WASHINGTON D.C. – In a move widely condemned by labor leaders as the most significant blow to organized labor in American history, the Trump administration has systematically dismantled collective bargaining rights for approximately one million federal workers across the United States. Through a series of sweeping executive orders, the administration has curtailed the ability of federal employee unions to negotiate for their members, citing a broad interpretation of national security concerns.
This unprecedented action, described by AFL-CIO President Liz Shuler as the “single largest attack on the labor movement in our history,” began to take shape in May 2018 with three executive orders (EOs 13836, 13837, and 13839) that aimed to expedite collective bargaining processes, narrow the scope of negotiations, limit the use of official time for union activities, and streamline the removal of federal employees. These initial measures laid the groundwork for more direct assaults on union power.
The most impactful phase of this campaign unfolded in March 2025 with Executive Order 14.251, which excluded a vast array of federal agencies from federal labor-management relations programs, effectively stripping collective bargaining rights from workers involved in what the administration broadly defined as “national security missions.” This order alone targeted nearly two-thirds of the federal workforce, impacting over a million dedicated public servants. The administration followed up in late August 2025, just days before Labor Day, with another executive order expanding these restrictions to an additional half-dozen agencies.
The Executive Orders and Their Scope
The Trump administration’s strategy involved multiple executive orders designed to weaken the collective bargaining power of federal unions. The initial set, issued in May 2018, included:
* Executive Order 13836: Focused on developing more efficient, effective, and cost-reducing approaches to federal sector collective bargaining. It directed agencies to renegotiate agreements quickly, set arbitrary timelines that could lead to unilateral imposition of terms, and created a bureaucracy to dictate bargaining proposals, encouraging “take-it-or-leave-it” tactics.
* Executive Order 13837: Aimed at ensuring transparency, accountability, and efficiency in the use of taxpayer-funded union time. This order sought to limit official time for union stewards and cut access to agency office space for union representatives, making it harder for them to assist workers.
* Executive Order 13839: Focused on promoting accountability and streamlining removal procedures, encouraging agencies to exclude disputes over employee removal for misconduct or performance from the bargaining process.
While these orders faced legal challenges and temporary injunctions, they were ultimately upheld, allowing their provisions to move forward. The subsequent executive order in March 2025, however, represented a more fundamental attack by excluding entire agencies, many of which unions argued do not primarily engage in national security work.
The agencies brought under the purview of the later executive orders included prominent institutions such as the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the National Weather Service and the National Environmental Satellite, Data and Information Service within the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the International Trade Administration and the Patent and Trademark Office within the Commerce Department, and the U.S. Agency for Global Media. These were added to the agencies previously targeted, which included the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
Administration’s Justification vs. Union Rebuttals
The White House consistently framed these actions as necessary for national security and government efficiency. A fact sheet accompanying one order stated that “procedural requirements in Federal labor-management relations can create delays in agency operations,” which “can impact the ability of agencies with national security responsibilities to implement policies swiftly and fulfill their critical missions.” The administration asserted that President Trump was taking action to ensure agencies vital to national security could execute their missions without delay and protect the American people, emphasizing the need for a responsive and accountable civil service.
However, labor unions vehemently disputed these claims. They argued that the administration’s national security rationale was a pretext to retaliate against unions that had opposed the administration’s policies and leadership. Union leaders pointed out that many of the affected agencies, like NASA, had long-established unions with a history of productive collective bargaining that had never been characterized as a national security risk. Everett Kelley, national president of the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), the nation’s largest federal employee union, called the executive orders a “clear example of retaliation against federal employee union members” and an “immoral and abhorrent” disenfranchisement of workers.
The Impact on Federal Workers and Their Rights
The executive orders fundamentally altered the landscape for federal employees and their unions. Collective bargaining rights, which have been a cornerstone of federal labor relations since the 1960s, allowed unions to negotiate on a range of working conditions, including parental leave, overtime pay, meal allowances, rest periods, and protections for workers who report safety concerns. The removal of these rights meant unions could no longer challenge contract violations or advocate for improved conditions through formal negotiation processes.
This erosion of bargaining power left federal workers more vulnerable to unilateral changes in their workplaces. For instance, the Department of Veterans Affairs announced the termination of union contracts for 400,000 employees in early August 2025, eliminating crucial protections. The actions also included restrictions on the use of official time for union representation, making it more difficult for unions to assist members with grievances or contract enforcement.
Georgetown University labor historian Joseph McCartin stated that the Trump administration’s actions represented “by far the largest single action of union-busting in American history.” Labor leaders expressed concern that the administration’s aggressive tactics against federal workers would serve as a blueprint for private sector employers looking to undermine unionization efforts nationwide.
The Legal Battleground: Challenges and Court Rulings
From the outset, federal employee unions mounted a robust legal defense against the Trump administration’s executive orders. AFGE, along with other unions like the National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU) and the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers (IFPTE), filed numerous lawsuits challenging the legality and constitutionality of the orders. These challenges argued that the administration’s actions constituted unlawful retaliation for the unions’ constitutionally protected speech and that the president had exceeded his legal authority.
In June 2025, a federal judge granted AFGE and its allies a preliminary injunction, blocking the implementation of the March executive order. The judge’s ruling suggested the order was likely an illegal, retaliatory attempt to punish unions. However, this victory was short-lived. On August 1, 2025, a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals granted an emergency stay of the district court’s preliminary injunction, allowing the administration to proceed with enforcing the executive order while the litigation continued.
Numerous state Attorneys General also threw their support behind the unions, filing amicus briefs in appeals courts. They argued that the executive orders were unlawful attempts to punish labor unions for expressing views deemed “hostile” to the administration’s agenda, thereby violating First Amendment rights. The legal battles were complex, with various appeals courts considering different aspects of the challenges.
Broader Implications for the American Labor Movement
The Trump administration’s assault on federal worker unions was viewed not in isolation, but as part of a broader pattern of anti-labor policies that threatened the entire American labor movement. With a significant portion of union members working in the public sector, the weakening of federal employee unions was seen as a direct threat to labor’s overall political influence and its ability to organize and secure gains for workers across all sectors.
Labor advocates warned that if such aggressive union-busting tactics were normalized within the federal government, they could embolden private sector employers to adopt similar strategies, further eroding worker protections and diminishing union density. The administration’s approach was also criticized for undermining the role of collective bargaining as a mechanism for promoting fair labor practices, enhancing workplace morale, and improving government efficiency from the ground up.
Historical Context and Union Responses
The federal government’s commitment to collective bargaining for its employees has evolved over decades. The right to organize and bargain collectively was first established for federal employees in 1962 by President John F. Kennedy. The Trump administration’s actions were seen as a stark reversal of this longstanding policy.
Union leaders vowed to continue their fight, utilizing all available avenues – legal, legislative, and grassroots activism. The American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) stated its commitment to fighting “relentlessly to protect the rights of our members, federal employees and their union.” The AFL-CIO mobilized its affiliates and called for broad public support, emphasizing that an attack on one sector of the labor movement ripples through the entire structure.
In January 2021, the Biden administration revoked these executive orders, signaling a return to policies that support federal employee union rights and collective bargaining. However, the period of intense executive action left a significant mark on federal labor relations and served as a stark reminder of the ongoing struggle to protect workers’ rights in the United States.
The story of these executive orders highlights a critical chapter in the ongoing debate over labor rights, government efficiency, and the role of unions in advocating for the American workforce, illustrating the profound impact that executive policy can have on millions of working families.
