The Solidarity Docket
August 18, 2026
This week's docket leads with a deadline. The President has until the end of the month to set federal pay for 2027, and the schedule points toward a freeze. We also cover the approaching September 2 transition of appeals away from the Merit Systems Protection Board, a second wave of Schedule Policy/Career conversions, and a new suit over reservist differential pay.
Pay Decision for 2027 Due August 31
The President must send Congress a pay plan by August 31. If he does not, the formula in the Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act of 1990 takes over and produces (substantially larger) automatic locality increases. Every president since the law passed has used the alternative plan to set a smaller figure.
As of the middle of this month no plan had been submitted. The fiscal 2027 budget released in April said nothing about civilian compensation, and the Office of Management and Budget confirmed afterward that the proposal is no increase for civilian employees. Military members would receive between five and seven percent depending on rank.
Congress can override the President's plan through appropriations. Historically, neither chamber has ever done so. The House Financial Services and General Government bill is silent on civilian pay. Democrats in both chambers continue to press the Fair Adjustment of Income Rates Act, which would provide an average increase of 4.1 percent, consisting of a 3.1 percent increase in basic pay and roughly one percent in locality pay. That bill has not advanced.
Most civilian employees received a one percent (1%) increase for 2026, the smallest increase since 2021. Federal law enforcement personnel received 3.8 percent.
MSPB Completes Its Withdrawal From Three Categories of Appeals
The Merit Systems Protection Board has issued a final rule removing every reference to its jurisdiction over appeals from reduction in force actions, probationary period actions, and suitability actions. The rule is the companion to the four OPM rules we covered last week, and it takes full effect in early September.
The trigger dates control, and they differ by rule. For reduction in force matters, the date the agency issued the specific RIF notice determines which system applies. For probationary matters, the date the action took effect controls. For suitability matters, the date the appeal is filed controls, so an appeal filed with the Board before September 2 stays with the Board.
State Department Opens a Second Round of Schedule Policy/Career Conversions
The State Department is expanding its search for employees to reclassify as at-will workers under Schedule Policy/Career. According to reporting in Government Executive, one department employee described human resources officials using a short questionnaire to evaluate employees at the GS-13 and GS-14 levels, and characterized the effort as moving relatively fast.
The June executive order placed approximately 8,000 positions into the schedule. The State Department's return to the question suggests that its first round did not meet expectations, and other agencies may follow.
Rise Up’s guidance is as yet unchanged. Signing an acknowledgment form confirms that the employee received the notice. It does not signal agreement with the reclassification. Annotating the form provides no legal protection, and refusing to sign may create a risk of an adverse action without any offsetting benefit. Employees should keep every document they receive, meet every deadline, and preserve their position descriptions.
The challenges to Schedule Policy/Career remain pending in federal court. No injunction is in place, so conversions are effective as they are issued.
New Suit Seeks to Force OPM to Issue Reservist Differential Regulations
A Department of Veterans Affairs attorney who also serves as a major in the Army Reserve's Judge Advocate General's Corps filed suit against the Office of Personnel Management on August 12, asking the court to compel the agency to issue regulations implementing the Supreme Court's 2025 decision in Feliciano v. Department of Transportation.
The statute requires agencies to pay the difference when a federal civilian employee's military pay during a qualifying activation falls below their civilian basic pay. OPM's guidance instructed agencies that the deployment had to be substantially connected to a particular war or national emergency. The Supreme Court rejected that test and held that the statute asks only whether the service coincided in time with a declared national emergency.
Fifteen months later the guidance has still not changed. According to reporting in Federal News Network, agencies continue to deny differential pay while the regulations remain outstanding. Government Executive reportedthat counsel are preparing a class case before the Merit Systems Protection Board.
NTEU Sets a September 5 Dues Deadline
The National Treasury Employees Union has set a deadline of September 5 for members to sign up to resume paying dues. According tothree union officials, members who do not enroll by that date will lose access to union benefits, including eligibility for representation, until they resume paying.
The deadline follows the loss of payroll dues withholding across much of the union's membership. NTEU stated in litigation that member dues accounted for nearly 85 percent of its revenue in fiscal 2024, and that roughly 95 percent of those dues arrived through payroll deduction. The union began a phased rollout of a direct payment system in February.
There is an advantage to paying dues directly to a union. Payroll deduction requires the agency to process the allotment, which tells the employer exactly who its union members are. Direct payment removes that visibility and keeps the employee’s status as a member between the employee and their union.
OPM Narrows Bargaining Over Performance Appraisals
OPM has issued guidance to agencies identifying which parts of the new performance management system override collective bargaining obligations.Under the guidance, contract provisions that allow grievances over performance ratings are non-negotiable, as are provisions that would prevent an agency from using a forced distribution system.
Some subjects remain negotiable, including informal requests for reconsideration of a rating, awards and recognition programs, and feedback procedures between supervisors and employees, provided they are consistent with the final rule and applicable law.
The final rule issued in early July clears the way for forced distribution and requires agencies to limit the number of employees rated as high performers. The combination matters for anyone facing a rating they believe is inaccurate, because the guidance removes the grievance procedure that many contracts provided for exactly that dispute.
Appropriations Move Toward December
The Senate passed a continuing resolution on August 7 by a vote of ninety to six that would fund the government at current levels through December 11 andavoid a shutdown when the fiscal year ends on September 30. The measure also temporarily blocks implementation of an Office of Management and Budget rule governing federal grants.
The House passed its own resolution in July running through December 4. The two chambers have not reconciled the difference. The House returns from recess later this month and must take up the Senate measure or negotiate a compromisebefore anything reaches the President. Until that happens the October 1 deadline remains open.
Looking Ahead
Comments on the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service interim final rule where it can block requests for arbitration panels close September 3 at regulations.gov.
The Department of Veterans Affairs has asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit to stay the collective bargaining injunction we reported on last week, and has requested a ruling on an expedited basis.
The D.C. Circuit has now gone eight months without ruling in the consolidated collective bargaining cases brought by the National Treasury Employees Union, the American Foreign Service Association, and the Federal Education Association. A substantial number of district court cases remain stayed behind that decision.
A Note on the Litigation Tracker
Our Litigation Tracker is undergoing renovations and is not currently up-to-date. We are rebuilding it with the goal of making it easier to navigate and faster to check. We will let you know when it returns!
In Solidarity,
Suzanne Summerlin General Counsel Rise Up: Federal Workers Legal Defense Network
