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
-
USDA Relocations Stayed: A federal judge in San Francisco on Tuesday stayed USDA's office closures and cross-country employee relocations at eight components while the lawsuit proceeds, finding the agency is likely spending appropriated funds in violation of the spending law Congress passed. USDA has two business days to notify every affected employee.
-
Labor Department Accommodation Reviews: Starting in November, the Labor Department will "recertify" every existing reasonable accommodation annually, beginning with agreements approved on or before September 30, 2025 — and employees may be asked for updated medical documentation.
-
FLRA Mediation Program: The Federal Labor Relations Authority approved a voluntary FMCS-run mediation program for negotiability disputes, published in Tuesday's Federal Register, with no set timeline for how long a case can sit in mediation.
Top Stories:
1. A Judge Stays USDA's Office Closures and Employee Relocations "Full Stop" — About 2,600 Employees, Eight Components, and a Two-Business-Day Notice Deadline
Source: Government Executive, October 13, 2026
TL;DR: U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria of the Northern District of California on Tuesday granted a stay under the Administrative Procedure Act that bars the Agriculture Department from closing offices or relocating employees outside their local commuting area at eight components — the Forest Service; the Food and Nutrition Administration; the Research, Education, and Economics mission area; the Foreign Agricultural Service; Rural Development; Farm Production and Conservation; the Office of the General Counsel; and the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights — while the unions' lawsuit proceeds. The order also bars USDA from issuing or enforcing "management directed reassignment" letters, including the report dates in letters already sent. The judge found "strong evidence that USDA's planned reorganization activities deviate from Congress's expectations at the time it appropriated the funds," because the fiscal 2026 appropriations law prohibits USDA from reprogramming funds to relocate offices or employees without advance approval from the House and Senate Appropriations Committees. Both sides agreed that the committee-approval mechanism itself is unconstitutional, but the judge concluded Congress would have wanted the underlying prohibition to remain. The Justice Department asked him to limit relief to union-represented employees; he declined, writing that "the most appropriate remedy is indeed to stay USDA's reorganization expenditures, full stop." The order does not reach moves within the National Capital Region and does not require USDA to return employees who had already reported to a new duty station before the judge's September 14 administrative stay. The judge cautioned that the relief "could end up being quite short": the spending restrictions expire December 11, and an appeal is likely.
For federal employees, this means:
- If you received a management directed reassignment letter at one of the eight components, its report-by deadline cannot be enforced while the stay is in place. USDA must email the order to every affected employee within two business days and post it on its reorganization website, and must file a compliance declaration with the court within seven business days.
- The stay is tied to appropriations language that expires December 11. Whether the restrictions continue is now a question for Congress and the next funding bill, so treat this as a pause, not a resolution, and keep every relocation document you have received.
- The order does not stop reassignments within the National Capital Region, and it does not unwind moves completed before September 14. If you have already relocated, your status does not change under this order.
Legal Insight
The stay rests on 5 U.S.C. § 705, which lets a reviewing court "issue all necessary and appropriate process to postpone the effective date of an agency action or to preserve status or rights pending conclusion of the review proceedings." The underlying violation the court found is of § 716(a) of the fiscal 2026 agriculture appropriations act, Pub. L. No. 119-37, Div. B, which bars USDA from reprogramming funds in a way that "relocates an office or employees" without committee approval, and the order borrows the RIF regulation's definition of "local commuting area" at 5 C.F.R. § 351.203 to define what counts as a relocation. Separately from this case, an employee who declines a directed reassignment outside the commuting area can face removal under 5 U.S.C. § 7513, with MSPB — Merit Systems Protection Board — appeal rights. If you have a reassignment letter and are weighing whether to accept or decline, consult a federal employment attorney before the deadline.
2. The Labor Department Will "Recertify" Every Existing Reasonable Accommodation Annually, Starting in November — Here Is What the Rehabilitation Act Rules Say About Re-Requesting Medical Documentation
Source: Government Executive, October 13, 2026
TL;DR: The Labor Department told employees on Tuesday that its Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration and Management (OASAM) will begin an annual "recertification" of reasonable accommodations in November, covering accommodations in place for disabilities and pregnancy-related medical conditions. The review starts with accommodation agreements approved on or before September 30, 2025; accommodations approved in fiscal 2026 or later will be reviewed on a schedule "announced at a later date." According to the staff email obtained by Government Executive, employees "may be asked to provide updated medical information confirming their continued need for the accommodation," supervisors may be asked about essential functions and how the accommodation is being implemented, and accommodations "may be adjusted" if the review finds a change in medical needs, job duties, or effectiveness. Current accommodations remain in effect during the review unless an employee is "individually notified otherwise." The email cites February 2026 OPM and EEOC guidance that agencies may find it helpful to reevaluate "a significant accommodation such as recurring or full-time telework once a year." A former FEMA reasonable accommodation specialist quoted in the article said annual recertification of every accommodation "is not how this has traditionally worked" and goes well beyond that guidance, which addressed telework; a former CDC and HHS EEO director said she had "never seen this practice" for a permanent accommodation. The department already has a backlog of hundreds of pending accommodation requests.
For federal employees, this means:
- If you work at Labor and your accommodation was approved on or before September 30, 2025, expect contact from OASAM beginning in November. Pull your original approval, the medical documentation you submitted, and any email confirming the accommodation now, before you are asked.
