OPM’s New RIF Proposal: How Performance Ratings Could Cost You Your Job
Federal employees have long relied on a RIF system grounded in objective factors—tenure, veterans’ preference, and credible measures of service time. The new OPM proposal rewrites that foundation. Under this draft rule, your last three performance ratings would become the dominant factor in determining who keeps a job during a reduction in force. For GS-9 and above employees navigating demanding workloads, EEO issues, or probationary pressure, this creates a new axis of vulnerability: one subjective number at the end of the year.
Why Performance Ratings Are Not Neutral Evidence
On paper, a point system tied to “Outstanding,” “Fully Successful,” or “Unacceptable” looks like a merit-based upgrade. In practice, federal employees know how variable ratings really are. Some supervisors refuse to award top scores. Some offices quietly cap “Outstanding” ratings regardless of performance. And employees who raise concerns—about discrimination, safety, retaliation, telework restrictions, or compliance issues—often see their ratings drop the next cycle. The draft rule accelerates those risks. When layoffs hinge on subjective ratings rather than tenure or veterans’ preference, it creates a legal pathway for masking retaliation or bias behind the veneer of “objective” point totals.
Expanded Erosion Authority and Reduced RIF Protections
The proposal also widens the category of positions that can be moved out of RIF protections entirely. Employees whose duties are deemed “eroded” could be downgraded more easily and with far less procedural protection. For someone already managing a heavy portfolio or juggling accommodation requests, a quiet downgrade can become a career setback long before a formal RIF ever occurs. This is not theoretical—these structural changes make it harder for unions, representatives, and attorneys to intervene before decisions become final.
A System That Invites More Appeals, Not Fewer
Even internal reviewers have warned that weighting RIF decisions heavily toward performance ratings could backfire. Ratings are the least standardized element of the federal HR process. When they suddenly become determinative in layoffs, employees have stronger grounds to challenge RIF actions as retaliatory or discriminatory. The result could be faster and broader RIFs on the front end, followed by a surge of MSPB appeals and EEO complaints on the back end—a system that helps no one, least of all career civil servants.
Steps You Can Take Now to Protect Your Career
Before this rule becomes final, your best defense is preparation. Treat your performance file as evidence: keep your plan, your appraisals, email praise, and metrics that show actual results. If a rating misrepresents your work, put your disagreement in writing. When the public comment window opens, speak up—individually and through your union or professional organization. The people who understand how ratings function day-to-day are the ones best positioned to explain why this proposal is dangerous.
Legal Disclaimer: The information provided in this article is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice. While I am a federal employment attorney, this post does not create an attorney-client relationship. Every situation is unique, and legal outcomes depend on specific facts and circumstances.