Attorneys for Federal Employees — Nationwide

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

• Telework Down 73 Percent: OPM's new report to Congress says only 12 percent of federal employees teleworked at all in the last pay period of fiscal 2025, down from 40 percent the year before. OPM says telework remains a legitimate tool for reasonable accommodation and other limited circumstances.

• A Judge Says "Fired For No Good Reason" Is Not Enough: A D.C. federal judge dismissed a lawsuit by three former USAID employees, holding that most of their claims belong at the MSPB, not in court — but she also rejected the government's attempt to make it harder to get into court when the Board sits on a mixed case for 120 days.

• New Rating Rules For Senior Professionals: OPM's final rule for senior-level (SL) and scientific or professional (ST) employees takes effect November 18, with quarterly progress reviews, a new higher-level review right, and OPM-set rating distribution caps.

Top Stories:

1. OPM Reports a 73 Percent Drop in Federal Telework — and Names Reasonable Accommodation as One of the Few Remaining Reasons to Work From Home

Source: Federal News Network, November 10, 2026

TL;DR: The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) has sent Congress its annual report on the status of telework, and the numbers show how completely the January 2025 "Return to In-Person Work" memorandum changed federal workplaces. OPM collected data from 97 agencies for the final full pay period of fiscal 2025. It found that 273,497 employees, or 12 percent of the workforce at reporting agencies, teleworked in some form during that period, down 73 percent from 1,017,230 employees, or 40 percent, in fiscal 2024. OPM Director Scott Kupor called the result "a fundamental reset of how the Federal workforce shows up every day to serve the public," and wrote that telework "remains a legitimate tool when a clear mission need exists: continuity of operations, severe weather and other emergencies, reasonable accommodation, and other limited and compelling circumstances." According to FEDweek's review of the agency tables, the largest remaining groups of teleworkers were at the Defense Department (listed in the report as the Department of War), Veterans Affairs, and Treasury, and most of those who still telework do so only situationally.

For federal employees, this means:

• If you telework as a reasonable accommodation, OPM's own report confirms that accommodation remains a recognized reason for telework. Keep your approved accommodation paperwork and any medical documentation where you can find it, and ask for the decision in writing if your agency moves to change or end the arrangement.
• "Eligible to telework" is a status under the agency's policy, not a promise. OPM's report notes that eligibility is determined under 5 U.S.C. § 6502(a) and (b); whether you actually telework depends on your agency's current policy and any written telework agreement.
• If your union contract still contains telework provisions, the question of whether the return-to-office directive overrides them is being litigated agency by agency before arbitrators and the FLRA (Federal Labor Relations Authority). Check with your steward before assuming the contract language is dead.

Legal Insight

The Telework Enhancement Act of 2010, 5 U.S.C. §§ 6501–6506, requires every agency to have a telework policy, sets the eligibility rules at 5 U.S.C. § 6502, and requires OPM's annual report to Congress under 5 U.S.C. § 6506. Nothing in that statute gives an individual employee a right to telework, which is why the return-to-office memorandum could reverse a decade of practice without changing the law. The exception that still has teeth is disability accommodation: under the Rehabilitation Act § 501 (29 U.S.C. § 791) and the EEOC's regulations at 29 C.F.R. § 1630.2(o), an agency must provide a reasonable accommodation, which can include telework, unless it can show undue hardship, and it must engage in an individualized interactive process rather than apply a blanket in-office rule. If your agency denies or revokes accommodation telework, the 45-day clock to contact an EEO counselor under 29 C.F.R. § 1614.105(a)(1) starts running from the denial, so consult a federal employment attorney promptly.

2. Judge Dismisses USAID Employees' Lawsuit as "Fired For No Good Reason" but Outside Her Power — and Rejects the Government's Bid to Narrow the 120-Day Path to Court

Source: FedSmith, November 10, 2026

TL;DR: On November 6, Judge Sparkle L. Sooknanan of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed a suit by three former employees of USAID's diversity office in Greene v. U.S. Agency for International Development, No. 25-cv-4217 (D.D.C. Nov. 6, 2026). The three were placed on administrative leave on January 22, 2025, after the executive order closing DEIA offices, and were terminated in April 2025 in the agency-wide reduction in force (RIF). They filed a mixed-case appeal at the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) in May 2025; when the Board took no action for more than 120 days, they sued in December 2025 under the Constitution, the Civil Service Reform Act (CSRA), Title VII, and other statutes. The judge wrote that the plaintiffs "were abruptly stripped of their duties and seemingly fired for no good reason," but that the court "is without authority to grant them the relief that they seek." She dismissed the leave, regulatory, and APA claims for lack of jurisdiction because the CSRA channels personnel disputes through the MSPB and the Federal Circuit, quoting the D.C. Circuit's line that "what you get under the CSRA is what you get." She dismissed the Title VII and First Amendment claims for failure to plead enough specific facts. One ruling went the employees' way: the court rejected the government's argument that a mixed-case appeal must contain "reasonably specific" discrimination allegations before the 120-day rule can open the courthouse door, holding that the statute "requires only that a plaintiff file a mixed case appeal with the MSPB and wait 120 days before filing suit in federal court."

