A federal judge recently took steps to protect federal employees from being laid off during the ongoing government shutdown. Judge Susan Illston expanded a restraining order that stops reductions in force (RIFs) to include workers from more unions, such as the National Federation of Federal Employees and the Service Employees International Union. Before this, only members of two other unions were protected.
During an emergency hearing in San Francisco, the judge heard concerns from union representatives. They argued that the government was misinterpreting who qualifies as a “member” of a union, especially following changes made in March 2025 under an executive order that weakened union recognition in federal agencies.
Danielle Leonard, a lawyer for the unions, emphasized that union members were entitled to protection, regardless of their bargaining unit status. The judge agreed with her, stating that anyone employed by the affected agencies and affiliated with a union should not face layoffs.
However, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) claimed that some employees were not covered by this order because the agency had chosen to stop acknowledging their union. But the judge clarified that these employees were indeed included in the protections and could not be laid off.
The Department of the Interior also planned to eliminate positions but argued that those layoffs were not part of the restraining order’s protections. The judge quickly countered, saying that RIFs should not occur among protected employees during the shutdown.
Illston ordered federal agencies to provide an update on how many employees they planned to lay off and how many were now protected under her clarified order. This information is vital, especially when considering that many agencies are currently short-staffed due to the shutdown.
The government acknowledged the difficulty in gathering this information quickly, as many workers were furloughed. As Elizabeth Hedges from the Justice Department pointed out, compliance during a shutdown adds an extra layer of challenge.
This legal situation highlights the ongoing tension between federal employees’ rights and governmental actions during crises. Union membership in the U.S. has been a contentious topic, especially following changes to labor relations enacted in recent years. Experts argue that these shifts affect not only employee benefits but also workplace morale and job security.
According to a recent survey by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, union membership in the public sector has seen fluctuations, with about 34% of public-sector employees part of a union as of 2022. This number contrasts with private industries, where rates are significantly lower, reflecting a broader trend affecting workers nationwide.
The fallout from this legal dispute may set precedents for how federal employee rights are managed in future shutdowns, underscoring the importance of union representation amid changing political landscapes.
For further details on the court’s decisions, you can refer to this official court document.
Source link
danielle leonard,reduction in force,susan illston
