Episode 5 is Up — and EEOC Votes Tomorrow Morning (Will Be Historic)

Hey Feds,

Two things today: Episode 5 is up, and the EEOC votes tomorrow morning on something you should have eyes on. Both below.

First, the podcast. The content is timely, and most Feds need to know this. Given everything that's happening, is it time you learn more about the MSPB and what it was designed to do?

Episode 5: Inside the MSPB Appeal

Start here, because it has a deadline. On September 2 — eight days from today — RIF appeals, suitability actions, and probationary terminations leave the Merit Systems Protection Board. They get decided inside OPM instead, mostly on paper: no discovery, no depositions, no subpoenas. About 1,250 comments came in on the RIF rule; ninety-nine percent opposed it. Is the government going to try to use suitability to get around your civil service protections? Want to know what might be lost for some people and the generally about how the MSPB processes appeals? This is your episode.

What is not changing: if you are tenured and your agency removes, demotes, or suspends you for more than 14 days, unless it is a suitability concern, your appeal still goes to the Board, and cases already pending stay there. Lydia clears that up in the first five minutes, before anybody panics.

Also, we have some great guests. Kevin Byrnes — Navy Judge Advocate, federal prosecutor, Department of Justice, more than 35 years in practice — leads the litigation for hundreds of separated USAID and State Department employees before the Board, and explains why he challenged the reduction in force as invalid from the outset rather than fighting over its procedures. He also gives his take on what's happening with the MSPB.

And also: Lillian. She is a career Foreign Service Officer, over fifteen years in and tenured, who ran the last conversations at her post herself — then had to explain it to her eight-year-old. Her daughter's answer stayed with me: "But you're helping people, you're helping sick people." It's a powerful story.

▶ Listen now: MSPB Appeal: The 30 Days That Decide Your Federal Career - Civil Rights for Civil Servants

Both guests are here because of the USAID Employee Support Fund. It does not practice law — it finances the legal defense, so career employees separated in the 2025 dismantling can get the hearings federal law promises them. If you can help, or pass it along: usaidemployeefund.org. Please learn more and support them how you can.

Tomorrow at 10 a.m.: the EEOC Votes on Your Hearing Rights

Tomorrow morning — Wednesday, August 26, at 10:00 a.m. Eastern — the EEOC votes on whether to publish a proposed rewrite of Part 1614, the rules every federal employee uses to bring a discrimination case. Reports say it would end your right to choose a hearing before an independent EEOC Administrative Judge (an EEOC office would decide whether you ever get one), eliminate the counseling and mediation stage, and abolish group complaints. Federal employees requested 7,175 of those hearings last fiscal year.

Here is the part I keep coming back to: as of this morning, the public cannot read the proposal. We're going based on behind-the-scenes information, but once it drops, of course I'll read it.

Based on our concerns, today our firm sent the Commission a letter — to put objections on the record before the vote. We demanded the text, a real public hearing, at least 90 days to comment, and protection for every pending case.

To be clear: tomorrow's vote changes no one's rights or deadlines. Current rules remain fully in force. This is not a moment for panic — it is a moment to pay attention.

Read our letter, the plain-English breakdown, and how to watch the meeting live: fedlegalhelp.com/EEOmeeting

I don't anticipate it will be that surprising, but it will be historic.

— Shaun Southworth, Founding Partner, Southworth PC

P.S. Send this episode to the coworker still holding a letter who thinks it is over. And forward the EEOC piece to your steward or EEO professional — the people this system exists for should not learn about its redesign after the fact.

General information, not legal advice.