Politicians are taking separate routes to oppose Trump's anti-union decree in Congress
In a recent development, a group of representatives in the United States House of Representatives have taken a stand against President Trump's executive order limiting collective bargaining rights for two-thirds of federal employees. The representatives are attempting to bring the Protect America's Workforce Act to the congressional floor, as reported by various news outlets.
However, as of last week, no search results have provided information on which representatives have signed the relief petition. One of the key figures in this movement is Rep. Jeff Crank (R-Colo.), who has described the amendment as a serious overreach and an attempt by Democrats to score political points with labor groups.
The Protect America's Workforce Act (H.R. 2550), introduced in April, aims to nullify Trump's executive order and bar federal funds from being used to implement it. The executive order, signed in March, cited a provision of the 1978 Civil Service Reform Act to strip two-thirds of the federal workforce of their collective bargaining rights.
Democrats have begun circulating a discharge petition for the Protect America's Workforce Act, which, if successful, would force a vote on the House floor. Rep. Donald Norcross (D-N.J.) has secured the votes of Reps. Don Bacon (R-Neb.), Mike Turner (R-Ohio), and Derrick Van Orden (R-Wisc.) to amend the annual must-pass bill.
The executive order has resulted in agencies cancelling the automatic collection of union dues from federal employees' paychecks and ceasing participation in collective bargaining negotiations, grievance, and arbitration proceedings. However, these agencies have insisted to federal judges that they are waiting for judicial assent before implementing the edict.
The Protect America's Workforce Act currently has 222 cosponsors, including seven Republicans. Notably, Reps. Jared Golden (D-Maine) and Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) introduced the Act. At a press conference, Jared Golden stated that unions within the government's national security agencies improve mission delivery.
Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-Mich) has called the action a clear retaliation and union busting, and a threat to organized labor and workers everywhere. Democrats and union leaders argue that the citation of national security is a pretext for retaliation against labor groups that have filed lawsuits challenging the administration's workforce policies.
In a positive development, the House Armed Services Committee has voted to add language to the 2026 National Defense Authorization Act that would bar the executive order's implementation at the Defense Department. The future of the Protect America's Workforce Act and the collective bargaining rights of federal employees remains uncertain, as the House awaits the results of the discharge petition.