For federal employees, this means:

• If your mixed-case appeal has sat at the MSPB for more than 120 days without a decision, this opinion supports your right to take the discrimination claim to district court without first proving your Board appeal was detailed enough — a point worth raising if the agency argues otherwise.
• Going to court does not bring every claim with you. Challenges to administrative leave, agency regulations, and the authority of OPM or OMB to direct firings were all sent back to CSRA channels. Plan your claims around the MSPB and the Federal Circuit, not around them.
• Extended paid administrative leave is still unsettled. The court held that paid leave is not an appealable adverse action because the CSRA defines a suspension as a status "without duties and pay," 5 U.S.C. § 7501(2), and it never reached whether the 10-workday cap in 5 U.S.C. § 6329a(b)(1) was violated.

Legal Insight

Under 5 U.S.C. § 7702(e)(1)(B), an employee who raises a discrimination claim together with an appealable action may file a civil action if the MSPB does not issue a judicially reviewable decision within 120 days of the appeal. That door opens only for the mixed case itself; claims that could never have been appealed to the Board, such as a challenge to paid leave, do not come along, and 5 U.S.C. § 7512 lists the only actions that are appealable in the first place. The decision is a district court ruling, so it binds no one outside the case. Any employee weighing a 120-day filing should consult a federal employment attorney first, because choosing the wrong forum for the wrong claim can cost the claim entirely.

3. OPM's Final Rule on Senior Professional Ratings Takes Effect November 18 — Quarterly Reviews, a Higher-Level Review Right, and OPM-Set Rating Caps for SL and ST Employees

Source: FEDweek, November 11, 2026

TL;DR: OPM Director Scott Kupor sent agency heads a November 9 memorandum announcing that the final rule on Managing Senior Professional Performance, published in the Federal Register on October 19, 2026 (FR Doc. 2026-21316), is effective November 18, 2026. The rule creates a new subpart E in 5 C.F.R. part 430 for senior-level (SL) and scientific or professional (ST) employees and makes their appraisal process "largely mirror" the Senior Executive Service (SES) process. According to FEDweek, the category covers roughly 1,700 senior-level positions and nearly 800 scientific and technical positions, and the Federal Register notice cited governmentwide data showing about 90 percent of senior professionals received the top two rating levels in fiscal 2023 and 2024. The memorandum lists the key changes: agencies no longer need separate senior professional appraisal programs; progress reviews move from once per appraisal period to at least quarterly; any senior professional may request higher-level review of an initial summary rating regardless of the rating level; OPM is authorized to establish and enforce a standardized distribution of rating levels; and the agency Performance Review Board now conducts the centralized review of proposed ratings and pay actions required under 5 C.F.R. part 534, subpart E.

For federal employees, this means:

• If you are an SL or ST employee, your fiscal 2027 appraisal will run under OPM's governmentwide system rather than your agency's own program, and your rating will be subject to OPM's distribution caps. Because SL and ST pay adjustments and performance awards are tied to the rating, a Level 3 instead of a Level 4 has a dollar consequence.
• The new higher-level review right applies at every rating level, not only to an "Unacceptable" rating. The reviewer cannot change the rating, but can recommend a different one before the Performance Review Board acts. Request it in writing and put your performance evidence in the record.
• Quarterly progress reviews are now mandatory. Treat each one as a documented checkpoint: if the agency skips them or never tells you where you stand, that gap matters if a low rating later arrives.

Legal Insight

Performance appraisal for senior professionals is governed by 5 U.S.C. § 4302 and OPM's regulations in 5 C.F.R. part 430, and SL/ST pay is set under 5 U.S.C. § 5376 and 5 C.F.R. part 534, subpart E. The final rule's standardized distribution authority means an agency can be required to hold the share of top ratings within an OPM cap, and FEDweek reports that OPM's earlier guidance applied a 40 percent cap for the top two rating levels combined across the GS workforce, senior professionals, and the career SES, with agency waivers available. A rating of record is generally not directly appealable to the MSPB, but it becomes evidence in any later performance-based action under 5 U.S.C. chapter 43, so the review procedures in this rule are the place to build the record.

Mindful Moment of the Day

The Badge Reader Pause

Maybe today's telework numbers landed somewhere personal: the badge reader at the door, the longer commute, the desk that no longer feels like yours. Before you reach for the next headline, notice what your body is doing. Are your shoulders lifted? Is your jaw tight? Feel your feet on the floor, take three slow breaths, and say silently, "This is a real change, and I can meet today." Then choose one small step within your reach: gather your telework or accommodation paperwork into one folder, write down one question to ask your supervisor, or plan a fifteen-minute break away from your screen. Mindfulness here does not mean pretending the change doesn't matter; it means meeting it one steady breath at a time, so you can decide what to do next with a clear head.  

In Case You Missed It

A few quick hits from our recent posts:

Veterans Day: Why Veterans' Preference Matters to Every Federal Employee

Southworth PC Makes the Inc. 5000 and Is a Crisp Firm of the Year Finalist

Worried About Retaliation or Being Targeted for Speaking Up?

If you’ve reported misconduct, safety concerns, discrimination, or waste/fraud/abuse—and now you’re seeing sudden schedule changes, bad performance reviews, or threats of discipline—you may be in whistleblower or retaliation territory.