To Do For All That Which No One Can Do For Oneself
Header

Dear AFGE Activist,

When's the last time you checked the contact information we have on file for you? Got a new mailing address, phone number or email address?

Now is the perfect time to make sure your contact information is update with your union. We're in for a long road ahead with the upcoming administration and it is imperative that we are able to stay connected with members, leaders and activists all across the country.

Take 2-minutes to check your info!

Orange and white button that reads update your contact info

Our ability to stay connected is critical to our success now and in the future.

In Solidarity,

Dear AFGE Activist,

We know this is a difficult moment for public servants. You are being asked to make a decision about resigning from the federal service on a short timeline and without enough information. That's why, yesterday, AFGE and our allies filed a lawsuit against the Deferred Resignation Program seeking to prevent AFGE members from being misled.

In the meantime, we have updated some frequently asked questions we previously sent to provide you with the best guidance we can given the current uncertainty. You can also click here to view this guidance online.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) on OPM's Deferred Resignation Program Email

  1. What is the Deferred Resignation Program?

The Deferred Resignation Program ("Program") was introduced by an email sent to federal employees on January 28, 2025. Preceded by threats to modify and downsize the federal workforce, the Program purports to allow federal employees to submit a resignation letter that will become effective on September 30, 2025. In exchange, the Program claims that employees will be exempt from "Return to Office" requirements and will maintain their current compensation and benefits until the effective date of their resignation.

Employees should not take the Program at face value. The Program documentation, including the introductory email, an associated guidance memorandum issued by the Office of Personnel Management ("OPM") on January 28, 2025, and OPM-issued FAQs, is riddled with inconsistencies and uncertainties. It is also unclear whether OPM has the legal authority to support the Program or its alleged benefits, and the eligibility criteria are vague.

  1. Is the Program a buyout?

No, the Program is not a buyout nor is it a Voluntary Separation Incentive Payment ("VISP") program. Instead, it purports to offer employees the ability to submit a deferred resignation and claims that employees who do so will continue to receive pay, while still possibly working, until September 30, 2025.

Notably, however, the Program contains no guarantee that an employee's resignation will be accepted. Nor does the Program guarantee that an employee whose resignation is accepted will receive the benefits that the Program purports to offer.

  1. If an employee chooses to accept the program, are they required to work during the deferred resignation period?

They may be. OPM's statements are conflicting on this point. According to the OPM email and letter, employees will not be required to work in person but may be assigned remote work duties. The OPMFAQ page also suggests that employees will not be required to work except in "rare cases," without defining what constitutes "rare cases." At the same time, the FAQ's describe the deferred resignation period as a "nice vacation" and the Program states that employees may be placed on "paid administrative leave."

  1. Can an employee take another job during the deferred resignation period?

The FAQ states that the resignation letter does not explicitly prohibit outside employment. However, other existing policies, such as agency-specific regulations requiring prior authorization for outside work, are likely to apply.

  1. Are all federal employees eligible for the program?

No. Employees in positions related to immigration enforcement and national security, as well as those in any positions specifically excluded by their employing agency, are not eligible. USPS employees and military personnel are also excluded. There is no guidance on how employees can confirm their eligibility or if their agency has specific exclusions.

  1. Will employees who opt-in be protected from termination before their resignation date?

Nothing in the Program documentation prohibits the termination or separation of an employee who accepts deferred resignation. While the OPM email suggests that employees will maintain their compensation and benefits until the effective date of their resignation, it does not explicitly state that employees are shielded from layoffs or other adverse actions before September 30, 2025. There is no guarantee that employees opting in to the Program will not be targeted by such actions.

The Program also does not indicate what may occur in the event of a lapse in congressional appropriations. At present, many agencies of the federal government are only funded through March 14, 2025.

  1. What happens if an agency requires an employee to continue working despite OPM's FAQ stating that continued work should be rare?

While OPM's FAQ states that work will only be required in "rare cases," the Program's details vary across the different OPM documents. If an agency insists on continued work, employees may not have a clear administrative remedy, as the enforceability of the promises and statements in OPM's FAQ is uncertain.