- An agency may request medical documentation, but the EEOC's rules tie that request to information "sufficient" to explain the disability and the need for accommodation. If your condition and limitations have not changed, say so in writing and ask what specifically the agency considers insufficient before paying for new appointments.
- Watch for the word "adjusted." If the review ends with your accommodation reduced, replaced, or removed, that is a decision you can challenge — and the clock on challenging it is short.
Legal Insight
The EEOC's Rehabilitation Act regulation requires every agency's accommodation procedures to explain when the agency may require medical information "sufficient to explain the nature of the individual's disability, his or her need for reasonable accommodation, and how the requested accommodation" will help, and the agency's right to request "relevant supplemental medical information" only if what was submitted is insufficient for that purpose. 29 C.F.R. § 1614.203(d)(3)(i)(I), (J). Nothing in the regulation prohibits periodic check-ins, and the OPM/EEOC guidance the department cites says an employee is not necessarily entitled to a preferred accommodation "in perpetuity" — but a denial, including a replacement with an accommodation that does not work, must come with written notice of the reasons and of the right to file an EEO complaint, and the right is lost unless you contact an EEO counselor within 45 days of the denial. 29 C.F.R. § 1614.203(d)(3)(iii); 29 C.F.R. § 1614.105(a)(1). If a recertification review ends with your accommodation changed or withdrawn, consult a federal employment attorney promptly; the 45-day clock does not pause while you wait for the agency to reconsider.
3. The FLRA Sends Negotiability Disputes to Voluntary Mediation at FMCS — Published in the Federal Register, With No Deadline for How Long a Case Can Wait
Source: Federal News Network, October 13, 2026
TL;DR: The Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) approved a voluntary mediation program, administered by the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS), for negotiability disputes — the cases in which a union challenges an agency's claim that a bargaining proposal is outside the duty to bargain, or an agency head's disapproval of an agreement as contrary to law. The notice appeared in Tuesday's Federal Register at 91 FR 64930. After a union files a petition for review, the parties may jointly request mediation or the Authority may refer the case; either side may decline or withdraw consent at any time. Once a case is referred, the Authority places it "in abeyance" and stops processing it until FMCS reports that the dispute settled or did not. This is the second time FLRA has moved this work to FMCS: Chairman Colleen Kiko closed the Authority's in-house Collaboration and Alternative Dispute Resolution Office (CADRO) in 2018 and launched an FMCS program in 2019; CADRO was restored in 2021 and eliminated again in August 2025. Federal labor attorney Suzanne Summerlin told Federal News Network the 2019 program expected mediation to take 30 to 60 days, while the new notice sets no target, so "a petition could sit with no stated horizon."
For federal employees, this means:
- This affects union-side cases, not individual appeals. If your local has a negotiability petition pending at the Authority, ask your steward whether the union intends to consent to mediation and what happens to the case clock if it does.
- Mediation is voluntary in both directions. A union cannot be forced into it, and an agency cannot be forced to stay in it, so the program only resolves disputes both sides want resolved.
- With no stated mediation timeline and the case placed in abeyance, a referred dispute can stall. Unions weighing consent should ask for a target completion date in writing before agreeing.
Legal Insight
Negotiability appeals arise under 5 U.S.C. § 7117(c), which lets a union petition the Authority when an agency alleges a proposal is outside the statutory duty to bargain, and the Authority's power to resolve them comes from 5 U.S.C. § 7105(a)(2)(E). The Authority's notice grounds the program in its regulation at 5 C.F.R. § 2424.31(d), which lets it "take any other appropriate action" to resolve a dispute — so the program is a procedural option layered onto the existing process, not a change to the duty to bargain itself. The practical effect for bargaining units is that a contested proposal may now wait longer for a decision on whether it is negotiable at all.
Legal Tip of the Day
Re-Submitting Documents Your Agency Already Has
When your agency asks you to prove something again — a medical need, a duty location, a prior approval — slow down before you respond. Ask in writing exactly what is being requested, why it is needed, and by what date. Keep a copy of everything you submit, along with the date and the way you sent it. Keep your own timeline and copies outside government systems, so you still have them if your access changes. Note every deadline in the notice, and remember that different forums run different deadlines, some of them short. Do not assume that a pending review or an unanswered question pauses a clock that may already be running. If you are unsure, ask a federal employment attorney before you reply.
In Case You Missed It
A few quick hits from our recent posts:
2027 Federal Pay Freeze: What the White House Letter Says and What Congress Can Still Change
|
HHS Closes Accommodation Requests Over “Missing” Medical Records: Your 45-Day EEO Deadline
|
DOGE Alumni Startups Raise Half a Billion Dollars: What Federal Ethics Rules Say
|
Thinking About Federal Disability Retirement?
If your medical conditions make it hard to safely or consistently perform your federal job—even with accommodations—it may be time to explore OPM/FERS disability retirement.
We help federal employees:
-
Decide whether disability retirement is the right path compared to accommodation or reassignment
-
Gather and frame medical evidence so it speaks the language OPM expects
-
Prepare and submit disability retirement applications and related documentation
-
Coordinate strategy when disability retirement interacts with pending discipline, EEO complaints, or MSPB appeals
For most disability retirement matters, we offer full‑service application assistance for a flat fee of $5,000, plus any required costs. In a free consultation, we’ll talk through your health limitations, job duties, and timelines so you understand your options before you commit.
👉 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