Nearly 200,000 federal workers and supporters follow our updates across TikTok, Instagram, YouTube, Facebook, and LinkedIn. Each briefing gives you the three stories that actually matter to your job, plain‑English legal guidance, and one short practice to protect your peace of mind. If it helps you, forward it to a colleague—new readers can subscribe at https://fedlegalhelp.com/newsletter. 

🎧 Listen: Civil Rights for Civil Servants

Shaun Southworth & Lydia Taylor on what's happening to the federal workforce. Latest episode: Apple · Spotify · Amazon Music · Youtube

Listen to the latest episode of Civil Rights for Civil Servants They kept a file on you. It's time you kept one on them. For the last year and a half, federal employees have lived through hiring freeze... player.captivate.fm

Today at a Glance

• Appeals and RIF Rules Finalized: OPM issued final rules Friday moving appeals of RIF, probationary, and suitability actions from the Merit Systems Protection Board to OPM itself, and making performance the top retention factor in a layoff. The rules publish in the Federal Register today and take effect 30 days later.

• VA Contract Deadline Saturday: AFGE has asked a federal judge to block the VA’s third attempt to end the master agreement covering more than 300,000 VA employees. The VA says the contract simply expires by its own terms on August 8.

• Last Day to Comment: The joint OPM-MSPB proposed rule that would cap PIPs at 30 days, ban clean-record settlements, and replace the Douglas factors closes for public comment today, August 3.

Top Stories:

1. OPM Finalizes a Major Shift — RIF, Probationary, and Suitability Appeals Move From the MSPB to OPM, and Performance Comes First in Layoffs

Source: Federal News Network, July 31, 2026

TL;DR: On Friday, July 31, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) issued four final rules that change both how agencies decide who stays in a reduction in force (RIF) and where employees go to challenge certain terminations. Under the new rules, appeals of adverse actions taken during a RIF, terminations during a probationary period, and removals under suitability standards will be decided by OPM — not the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB), where those appeals have gone for decades. OPM will hold what the rules call “sole and exclusive” authority over those categories, with RIF and probationary appeals handled by OPM’s Merit System Accountability and Compliance office and suitability appeals handled by OPM’s suitability office. A separate final rule reorders RIF retention: recent performance ratings become the primary retention factor, followed by veterans’ preference, with tenure and length of service used only as tiebreakers between employees — and the longstanding “bump and retreat” process is eliminated in favor of assignment rights to a position held by an employee with lower retention standing in the same tenure group. All four rules are scheduled to publish in the Federal Register today, August 3, and take effect 30 days after publication. According to the final rule, 99 percent of commenters opposed moving RIF appeals from the MSPB to OPM; OPM Director Scott Kupor wrote that the internal process is designed to be “structurally independent, with separate staff handling determinations and appeals,” while critics, including the Partnership for Public Service, questioned whether OPM — which has lost more than a third of its own staff — can provide the independent review the MSPB was built for.

For federal employees, this means:

• If you receive a RIF notice, a probationary termination, or a suitability action after the rules take effect (30 days from today’s publication), read the appeal instructions in your notice carefully. The forum and the deadline may now point to OPM rather than the MSPB, and a missed filing deadline is very hard to undo.
• Your most recent performance ratings now carry the most weight in whether you keep your job in a RIF. Keep copies of your ratings and any communications about them, and use the channels still available to correct a rating you believe is wrong — a separate OPM rule taking effect August 6 will bar challenges to ratings through negotiated grievance procedures.
• Veterans’ preference still counts in RIF retention, but it now comes after performance rather than ahead of it, and tenure and seniority only break ties. If you are preference eligible, confirm your preference is correctly coded in your personnel records now, before any RIF notice arrives.

Legal Insight. The RIF statute, 5 U.S.C. § 3502(a), requires OPM’s retention regulations to give effect to four factors — tenure, military preference, length of service, and performance ratings — but the order of those factors has long been set by regulation in 5 C.F.R. Part 351, which is what OPM has now rewritten. Under current rules, a RIF separation is appealable to the MSPB under 5 C.F.R. § 351.901, and probationers have narrow MSPB appeal grounds under 5 C.F.R. § 315.806; once the new rules take effect, those routes are redirected to OPM’s internal process. Appeal windows in these processes are short, and the new rules change the forum itself, so which rules govern your case may turn on the date of your notice. If you receive a RIF, probationary, or suitability action in the coming weeks, consult a federal employment attorney promptly about the forum and the deadline that apply to you.

2. The VA Says Its Union Contract Simply Expires Saturday — AFGE Asks a Federal Judge to Stop a Third Termination

Source: Government Executive, July 30, 2026

TL;DR: The Department of Veterans Affairs and the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) are back before U.S. District Judge Melissa Dubose in the District of Rhode Island over whether the VA may end the master collective bargaining agreement (CBA) covering more than 300,000 VA employees when the contract’s term runs out on August 8. On July 28, AFGE filed its second motion to enforce the judge’s prior orders after VA management said it would terminate the agreement on that expiration date. The VA has twice tried to end its union contracts since the March 2025 executive order excluding most VA bargaining units from collective bargaining — first in August 2025 and again in March 2026 — and both attempts were blocked by preliminary injunctions finding the department violated employees’ First Amendment rights; a federal appeals court upheld most of those rulings in May. The union argues the VA’s own May notice seeking negotiations for a new contract term triggered a clause in the CBA that automatically extends the agreement until the parties reach a new deal, and says the parties exchanged ground-rules letters from early June through July 8. The VA responds that the master agreement “expires August 8, 2026 by its own terms,” that it told the union its position on May 19 and again on July 15, and that any claims about the roughly 3,000 police officer, firefighter, and security guard positions exempt from the executive order belong at the Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA), not the district court.