  1. What legal recourse do employees have if the government does not honor the terms of deferred resignation?

It is unclear what recourse, if any, employees might have if the government fails to honor the terms of their deferred resignation. There is no certainty that the statements made in the OPM Program documents will be legally enforceable. Even if the email and FAQ page are interpreted as an implied contract or offer, there is no guarantee that such a claim would be enforceable. For example, while each case will be fact-specific, resignation is generally considered to be a voluntary action. It is therefore unclear whether violations of the policy would be appealable to the Merit Systems Protection Board, through the grievance process, or any other forum.

  1. How can employees ensure the administration will follow through on the Program?

Given the inconsistencies among the Program's documents issued by OPM, as well as the ambiguous and conflicting language regarding work obligations and exclusions, there is no guarantee that the claims in the Program will be honored by the Government. The Program may also face legal challenges that could alter the terms of all or portions of the Program. Employees who opt-in to the Program will be at the mercy of the administrators of the Program, whose claims contain inconsistencies and lack stated legal underpinning.

  1. Is there an assurance that the promised continued salary will be funded?

No. Nothing in the OPM documentation contains such an assurance. Moreover, because current appropriations for most civilian agencies are set to expire March 14, 2025, it is not guaranteed that agencies subject to the current appropriations bill will continue to have adequate funding for the promised salary beyond the bill's expiration.

  1. Why did AFGE file a lawsuit challenging the Program?

AFGE's lawsuit aims to protect its members and force OPM to produce information supporting the legitimacy of the offers as stated in the Program. It is critical for employees to ensure that any offer from OPM is legally supported and that any participation in the Program will be honored and is enforceable. Based on the current terms of the Program, and the manner in which it has been implemented, government claims of its legitimacy are specious.

  1. What is AFGE asking for as relief in the lawsuit?

AFGE is seeking that the Program be declared a violation of the Administrative Procedure Act and remanded to OPM to provide the reasoned basis and support for the Program as required by law. AFGE is also seeking to enjoin OPM from implementing the Program until such time as Defendants can provide justification for the legitimacy of the Program and assurance of its terms.

  1. Does AFGE's lawsuit affect my ability to accept the offer?

Not directly or immediately. Unless and until the court issues an injunction or similar order, there is no change to the Program as presented by OPM. If the court does issue an injunction or otherwise grant the relief sought in the lawsuit, that could preclude employees from enrolling in the Program.

  1. I have received an agreement from my agency. Should I sign it?

Even if you have received an agreement or form regarding the Program from your agency, AFGE continues to advise its members not to participate in the Program or sign any related documents. Employees should carefully review the terms presented in the Program and pay special attention to the inconsistencies, vagueness, and lack of legal support.

  1. What would I be waiving by signing the agreement?

The updated language in the Program and accompanying distributed agreements contain language that waives employees' rights to appeal or challenge any claims arising from their employment or participation in the Program in any judicial or administrative forum. OPM states that employees who enroll cannot rescind their choice and that the agency head has the sole discretion to unilaterally rescind enrollment in the Program. OPM further asserts that the agency head's decision to rescind an employee's enrollment is not subject to review by the Merit Systems Protection Board or any other forum. These waivers are troubling, to say the least.

  1. What actions can Locals and Councils take to protect bargaining unit employees from the Program?

Locals and councils may:

  • Consider filing requests for information under 5 U.S.C. § 7114(b)(4).
  • Consider filing a demand to bargain over the Program.
  • Consider grievances alleging the Program violates terms of their collective bargaining agreement or regulations (e.g. regulations concerning administrative leave).
  • Locals and councils may also have a basis for a grievance or unfair labor practice charge alleging, among other things, a bypass of the Union with respect to communications about the Program directly to employees.

Please Note: This is for informational purposes only and does not guarantee any particular result in a specific case. The information provided is not, nor is it intended to be, a substitute for individualized legal or professional advice.

