Arbitrator Finds USDA Repudiated Its Telework Contract: What It Means for Your CBA

A USDA telework arbitration award issued on August 19 did more than find a contract violation — the arbitrator wrote that the Agriculture Department’s conduct “amounted to a repudiation of the agreement.” For federal employees living under return-to-office mandates, that word matters. It is the twelfth return-to-office or telework grievance this administration has lost in the past year, and it is the clearest statement yet that a collective bargaining agreement is a contract an agency has to negotiate, not a policy it can announce.

What the Arbitrator Actually Found

Arbitrator Margaret Donaghy reviewed what USDA did to Rural Development Agency employees: it ended telework, ordered employees back to the office, and never bargained the change first. She found that USDA “committed unfair labor practices when it engaged in bad faith bargaining and implemented a rule that conflicted with the existing agreement,” and that “[t]he nature and scope of the agency’s breaches amounted to a repudiation of the agreement.”

The change affected 135 employees represented by the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees. Forty-six of them had remote work as a condition of employment.

The Remedy: Restored Agreements, Bargaining, and Money

Donaghy ordered USDA to restore the telework and remote work agreements that were in effect in April 2025, and to actually sit down and negotiate any change to those terms. She also ordered reimbursement under the Back Pay Act and the Travel Expense Act for costs employees absorbed over the preceding eighteen months — tolls and transportation that employees paid out of pocket because of a change that should have been bargained.

Why Agencies Keep Losing These Cases

The pattern is consistent. Agencies have treated telework as a management policy they could announce, when the negotiated agreement made it a term they had to bargain. According to Federal News Network, arbitrators have now ruled for employees on similar grievances at the IRS, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, the Social Security Administration, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the Forest Service.

If you have spent the past year being told what federal employees lost, this is worth sitting with: the contract is still a contract, and arbitration still works.

What Is Not Settled Yet

This is not a final win, and it would be a disservice to present it as one.

• The agency can still challenge it. USDA has thirty days from service of the award to file exceptions with the Federal Labor Relations Authority. Counsel for AFSCME has said the matter could still reach federal court and run for years.
• Whether you personally see a dollar depends on your own contract. The toll and transportation reimbursement came out of specific language in that agreement, and employees will have to show receipts or affirm their costs. That is not automatically true for everyone who has won a similar grievance.
• The administration has won some of these. One grievance was dismissed on procedural grounds — not because the telework policy was lawful, but because the union had already filed an unfair labor practice charge over the same dispute.

One Trap Worth Knowing Before Anything Gets Filed

That last point is the one most likely to cost someone a case. Under federal labor law, an issue that could be raised either as a grievance or as an unfair labor practice charge generally has to travel one route, not both. The choice is usually made by whoever files first — and it can end a case before anyone looks at the merits.

The Law Behind the Award

A federal collective bargaining agreement must provide procedures for settling grievances, 5 U.S.C. § 7121(a)(1), and binding arbitration is the final step of those procedures, § 7121(b)(1)(C)(iii). Refusing to consult or negotiate in good faith with a labor organization as the statute requires is an unfair labor practice under 5 U.S.C. § 7116(a)(5), and interfering with, restraining, or coercing an employee in the exercise of a chapter 71 right is one under § 7116(a)(1).

An arbitration award becomes final and binding if no exception is filed with the Authority “during the 30-day period beginning on the date the award is served on the party,” 5 U.S.C. § 7122(b) — and the Authority may not extend or waive that filing deadline, 5 C.F.R. § 2429.23(d). Monetary relief for an unjustified or unwarranted personnel action runs through the Back Pay Act, 5 U.S.C. § 5596.

On the election-of-remedies point, 5 U.S.C. § 7116(d) provides that issues which can be raised under a grievance procedure “may, in the discretion of the aggrieved party, be raised under the grievance procedure or as an unfair labor practice under this section, but not under both procedures.” The same subsection bars raising as an unfair labor practice an issue that can properly be raised under an appeals procedure.

What to Do This Week

Three practical steps, none of which require a lawyer to start:

• Print your CBA’s telework article and its travel and expenses article. Read what your agency actually promised, in its own words.
• If you absorbed commuting costs because of an unbargained change, start keeping records now — receipts, toll statements, mileage.
• Before anybody files anything, ask your union representative which route you are taking. The order of filings matters more than most people realize.

To receive updates like this straight to your inbox, sign up for our free daily newsletter.

Legal Disclaimer: This content is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Federal employment situations are fact-specific and time-sensitive. Please consult a qualified federal employment attorney about your specific situation. You can contact Southworth PC at attorneysforfederalemployees.com.