In a whirlwind of federal workforce upheaval, the Trump administration has unleashed a series of sweeping changes that are reverberating through agencies, unions, and the lives of hundreds of thousands of government employees. Over the past several weeks, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) has churned out new guidance on administrative leave, probationary periods, and performance awards, while the administration has simultaneously defended mass layoffs and the largest single act of union-busting in American history. The result? A federal landscape transformed—one where job security, worker protections, and the very structure of labor relations have been upended.
On July 30, 2025, OPM issued highly anticipated guidance clarifying the appropriate use of administrative leave across federal agencies. According to Federal News Network, the new rules specify that administrative leave should not substitute for sick leave and that early holiday dismissals are capped at two hours unless an agency approves more. Federal employees can take administrative leave to vote in elections, but not to volunteer as poll workers. The guidance also allows for more flexible use of administrative leave for “workforce realignment purposes”—meaning agencies can use paid leave to facilitate restructuring efforts, including the ongoing Deferred Resignation Program (DRP). This year alone, about 154,000 federal employees are being paid through the DRP while not working, with payments scheduled to continue until the end of September 2025.
“Administrative leave is appropriately used for brief or short periods of time—usually for not more than one workday,” OPM wrote, but added that longer stretches could be approved for workforce restructuring. Notably, this flexibility will end in 2026, when a cap of 12 weeks for such leave will be imposed, unless OPM grants an exception. The guidance is part of the administration’s stated aim to create a “leaner, less expensive, less wasteful, more efficient and more mission-focused federal workforce.”
This administrative leave overhaul follows December 2024 regulations that capped leave for personnel investigations at 10 days per year—a change mandated by Congress in 2017 but only finalized after eight years. The timing is telling, as agencies brace for the full impact of the Trump administration’s workforce reduction orders.
These reductions are not limited to back-office changes. On August 18, 2025, the Trump administration appeared in a Rhode Island federal court to defend its authority to conduct massive layoffs and a sweeping reorganization at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). As reported by Law360, the administration argued that these actions are within executive powers and do not violate the U.S. Constitution or usurp congressional authority. The HHS cuts are just one piece of a much larger federal workforce puzzle.
Perhaps the most seismic development came last week, when the administration moved forward with plans to void collective bargaining agreements (CBAs) covering nearly 400,000 Veterans Administration (VA) employees, as well as tens of thousands more at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and Citizenship and Immigration Services. According to Jacobin, this action affects approximately 2.5 percent of all American unionized workers, making it the largest single act of union-busting in U.S. history. The administration’s March 27 executive order, which triggered these moves, also ended payroll dues collection for affected unions, placing them in desperate financial straits.
The voiding of CBAs has upended the workplace for hundreds of thousands of federal employees. Contracts that once governed everything from vacation allocation and sick leave to discipline and layoffs have vanished. Workers are now “at will” employees, subject to firing, layoffs, and unilateral changes to their working conditions with no means of appeal. The only recourse—appealing to the Merit Systems Protection Board—is effectively unavailable, as the Board lacks a quorum and cannot reverse unwarranted firings or layoffs.
The administration justified its sweeping actions by interpreting federal statutes broadly. According to the Justice Department, agencies with any “primary function” related to national security, intelligence, or investigations—definitions stretched to cover agencies as varied as the VA, EPA, Department of State, and more—could be exempted from collective bargaining obligations. For example, the VA was described as the “backstop medical provider for American troops in times of war or any national emergency,” while the EPA’s investigative work was cited as justification for the national security exemption.
Court challenges by major unions—including the American Federation of Government Employees and the National Treasury Employees Union—initially won injunctions blocking the decertification orders. But appellate courts stayed those injunctions, siding with the administration’s arguments about national security prerogatives and public interest. The courts pointed to government assurances that agencies would not terminate CBAs until litigation concluded, but, as Jacobin noted, those assurances proved illusory; contracts were voided within days.
The labor movement’s response has been muted. While some unions issued statements and pursued lawsuits, few mobilized their members or organized large-scale actions. Veteran labor organizer Stephen Lerner warned, “For Labor, Caution Is Fatal: The riskiest course is to stay the course.” Yet, as months passed, unions largely relied on legal strategies, even as their resources dwindled and their members faced unprecedented insecurity.
Meanwhile, OPM has continued to roll out guidance reshaping federal employment. On August 7, 2025, the agency clarified changes to the federal probationary period introduced earlier this year. Under the new rules, higher-level leadership—not first-line supervisors—must make staffing decisions for probationary employees. Agencies are now required to affirmatively sign off on any employee they wish to retain beyond the probationary period, and the grounds for removing probationary employees have been broadened beyond just performance or conduct. Notably, employees no longer have the right to appeal termination decisions to the Merit Systems Protection Board.
Jenny Mattingley, vice president of government affairs at the Partnership for Public Service, cautioned that while agencies should include frontline supervisors’ feedback in these decisions, there must also be safeguards against politically motivated firings. “That is always my biggest concern. And I think it remains to be seen in how agencies start implementing this,” she told Federal News Network.
On August 11, 2025, OPM issued further guidance aimed at tightening performance review standards and increasing award amounts for top performers. With fewer employees expected to earn top marks, the agency said award amounts “should increase significantly” for those deemed “truly deserving.” Agencies must submit their plans for implementing these changes by September 8, 2025, and can choose from monetary bonuses, extra time off, or step increases on the General Schedule as award options. OPM also capped the number of Senior Executive Service members eligible for top performance ratings, emphasizing that adherence to the president’s policies should be the most critical part of evaluations.
As the Trump administration’s federal workforce overhaul accelerates, the effects are rippling across agencies, unions, and individual workers. Some see a drive for efficiency and mission focus; others warn of eroded protections, weakened unions, and politicized personnel decisions. For now, the federal workplace is being reshaped in ways not seen in decades—its future uncertain, its workers waiting to see what comes next.