In Solidarity,

AFGE

LINK TO ARTICLE ON LAWSUIT: https://news.bloomberglaw.com/daily-labor-report/federal-worker-union-sues-trump-over-fork-in-the-road-offer?fbclid=IwY2xjawIQ0rxleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHRi9oSxhy68paVKrMPkmLwbuxCHrmxrS_xhQYDeATrRopKrZ5vFOkgmBSA_aem_jUa4CBCx_Luo9aYh2z3l9w

AFGE Notice of Election and Notice of the Nomination Meeting has been mailed to all members at the last known address of record.

If you have not received this notice contact the Local 1395 Election Committee via email at 1395e2025@gmail.com to update your mailing address.

Trump 2.0 EO Breakdown

Schedule Political/Career (PC) Executive Order

Soundbites:

  1. "This action will transform the professional civil service into an army of political appointees loyal to Trump, not their mission."
  2. "It dismantles the merit-based civil service, jeopardizing professionalism and impartiality."

Key Details:

  • Creates a hiring authority in the excepted service (Schedule PC) for policy-influencing decisions.
  • Could make hundreds of thousands of non-partisan roles into at-will positions.
  • Purports to remove due process protections and collective bargaining rights.

Legal Analysis:
Nothing in this Executive Order, as written, should abrogate existing collective bargaining agreements (CBAs), which remain in full force and effect. If agencies attempt to violate CBAs, unions should notify their Districts, Councils, and AFGE National. Members are encouraged to comply and grieve to ensure rights are upheld.

President Kelley:
"This order is a blatant attempt to corrupt the federal government by removing protections for workers, making them answerable only to one man."

Return to Worksite Directive

Soundbites:

  1. "Telework isn’t new—over half of federal employees never worked remotely, even during the pandemic."
  2. "Smart telework enhances productivity, recruitment, and retention. Rolling it back disrupts operations and progress."

Key Details:

  • Directive allows agencies discretion in implementation, with no specific timeline.
  • Hybrid schedules negotiated in contracts remain binding.

Legal Analysis:
This directive does not, as written, violate collective bargaining agreements. Hybrid telework schedules detailed in CBAs remain legally binding. Should agencies implement policies contrary to CBAs, unions must notify their Districts, Councils, and AFGE National, comply, and grieve.

President Kelley:
"This directive undoes decades of workplace progress. Rather than regressing, we urge the administration to focus on improving government programs for the public."

Federal Hiring Freeze Memorandum

Soundbites:

  1. "The federal workforce hasn’t grown since the 1970s, while the U.S. population has skyrocketed."
  2. "Freezing hiring worsens workforce shortages and skills gaps, undermining vital services."

Key Details:

  • Freezes civilian hiring for up to 90 days, with exceptions for national security and public safety roles.
  • Prohibits outsourcing to circumvent the freeze.

Legal Analysis:
The hiring freeze does not, on its face, abrogate CBAs. However, agencies’ implementation must align with negotiated agreements. If violations occur, unions should escalate to their Districts, Councils, and AFGE National, ensuring compliance and filing grievances as necessary.

President Kelley:
"This isn’t about efficiency—it’s about chaos and targeting patriotic Americans. These actions only harm the services the public relies on."

Targeting DEI Programs

Soundbites:

  1. "Merit-based systems require fairness for all, ensuring opportunity regardless of background."
  2. "Federal agencies have the lowest gender and racial pay gaps because hiring decisions are based on ability, not bias."

Key Details:

  • Ends all DEI initiatives and reviews federal employment practices for compliance with the EO.
  • Risks undermining workplace equity and military readiness, as per defense leaders.

Legal Analysis:
The EO’s directive to review employment practices must comply with existing CBAs. If agencies attempt to implement changes that conflict with CBAs, unions should notify their Districts, Councils, and AFGE National, comply, and grieve to uphold the negotiated terms.

President Kelley:
"DEI programs promote fairness and build a workforce that mirrors America’s diversity. Their elimination jeopardizes progress and inclusivity."

