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
Today at a Glance
-
HHS Accommodation Closures: HHS is administratively closing reasonable accommodation requests for medical documentation it says it never received. Employees have proof they sent it, interim accommodations end with the closure, and the 45-day EEO counselor clock runs from the notice.
-
BOP Contempt Hearing Today: At 4 p.m. in Hartford, the judge who ordered the Bureau of Prisons to reinstate its union contract hears the unions' contempt motion. The unions call the October 7 re-termination "self-help"; BOP says it complied.
-
TSA Privatization: TSA has dropped Gold+ but still wants more airports in the Screening Partnership Program, and the fiscal 2027 budget request would move every category III and IV airport to private screeners. Here is what 49 U.S.C. § 44920 requires of a contractor.
Top Stories:
1. HHS Is Closing Reasonable Accommodation Requests for "Missing" Medical Paperwork That Employees Say They Sent — Interim Accommodations End With the Closure, and the 45-Day EEO Clock Is Running
Source: Government Executive, October 9, 2026
TL;DR: Several HHS employees told Government Executive that the department administratively closed their reasonable accommodation requests for failing to provide medical documentation within 20 calendar days, and showed the outlet proof they had submitted it before the deadline. A September 21 closure email obtained by Government Executive says the Reasonable Accommodation Program "has not received the information requested," that the case "will be administratively closed," and that any interim accommodations in place while the request was pending "will also cease"; it adds that the closure "does not constitute a denial or determination on the merits." One CDC employee said she was granted an extended deadline, submitted her records by mid-September, and was closed out anyway in late September; NIH employees reported the same closures. An HHS spokesperson said that if a "request is verified to have been closed in error due to documentation having been received prior to the 20 day timeline, then those cases will be corrected accordingly." In September, Government Executive reported a CDC backlog of about 3,000 requests and an August CDC notice telling employees to resubmit documentation they had already provided. HHS's own policy says medical documentation may be requested only when the disability or need "is not known or obvious," that once a provider confirms the disability and functional limitations "it is the HHS's policy to not request additional medical documentation," and that closure for missing documentation applies when the requestor "did not submit any medical documentation" within 20 days "and did not respond to subsequent requests for response."
For federal employees, this means:
- If you received a closure notice, reply in writing now to your reasonable accommodation coordinator and the address on the notice with your proof of submission (the sent email, portal confirmation, or date stamp), ask that the case be reopened at the stage it had reached, and ask that any interim accommodation be restored while the error is corrected. Keep copies outside agency systems.
- Treat the closure as a denial for deadline purposes. Contact an EEO counselor within 45 calendar days of the closure notice, even while HHS reviews the error. For a notice received September 21, that is November 5. A later correction does not restart the clock.
- Do not send more medical information than the policy requires. HHS's policy says that once a provider has documented the disability and the functional limitations, processing moves to a decision. If you are asked for more, ask in writing what is insufficient and why.
Legal Insight
The Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. § 791, requires agencies to provide reasonable accommodation under the standards of the Americans with Disabilities Act. EEOC regulations require every agency's procedures to explain when it may require medical information, limit requests for supplemental information to cases where what was submitted is insufficient, and require an interim accommodation when it is reasonably likely the employee is entitled to one but it cannot be provided immediately. 29 C.F.R. § 1614.203(d)(3)(i)(I), (J), (Q). A denial requires written notice with the 45-day warning, 29 C.F.R. § 1614.203(d)(3)(iii), and the counselor-contact deadline runs under 29 C.F.R. § 1614.105(a)(1); closing a request and ending an interim accommodation over paperwork the agency already holds is the kind of record a complaint is built on, so consult a federal employment attorney before the 45 days run.
2. The BOP Contempt Hearing Is Today at 4 p.m. in Hartford — the Unions Call the Re-Termination "Self-Help" and Ask the Judge to Declare the Injunction Still Binding; BOP Says It Complied and the Hearing "Is Not Necessary"
TL;DR: At 4 p.m. today in Hartford, Judge Vernon D. Oliver hears the unions' motion to hold the Bureau of Prisons in contempt of the September 29 preliminary injunction, which ordered the agency to "immediately reinstate" its contract with AFGE's Council of Prison Locals "for the remainder of the agreed-upon term." In Friday's joint status report, the unions say BOP's October 7 "fresh" termination of the contract, issued the day after the contempt motion, amounts to "self-help": the agency never asked the judge to dissolve or modify the injunction, and the unions ask him to confirm that the order remains binding, which they say would make the re-termination void. BOP's position is that it complied: senior managers met immediately, reinstated the agreement, instructed its six regional directors, and worked to "turn back on" normal operations at 122 institutions before re-terminating, and the injunction addressed only the September 2025 termination and "did not (and cannot)" bar a new decision, so the hearing "is not necessary." As Federal News Network reported last week, the October 7 memo relies on Executive Order 14251 and the national security exclusion in 5 U.S.C. § 7103(b)(1), ends dues deduction and official time, ends union representation at investigatory interviews and disciplinary proceedings, and treats pending grievances and arbitrations as withdrawn. Roughly 30,000 BOP employees are covered.
