“If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”
The rationale for changes being made in government today is largely captured in a post on OPM’s website. Director Scott Kupor attributed the saying in the headline to the Carter Administration’s OMB Director Bert Lance. As stated in Kupor’s recent posting:
“Unfortunately, the legacy of the Carter Administration’s attempts at reform may have in fact been (Bert) Lance’s quote alone. Well-meaning, no doubt – it seems perfectly logical we shouldn’t fix things that aren’t broken. And that is what the federal government has done – become a static organization that is perfectly comfortable with leaving good enough alone. That is something that is wrong with government today – Lance’s admonition has led to bloat, bureaucracy and a fixed mindset that makes innovation, efficiency and bold thinking anathema to the day-to-day operations of government.”
OPM is moving out to make changes in government and is not accepting of a mindset that believes “if it ain’t broke don’t fix it.” Kupor writes, “[F]ixed mindset individuals avoid new challenges, embrace the status quo, and view setbacks or feedback as signs of failure versus opportunities for improvement. Growth mindsets lead to true innovation and breakthroughs that improve society.”
The most recent OPM directive to terminate or modify more federal employee union contracts reflects this philosophy.
The Trump administration wants to make significant changes in the government’s workforce. Unions are working hard at every step to block the administration’s changes. Based on the belief that the existing government structure impedes change and that any changes are harmful to America’s national security, reducing unions’ role and involvement in government will clear a path for more substantive changes.
This is not a new idea in government. It is, however, a resurgence of an old idea from a Democrat, Franklin D. Roosevelt, the only president elected to three terms.
Channeling President Franklin Roosevelt on Federal Employee Unions
The Trump administration has clearly stated its opposition to unions representing federal employees, arguing that they make the government less efficient, less productive, and less responsive to the people it serves.
In his August 16, 1937, letter to Luther C. Steward, president of the National Federation of Federal Employees (NFFE), President Roosevelt wrote:
- He affirmed “the right of employees to organize” is fundamental.
- He warned that the “process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service.”
- Government officials do not operate like private employers—they manage public programs on behalf of all citizens, so union negotiations over policy or conditions could undermine democratic governance.
- He wrote, “The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives in Congress.”
Avoiding the “If it Ain’t Broke” Philosophy: Moving Out Now to Cancel Union Contracts
OPM has directed agencies to cancel union contracts under E.O. 14251 for national security exclusions. Agencies have been ordered to notify unions, terminate/modify CBAs, and report monthly compliance.
This latest directive, released on February 12, 2026, aligns with Executive Order (E.O.) 14251, “Exclusions from Federal Labor-Management Relations Programs,” and a subsequent order, E.O. 14343.
Background and Legal Authority Behind the Executive Orders
The Executive Orders exclude certain agencies and subdivisions from the labor relations statute’s requirements to ensure that intelligence, counterintelligence, investigative, and national security functions are not hindered by collective bargaining.
E.O. 14251 was signed on March 27, 2025, invoking a provision of the 1978 Civil Service Reform Act that allows the President to exclude agencies from federal labor-management relations if their primary functions involve national security and if applying the statute would compromise those considerations.
The order initially targeted over 30 agencies, including those dealing with defense, border security, foreign relations, energy security, pandemic preparedness, cybersecurity, and public safety.
A follow-up order, E.O. 14343, issued on August 28, 2025, expanded these exclusions to additional entities such as NASA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and the National Weather Service.
Rationale and Controversy Over Union Contract Terminations
The rationale behind these exclusions stems from the President’s authority under 5 U.S.C. § 7103(b), which prioritizes national security over collective bargaining in specific contexts.
Proponents argue that union contracts can impede managerial flexibility and employee accountability in critical sectors, potentially endangering national interests. It is not a surprise that the federal employee unions are seeking to have these Orders overturned.
Implementation of the orders was initially delayed by litigation, with courts issuing injunctions preventing agencies from immediately terminating contracts. Despite ongoing lawsuits, OPM’s recent memo urges agencies to proceed, signaling a push to enforce the exclusions regardless of pending judicial outcomes.
