Labor Relations in Federal Government
The role played by federal employee unions in the federal government, if any, has changed dramatically over time.
President Franklin Roosevelt believed unions did not belong in the federal government. He expressed his view on the issue in 1937 in a letter to the president of the National Federation of Federal Employees when he wrote:
All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management. The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with Government employee organizations. The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives in Congress.
That changed in 1962 when President John F. Kennedy issued Executive Order 10988. This Order gave federal employees the right to form and join unions and engage in collective bargaining. The Order limited bargaining rights by not allowing strikes, no wage negotiations tied to union contracts and limited the topics for bargaining. It was formulated by a task force led by Labor Secretary Arthur Goldberg, a former union lawyer.
President Richard Nixon issued Executive Order 11491 in 1969 and modified the Kennedy Order. It provided for exclusive representation by one union, clarified topics that could be bargained in government, and created a structure for resolving labor disputes but did not allow strikes or picketing.
In 1978, the Civil Service Reform Act (CSRA) was passed, which overhauled the federal labor relations program. A large part of the argument for the CSRA was that it was too difficult and time-consuming to take action against poorly performing employees. The law was intended to improve the process of hiring and firing federal employees and created new agencies including the Federal Labor Relations Authority, the Merit Systems Protection Board, and the Office of Personnel Management that replaced the Civil Service Commission.
The bill was strongly supported by the National President of the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), Kenneth Blaylock. It put the labor relations program under a legislative program rather than an executive order that could be more easily changed or eliminated.
Federal Workforce Freedom Act
Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) has introduced S. 1006. It is described as “A bill to prohibit Federal employees from organizing, joining, or participating labor unions for purposes of collective bargaining or representation, and for other purposes.” The short title is the Federal Workforce Freedom Act.
The Federal Workforce Freedom Act would:
- Repeal the statutory framework governing federal labor relations (5 US Chapter 71).
- Prohibit federal employees from being allowed to organize, join, or participate in labor unions for the purposes of collective bargaining or representation.
- Ban federal agencies from engaging in collective bargaining negotiations with labor unions on behalf of federal employees.
- Immediately terminate all collective bargaining agreements, whether established before, on, or after the date of enactment of the bill, and dismiss any arbitration, dispute resolution, or grievance proceeding related to the collective bargaining agreements.
Senator Blackburn cites various reasons for the bill including:
- Federal employees serving as union representatives conduct union business during work hours rather than performing their government duties (“official time“). In Fiscal Year 2019, federal employees spent approximately 2.6 million hours on union activities during work hours, costing an estimated $135 million.
- Federal employee unions overwhelmingly support Democrats, who in turn support union interests. During the 2024 election cycle, approximately 96% of AFGE’s political contributions went to Democratic candidates and committees.
- The federal government acts as a bill collector for federal employee unions, deducting membership dues and transferring them to unions. This forces taxpayers to bear the administrative costs, and public sector unions impede government efficiency, fiscal responsibility, and accountability.
Politics and Federal Employee Unions
While the federal employee workforce is designed to be politically neutral, establishing unions has modified that assumption.
Politics have probably played a role in federal labor relations for some time.
President Kennedy’s 1960 election win was very close—less than 0.2% of the popular vote separated him from Nixon. Organized labor, including groups like the AFL-CIO, were crucial in mobilizing voters, especially in key states like Illinois and Michigan. It is likely Kennedy felt pressure to reward labor’s loyalty, and EO 10988 played that role.
According to historian Irving Bernstein: “The labor movement, particularly the AFL-CIO, delivered crucial support in industrial states…Kennedy was keenly aware of their role, and EO 10988 can be seen as a gesture of appreciation while also advancing his administrative goals.” (Bernstein, Irving. Promises Kept: John F. Kennedy’s New Frontier. New York: Oxford University Press, 1991.)
Federal unions routinely donate their time and money on behalf of Democrats and, as President Biden did on occasion, Democrats often provide more flexibility from agencies in working with the unions that support their party. Republicans, on the other hand, tend to view the unions as a political opponent and work to restrict their influence and benefits from the federal government.
Summary
The political environment for federal employee unions under President Trump is going to be challenging. In his first administration, he worked to restrict union influence and access by restricting the use of official time, charging rent for the use of federal agency space, restricting the time given for negotiating labor agreements, and requiring union representatives to spend more time working on their federal jobs instead of for unions.
There is no groundswell of support in Congress to support Senator Blackburn’s new bill. Democrats will vote against the bill for the reasons outlined, and Republicans are more likely to support the dramatic change in labor relations that this bill would create.
We are witnessing a dramatic change in the structure and operation of the federal government. With this background, previously unthinkable changes have been introduced, executive orders have been issued, decisions have been made and implemented, multiple court cases have been filed, and the political undergirding of the federal bureaucracy is undergoing historic attacks and challenges.
No one can accurately and reliably predict how all of these changes will eventually be incorporated into the federal government’s civil service system.