For federal employees, this means:
- If you are a BOP employee facing an investigative interview or proposed discipline, ask in writing for a union representative anyway and keep the written answer. Whether the re-termination is void is exactly what the judge is being asked to decide.
- Your statutory rights do not depend on the contract. Advance written notice of a removal or a suspension over 14 days, a reasonable time to reply, and the right to be represented by an attorney or other representative remain in place under 5 U.S.C. § 7513(b), as do MSPB appeal rights.
- Watch for the ruling. If the judge enforces the injunction, pending grievances and arbitrations may come back; if he accepts the fresh-decision argument, the fight shifts to the October 7 termination itself. Keep a dated file of every notice.
Legal Insight
The unions' filing quotes the Second Circuit's rule that persons subject to an injunction "are expected to obey that decree until it is modified or reversed," while BOP argues the Administrative Procedure Act lets an agency "deal with the problem afresh" with a new decision on a new record. The right to a union representative at an investigatory interview the employee reasonably believes may lead to discipline comes from 5 U.S.C. § 7114(a)(2)(B), and it exists only where a union is the recognized exclusive representative, which is why the 5 U.S.C. § 7103(b)(1) exclusion is the center of this case. Chapter 75 protections under 5 U.S.C. § 7513 remain in force regardless of the contract; if you receive a proposed adverse action during this period, consult a federal employment attorney promptly, because the reply deadline in the notice controls.
3. TSA Drops "Gold+" but Still Wants More Airports to Switch to Private Screeners — What the Screening Partnership Statute Requires of Contractors, and What It Does Not Say About the TSOs Already on the Job
Source: Federal News Network, October 9, 2026
TL;DR: TSA Administrator David Cummins told an airport industry conference last week that he "decided to sunset the Gold+ initiative, but not the desire to increase membership in SPP," the Screening Partnership Program under which a private contractor runs an airport's screening with federal oversight. Steve Lorincz, TSA's executive assistant administrator for security operations, said the agency is discussing a "tiger team" to evaluate the Gold+ process and how to "evolve" SPP, which is in place at roughly 20 airports. Gold+ would have let contractors manage the screening workforce and the technology; TSA canceled it in August after Tampa International, the largest of the three airports that opted in, withdrew after hearing from its TSOs. Separately, the fiscal 2027 budget request, as Federal News Network reported in April, would cut roughly 8,400 of TSA's 61,000 positions, require all category III and IV airports (generally smaller regional and county airports) to move to private screening, and redirect about $477 million to SPP. AFGE, which represents the roughly 55,000 TSOs, opposes privatization, and DHS's appeal of the injunction protecting the TSO collective bargaining agreement is pending in the Ninth Circuit, with the government's opening brief due October 26.
For federal employees, this means:
- Know your airport's category. The budget proposal targets category III and IV airports; a conversion would come through the appropriations process and an airport application, not overnight. Watch for an application and TSA's 60-day decision.
- The statute sets a floor for contractor pay and benefits at the federal level and keeps federal supervisors on site, but it does not say what happens to the TSOs already working at a converting airport. Ask your Federal Security Director in writing what reassignment, transfer, or hiring arrangements would apply.
- Nothing changes because of a conference announcement; until Congress funds a different structure and your airport converts, your status and protections stay as they are.
Legal Insight
Under 49 U.S.C. § 44920, an airport operator may apply to have screening performed by a "qualified private screening company," and TSA must decide within 60 days and must approve the application unless approval "would compromise security or detrimentally affect the cost-efficiency or the effectiveness of the screening." A company qualifies only if it employs individuals who meet the same requirements as federal screeners and provides "compensation and other benefits" that are "not less than the level" provided to federal screeners; TSA must supply federal supervisors at every SPP airport and may terminate a contractor that repeatedly fails to comply. 49 U.S.C. § 44920(b), (c), (e), (f). The statute governs the contractor; what happens to the federal screeners at a converting airport turns on TSA policy and on what Congress writes into the appropriation.
Mindful Moment of the Day
When the Paperwork Goes Missing
You open an email saying the document you sent was never received. You know you sent it. Notice what your body does: the tight chest, the heat in your face, the urge to reply this second. Put both feet on the floor and take three slow breaths, longer on the exhale. Say silently, “I can be upset and still be careful.” Then take one small step: find the proof you sent it, save a copy somewhere outside agency systems, and write down the date. Mindfulness here does not mean pretending the error is fine; it means giving yourself a steady minute before you decide what to do next.
In Case You Missed It
A few quick hits from our recent posts:
BOP Cancels Union Contract Again Days After a Judge Ordered It Reinstated
|
Third Circuit Erases Ruling on EEOC’s Penn Subpoena: What Federal Employees Should Know
|
Facing Harassment or Discrimination?
If you’re dealing with slurs, exclusion, hostile emails, or sudden negative treatment after speaking up, you don’t have to wait until things get unbearable to explore your options.
We regularly represent federal employees in:
-
EEO complaints for discrimination, harassment, and hostile work environment
-
Retaliation for prior EEO activity or protected conduct
-
Reasonable accommodation disputes
-
Related discipline or performance issues that follow on the heels of complaints
In your free, confidential consultation, we’ll walk through what’s been happening, key dates (including the short EEO deadlines), and the tools available to you—formal and informal.
👉 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.
Responses