OPM’s Directive and Implementation Process
OPM Director Scott Kupor’s memorandum, addressed to heads of departments and agencies, explicitly advises covered entities to “proceed to terminate or modify Collective Bargaining Agreements (CBAs) in order to fully comply” with E.O. 14251 and E.O. 14343.
This new guidance is a departure from earlier OPM advice which recommended delaying terminations until litigation concluded. OPM now advises agencies and agency subdivisions covered by E.O. 14251 and E.O. 14343 to proceed to terminate or modify Collective Bargaining Agreements (CBAs) in order to fully comply with those Executive Orders.
The directive emphasizes that only bargaining units impacted by the exclusions should have their CBAs terminated, while non-excluded employees retain their union representation and contract terms.
Step-by-Step Compliance Overview
To comply with the OPM guidance, agencies are expected to follow a structured process outlined in the memo and accompanying FAQs. Here’s a step-by-step overview:
- Notification to Unions and Employees: Agencies must promptly notify affected labor unions and bargaining unit employees of the intent to terminate applicable CBAs. OPM provides a template termination notice that agencies can customize. This notice should reference the executive orders and explain the national security basis for the exclusion.
- Termination or Modification of CBAs: Covered agencies and subdivisions should terminate or amend CBAs for excluded units as soon as possible. This includes ceasing participation in negotiated grievance procedures or other practices that conflict with the administration’s priorities, such as in-person work directives.
- Reporting to OPM: Agencies are required to report the status of all CBAs for affected bargaining units to OPM on the first of each month using a provided spreadsheet. This ensures ongoing monitoring and compliance.
- Coordination with Legal Counsel: Agency labor relations staff must collaborate with legal counsel to draft and issue termination notices, ensuring adherence to any remaining statutory obligations during the transition.
- Handling Ongoing Negotiations and Grievances: For any pending negotiations or grievances, agencies should inform unions that these are held in abeyance due to the exclusions. If a CBA has already expired, agencies can terminate it outright without further negotiation.
Agencies not fully excluded—such as subdivisions of the Departments of Defense or Veterans Affairs—may receive delegated authority from their secretaries to issue their own suspension orders.
Legal Challenges and Union Responses
Throughout the process, OPM stresses the need to balance implementation with any court-mandated stays, though the memo appears to encourage action despite legal hurdles.
This directive has sparked controversy, with unions arguing it violates court orders and strips essential protections from federal workers.
The legal challenges against these Executive Orders are ongoing. Expanding exclusions is likely to affect even more agencies and labor contracts negotiated by those agencies. The practical impact is that, instead of applying any provisions of these agreements, agencies will apply agency or government-wide regulations. There is little doubt that this will increase the administration’s ability to make changes to reduce or restructure the federal workforce more quickly as agencies begin implementing the latest OPM guidance.
Financial Impact on Federal Employee Unions
Another reality is that the latest guidance may also affect the unions’ financial stability. Dues withholding by agencies has been a primary source of income for these unions. Eliminating agency dues withholding, which typically occurs when a labor contract is terminated, will likely reduce the number of employees paying unions for their efforts on their behalf. Unions are encouraging their members to sign up for paying their union dues through other methods.
If that effort is successful, the change will not occur quickly. In the meantime, the steady flow of cash into union accounts will go down. At the same time, unions are likely shouldering increased expenses as lawsuits are routinely filed whenever new actions are taken to restructure the federal workforce—and the Trump administration has taken a large number of actions to create a more efficient and effective federal workforce.
Looking Ahead: Litigation and the Future of Federal Unions
With the matter still in litigation, no one can accurately predict the courts’ decisions. It is likely this will ultimately go to the US Supreme Court for a decision. That process could take months or more than a year. OPM is taking action rather than following the admonition to avoid change, a hallmark of the philosophy: “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”