For federal employees, this means:

• If you work at the VA, the protections in the master agreement — grievance procedures, scheduling and overtime rules, representation rights — remain in place at least through August 8. What happens after that date depends on how the judge rules on AFGE’s enforcement motion.
• Document anything that changes after August 8: a denied request for union representation, a canceled grievance meeting, a unilateral schedule change. Dates, names, and copies matter, and your local steward or the National VA Council is the right first stop for reporting them.
• This fight is over the contract, not your individual statutory rights. EEO complaints, MSPB appeals where applicable, Office of Special Counsel complaints, and FLRA unfair labor practice charges all exist independent of the CBA and remain available regardless of how the contract dispute ends.

Legal Insight. Under the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute, an agency generally must maintain established conditions of employment on mandatory subjects of bargaining while a successor agreement is negotiated, and unilateral changes can be unfair labor practices under 5 U.S.C. § 7116(a)(1) and (5). The March 2025 executive order relied on 5 U.S.C. § 7103(b)(1), which permits the President to exclude agencies or subdivisions with primary intelligence, counterintelligence, investigative, or national security functions from the statute’s coverage — the exclusion at the center of this litigation. Whether the CBA’s automatic-extension clause keeps the full contract alive past August 8 is now squarely before the district court.

3. Last Day to Comment: The Rule That Would Rewrite PIPs, Settlements, and the Douglas Factors Closes Tonight

Source: Federal Register (OPM/MSPB joint proposed rule, 91 FR 40444), July 2, 2026

TL;DR: Today, August 3, is the deadline to comment on “Promoting Employee Accountability,” the joint OPM and MSPB proposed rule that is the most far-reaching pending change to the federal discipline and removal process. The proposal would cap the opportunity period to demonstrate acceptable performance — the PIP (Performance Improvement Plan) — at 30 calendar days and bar informal pre-PIP assistance periods, make removal the default proposed penalty for unacceptable performance, standardize and compress response timelines including a 7-to-10-calendar-day window to answer certain proposed actions, and prohibit “clean record” settlement agreements that remove documented performance or misconduct allegations from personnel files. It would also bar employee representatives from using official time in certain adverse-action matters. On the appeals side, the MSPB proposes to stop applying the twelve Douglas factors — the framework used since 1981 to review whether a penalty is reasonable — and replace them with a “totality of the circumstances” test at proposed 5 C.F.R. § 1201.56(b)(3). Comments must be received today; after the window closes, OPM and the MSPB will review the record and decide whether to adopt, revise, or withdraw the proposals in a final rule. The four final rules OPM is publishing today (Story 1) came out of this same regulatory agenda, which is a fair indication of the pace at which these proposals could become final.

For federal employees, this means:

• If you want your experience in the record — as an employee, union steward, or HR professional — today is the last day. Follow the submission instructions in the Federal Register notice; the MSPB portion also accepts comments through the Clerk of the Board.
• If you are on a PIP or answering proposed discipline right now, current rules — including the Douglas factors and existing PIP timelines — still govern your case. Nothing in the proposal changes anything until a final rule issues and takes effect.
• Substantive comments filed today become part of the administrative record. If the final rule is later challenged in court, that record is what a reviewing court examines — which is why detailed, specific comments from people who work under these rules carry weight.

Legal Insight. Chapter 43 requires an agency to give an employee an opportunity to demonstrate acceptable performance before a performance-based removal, 5 U.S.C. § 4302(c)(6), plus 30 days’ advance written notice and a right to reply, 5 U.S.C. § 4303(b); Chapter 75 adverse actions carry their own notice-and-reply protections under 5 U.S.C. § 7513(b). The proposed rule would compress several of those windows by regulation and replace the penalty-review framework of Douglas v. Veterans Administration, 5 M.S.P.R. 280 (1981), with a case-by-case reasonableness test. Nothing changes until a final rule issues, but if you are in a PIP or responding to a proposed action when new rules take effect, which framework governs can be a live question — consult a federal employment attorney about the timing in your case.

Legal Tip of the Day

Problems During a Probationary or Trial Period

Employees in probationary or trial periods may have fewer appeal rights, but that does not mean they have no protections. If criticism, termination threats, or sudden negative feedback appears connected to discrimination, retaliation, whistleblowing, military service, prior EEO activity, or other protected conduct, timing and documentation may matter. Save notices, emails, performance feedback, training records, and examples of completed work. Create a timeline showing when problems began and what else was happening at the same time. Do not assume there is nothing to do, but do not delay because deadlines may be short. Southworth PC can help probationary and trial-period employees evaluate whether legal protections may apply.

In Case You Missed It

A few quick hits from our recent posts:

Veterans’ Preference Is Not a Federal Hiring Flaw

Could Jackler v. DOJ Weaken Civil Service Rights?

Need Help with Discipline or Performance?

If you’ve just been put on a PIP, received a proposed suspension or removal, or are worried your “coaching” has turned into a paper trail, it’s time to get real advice—not just hallway rumors.

At Southworth PC, we represent federal employees nationwide in:

• Proposed discipline and removals

• Performance issues and PIPs

• EEO discrimination, harassment, and retaliation

• Whistleblower and civil rights matters

• MSPB, EEOC, and OSC cases

• OPM/FERS disability retirement applications (flat‑fee full‑service assistance)

In a free, confidential consultation, you speak directly with an attorney about your timeline, key documents, and options. Deadlines can be quick in the federal sector, so if you have a deadline, don’t wait.

👉 Schedule Your Free Consultation Today

Disclaimer:

This briefing is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or create an attorney‑client relationship. Federal employment law is fact‑specific and time‑sensitive; you should consult a qualified attorney about your own situation and deadlines. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.

Your service is worth protecting. Let's protect it together at Southworth PC.