Courts deliver favourable decisions for organizations combating Trump's anti-labor directive

Federal Courts Rule in Favour of Federal Employee Unions in Collective Bargaining Rights Case

In a significant development, federal judges in two jurisdictions have ruled in favour of federal employee unions challenging the Trump administration's effort to strip collective bargaining rights.

The ruling comes in response to an executive order signed by President Trump in March, which aimed to strip most federal employees of their collective bargaining rights under the 1978 Civil Service Reform Act.

U.S. District Judge Danny Reeves, a George W. Bush appointee, dismissed the government's case against the National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU), finding that the administration lacked standing. Judge Reeves wrote that the Treasury Department lacks standing to bring the action against the NTEU Chapter 73.

Meanwhile, U.S. District Judge Paul Friedman, an Obama appointee, has suggested a new, more tailored ruling in accordance with a federal appellate court's decision. Friedman stated that certain agencies have in essence disregarded critical provisions of the collective bargaining agreements.

Examples of such evidence include the surreptitious cancellation of union dues withholding from employees' paychecks, the preparation of reduction in force plans without engaging in union negotiations, and the wholesale withdrawal from participation in grievance proceedings.

Friedman also noted several pieces of evidence that agencies are quietly disregarding union contracts without formally repudiating them. He stated that certain agencies are operating in accordance with the executive order by setting aside core provisions of the Federal Sector Labor Management Relations Statute that Congress unequivocally deemed to be "in the public interest."

However, the government argued that agencies would be harmed if the union enforced collective bargaining agreements in the face of the executive order, potentially leading to penalties such as backpay. Friedman, however, disagreed, stating that such penalties would not amount to threatened injuries.

Judge Friedman has instructed attorneys for the government and NTEU to submit a joint plan to address how to proceed under the D.C. Circuit's order by Thursday at noon.

In a separate case, a motions hearing in the Trump administration's other case seeking pre-clearance of the executive order, Defense Department v. AFGE, is scheduled for June 10. On June 10, the U.S. Supreme Court also announced it would review the case Defense Department v. AFGE concerning the presidential line-item veto affecting collective bargaining rights of about two-thirds of federal employees.

The court left the door open for NTEU to continue to pursue an injunction if "a specific agency or subagency deviates from that self-imposed rule."

These rulings mark a significant victory for federal employee unions, who argue that the executive order infringes on their constitutional rights to free speech and association. The cases are likely to continue to be closely watched as they progress through the courts.