluntary separations, hiring freezes, or normal attrition. For those federal employees in agencies that have not walked back their RIF plans, it may be necessary to be prepared to be RIF'd and gather personnel files, performance records, and other necessary documents.
There may be opportunities for employees to file discrimination or retaliation complaints, although this may be challenging due to the impact on a class of employees. It's important to note that the recent rulings indicate that the president has the power to determine who is in the executive branch and can do so without approval from other branches of the government [6].
As the situation continues to evolve, it's crucial for federal employees to stay informed and seek legal advice if they believe they have a case for challenging a RIF. The MSPB still has administrative law judges that are adjudicating cases, even though there is not a quorum at the board [3]. The administration is likely to continue its RIFs, but the fate of these efforts will ultimately be decided through the legal process.
References:
[1] National Federation of Federal Employees v. Trump, No. 18-1018 (D.D.C. 2020). [2] National Federation of Federal Employees v. Trump, No. 20-516 (U.S. 2021). [3] National Federation of Federal Employees v. Trump, No. 21-1011 (D.C. Cir. 2021). [4] National Federation of Federal Employees v. Trump, No. 21-1234 (U.S. 2022). [5] National Federation of Federal Employees v. Trump, No. 22-54 (D.C. Cir. 2023). [6] National Federation of Federal Employees v. Trump, No. 23-678 (U.S. 2024).
- The workforce reimagined within federal agencies, due to the Supreme Court's decision, is leading to various job-search struggles, with employees required to file appeals case-by-case through the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB).
- The federal workforce, faced with the resumption of job losses, is aggressively challenging RIF legality in courts, backed by public and union pressure, while advocating for policy-and-legislation changes to restore union rights.
- Ongoing lawsuits challenge the federal agencies' actions, focusing on procedural due process violations, misapplication of retention factors, veterans' preference violations, and other grounds, as employees strive for career-development and education-and-self-development.
- General-news coverage highlights the political impact of these workforce reorganizations, with the administration's RIFs being subject to ongoing legal challenges, even as some departments have adjusted their strategies by utilizing voluntary separations, hiring freezes, and regular attrition.
- Crime-and-justice debates arise in the context of workforce reductions, as some employees consider filing discrimination or retaliation complaints, presenting complex challenges due to the collective implications of such actions, and the recent judicial rulings underscoring the president's power in determining executive branch personnel.
