On March 9, 2026, it becomes official: the civil service protections guaranteed to federal employees by the Civil Service Reform Act (“CSRA”) are no longer available to a large swath of federal employees. The protections guaranteed to the approximately 50,000 federal workers by chapters 23, 43, and 75 of Title 5 of the U.S. Code will no longer apply to them, as they have been reclassified as or appointed as “Schedule Policy/Career” employees. This rule is a travesty; it makes a mockery of Congress’s intention to protect federal employees from political partisanship and favoritism, as codified in the CSRA.

A New Name for the “Schedule F” Employee Scheme

The rule, innocuously entitled, “Improving Performance, Accountability and Responsiveness in the Civil Service,” codifies the Schedule F scheme^[1] that President Trump tried to implement in his first term, revived and renamed as Schedule Policy/Career^[2] in his second term. Upon the rule’s effective date, employees hired into or designated^[3] Schedule Policy/Career become at-will employees. Therefore, chapters 43 and 75 of Title 5 no longer apply to them, stripping them of civil service protections and their rights before the Merit Systems Protection Board (“MSPB”). These policy and career employees will now have diminished rights, similar to those afforded to the 4,000 or so Schedule C political employees who are hired directly by the President or Presidential appointees for political purposes.

Reduced Protections for Federal Whistleblowers, Fewer Options for Recourse

Even more unconscionable than stripping 50,000 federal employees of their rights to contest any adverse actions taken against them at the MSPB is the effective neutering of these employees’ ability to exercise their rights to allege prohibited personnel practices by their agency, including retaliation for whistleblowing. The new rule precludes Schedule Policy/Career employees from going to the theoretically independent U.S. Office of Special Counsel (“OSC”) to vindicate their rights under Chapter 23 of the CSRA. Instead, federal agencies must now set up procedures to hear and adjudicate allegations of prohibited personnel practices from these employees. 

The CSRA established a Special Counsel to, as President Jimmy Carter once described, “investigate and prosecute political abuses and merit system violations,” and “safeguard the rights” of employees who “‘blow the whistle’ on violations of laws.” This rule does the opposite. President Carter emphasized the need for “independent and impartial protection” for federal employees. Congress emphasized the importance of the MSPB and Special Counsel being free from “any control or direction by the President.” S. Rep. No. 95-969, at 2, 24.

This new rule now creates the exact situation that Congress designed the CSRA to avoid. Effectively, the fox is guarding the hen house. Schedule Policy/Career employees’ rights to claim a PPP, including discrimination on the basis of political affiliation, 5 U.S.C. § 2302(b)(1)(E), or for refusing to participate in political activity, 5 U.S.C. § 2302(b)(3), or for retaliation for whistleblowing, 5 U.S.C. § 2302(b)(8), or for protected activity such as filing a whistleblower complaint, 5 U.S.C. § 2302(b)(8), will be adjudicated by the head of the agency or the General Counsel. And each agency will establish its own policy for adjudicating PPP complaints from Schedule Policy/Career employees. 

The Office of Personnel Management provides a template for the PPP policy,^[4] but does not mandate it, ensuring that justice will not be administered equally across every agency of the government. Furthermore, the official administering such justice is identified as “The General Counsel [OR AGENCY EQUIVALENT OFFICIAL].” Id. Such an official, who may in fact have been appointed by the President and who reports to the agency head, who has certainly been appointed by the President, is not an independent unbiased decisionmaker. Whoever conducts the investigation, however, does not have any guidelines or precedent since the MSPB case law does not apply to these employees. Furthermore, the decisionmaker’s decision is not subject to further review unless the agency head or General Counsel choose to do so; the complainant has no appeal rights to the federal judiciary, as they would if they were covered by Chapter 23. And without MSPB caselaw to guide their decision-making, what standards will be applied to evaluate the complaints? Will Schedule Policy/Career employees be assured of confidentiality and an unbiased review of their complaint? Schedule Policy/Career employees who file a complaint with their agency head or general counsel, will be taking a significant risk that they will be fired for exercising their “rights” under this policy, and they will have no recourse because they are precluded from lodging a complaint to the OSC or MSPB. 

This rule is the latest in a series of illegal actions taken by the Trump Administration to undercut the CSRA and replace it with the political spoils system that Congress has tried to eradicate since the passage of the Pendleton Act in 1883. 

[1] See Executive Order 13957, Executive Order on Creating Schedule F In The Excepted Service (Oct. 21, 2020), available at https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-creating-schedule-f-excepted-service/. The full text of E.O. 13957 reinstated by Executive Order 14171 is available as Appendix 1 to OPM’s earlier guidance document. See OPM, Guidance on Implementing President Trump’s Executive Order titled, “Restoring Accountability To Policy-Influencing Positions Within the Federal Workforce,” Appendix 1 (January 27, 2025).

[2] See Executive Order 14171, Restoring Accountability to Policy-Influencing Positions within the Federal Workforce (Jan. 20, 2025).

[3] Those whose positions are being reclassified will have to sign a statement saying that they understand that if they “do not agree” that they have become at-will employees and loss of their rights under chapters 23, 45, and 75 of Title 5, “[their] employment in this position will be terminated and [they] may be removed from federal service.” Furthermore, they must affirm that they “knowingly and voluntarily accept this reassignment.” Scott Kupor, Memorandum to Heads of Departments and Agencies, Initial Implementing Guidance for Schedule Policy/Career Final Rule (Improving Performance, Accountability and Responsiveness in the Civil Service), Appendix 4, Sample Acknowledgment of Conditions of Continued Employment for Employee Reassigned to Schedule Policy/Career Position (Feb. 6, 2026), available at chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.opm.gov/chcoc/latest-memos/opm-schedule-policycareer-implementation-guidance-memorandum.pdf

[4] See Scott Kupor, Memorandum to Heads of Departments and Agencies, Initial Implementing Guidance for Schedule Policy/Career Final Rule (Improving Performance, Accountability and Responsiveness in the Civil Service), Appendix 3, Policy Template: Prohibited Personnel Practices for Schedule Policy/Career Employees (Feb. 6, 2026), available at chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.opm.gov/chcoc/latest-memos/opm-schedule-policycareer-implementation-guidance-memorandum.pdf