Featured February 10, 2026 What Schedule Policy/Career means for the federal workforce Back to Blog Proposed changes to appeals processes weaken protections for federal employees Date March 18, 2026 Authors Paloma Jiménez Tags Government Effectiveness, Workforce The Partnership for Public Service recently submitted comments on three Office of Personnel Management proposed rules that, when taken together, represent a concerning pattern of executive actions aimed at weakening civil service protections that are in place to prevent the federal workforce from being used as a political tool. All three proposed regulations—which impact employees who have been removed during their probationary and trial period, through a reduction in force or as part of a suitability action—would move existing appeals processes from the Merit Systems Protection Board, an independent adjudicator, to OPM. While the Partnership agrees that certain appeals processes could be streamlined, removing the MSPB from the equation undermines merit system principles designed to ensure fair decisions. Which appeals processes are impacted? The recent proposed rules impact the appeals process for three types of workforce actions: Probationary Period and Trial Period Employee Terminations The probationary period generally refers to the first year of an employee’s tenure in government during which they do not have typical federal employee protections and can be removed for performance reasons. The proposed rule moves the appeals process from the MSPB to OPM, removes an employee’s right to a hearing and gives the OPM director sole discretion to reopen contested decisions. Suitability Action Terminations Employees who are deemed “unsuitable” for employment based on a number of factors can be removed by federal agencies. The new proposed rule would make OPM, not the MSPB, the sole adjudicator of appeals. OPM also has proposed changing the suitability criteria. Reduction in Force Layoffs A reduction in force is the federal term for layoffs. Most RIFs occur as a result of agency reorganizations meant to realign resources or strategically reduce staffing levels. The proposed rule would change how workers can challenge their termination by moving the appeals process from MSPB to OPM. Why is the shift from MSPB to OPM important for the federal workforce? The proposed rules would shift responsibility for adjudicating employee appeals to OPM despite the agency’s lack of institutional capacity and structural independence. This is concerning because OPM was never intended to both make federal workforce policy and adjudicate workforce appeals. Under the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, OPM was deliberately structured to be responsive to the president through a politically appointed, Senate-confirmed agency head, while adjudicatory functions were assigned to the Merit Systems Protection Board as an independent, bipartisan body. This institutional design was intentional, since placing adjudicatory authority within an agency closely aligned with the White House could undermine impartial decision-making. Placing even limited appeal procedures for workforce actions within OPM will create an inherent conflict of interest, particularly when OPM is simultaneously responsible for issuing workforce policy guidance, executing administration-wide personnel actions and then determining the status of employees who appeal such actions. It’s also unlikely that OPM has the resources and capacity necessary to carry out all its newly proposed responsibilities. A better path forward: Meaningful performance management reform While the Partnership agrees that agencies need an effective system to manage appeals and misconduct, it must not come at the expense of merit systems principles or subject employees to unfair and politicized personnel decisions. Instead of the proposed solutions in these rules, we encourage OPM to adopt impactful reforms, such as broader changes to the performance management and hiring processes, and to focus more on strategic workforce planning. Through our Government for a New Era initiative, the Partnership will continue advocating for solutions focused on performance management and other foundational government management issues. Learn more about the Government for a New Era initiative, our effort to develop reforms for a more effective, responsive and accountable government.