Lawsuit Against DOGE

Soundbites:

  1. "Fairness, accountability, and transparency—these are at the heart of our lawsuit."
  2. "Federal employees aren’t the problem; they are the solution. Excluding them threatens good governance."

Key Details:

  • DOGE’s composition excludes federal employees’ voices, violating the Federal Advisory Committee Act.
  • AFGE and partners demand fair representation and transparency in government decision-making.

Legal Analysis:
While this lawsuit focuses on transparency and accountability, it is also critical for agencies to honor CBAs. If DOGE-led initiatives infringe on CBA terms, unions should escalate issues to their Districts, Councils, and AFGE National, comply, and grieve.

President Kelley:
"This fight is about fairness and integrity. Federal employees’ voices are crucial to decisions affecting their work and public service."

Reforming Federal Hiring

Soundbites:

  1. "Replacing objective criteria with vague ideals is a path to cronyism. Federal jobs should go to the most qualified, not the most connected."
  2. "Merit-based hiring ensures federal employees serve the public, not political interests."

Key Details:

  • Proposes subjective hiring criteria tied to "American ideals" and "efficiency," undermining the current merit-based system.

Legal Analysis:
This EO, as written, does not eliminate protections afforded under CBAs. Should agencies adopt hiring practices inconsistent with CBAs, unions must escalate issues to their Districts, Councils, and AFGE National, comply, and grieve to protect merit-based hiring systems.

President Kelley:
"The federal government already hires and promotes exclusively on the basis of merit. The results are clear: a diverse federal workforce that looks like the nation it serves, with the lowest gender and racial pay gaps in the country. We should all be proud of that."

Source: AFGE Insider

AFGE is urging President Joe Biden to restore pay parity between civilian and military employees by increasing the 2025 pay raise for federal workers from 2% to 4.5%. 

Biden has proposed a 2% pay raise for federal workers and 4.5% for military personnel. In a letter spearheaded by AFGE from the Federal Salary Council to Biden, the council urged the president to issue an executive order to give federal workers a 4.5% pay raise with 4% allocated as an across-the-board cost of living adjustment and 0.5% as locality pay supplements that vary by region. 

“There is a long tradition of parity in pay adjustments for civilian and military employees of the federal government,” the council wrote in the Nov. 8 letter. “This tradition is rarely broken, and although your Fiscal 2025 Budget proposed just 2% for civilians and 4.5% for the military, we believe that using the occasion of the end-of-year executive order to revert back to this tradition is warranted. President Obama did so in 2016, and we ask that you do the same.” 

AFGE President Everett Kelley and Public Policy Director Jacqueline Simon serve as the union’s two presidential appointees on the council, an advisory body that provides recommendations to the administration on the federal employee locality pay program. 

AFGE is also working with Congress to push for higher pay. 

In a Dec. 11 letter to Biden, a group of 27 Democratic lawmakers from the House and Senate urged the president to restore the bipartisan support for pay parity across the federal workforce. 

“Although we understand this decision was made under the constraints put in place by the Fiscal Responsibility Act caps, we believe it is imperative you revise your budget to align military and civilian employee pay raises,” they wrote. “Specifically, we request you issue a revised alternative pay plan seeking a 4.5% pay increase for the entire federal workforce, including military and civilian employees alike.” 

The lawmakers noted that both military and civilian employees work hard to keep us safe and provide critical services to the American people. 

“Of the federal workforce, more than 2.2 million civilian employees work to ensure resources and services are provided to countless communities across America,” they added. “By aligning military and civilian pay raises for 2025, you will recognize the efforts of the entire federal workforce.” 

Biden has until the end of December to finalize the pay raises. 

Source: AFGE Insider

Sen. Joni Ernst, Elon Musk, Vivek Ramaswamy and other politicians have continued to make incorrect statements about the federal workforce. Their statements have eroded their own credibility and are just an attempt at tarnishing the reputations of civil servants to make it easier to fire them and contract out their jobs to for-profit corporations. 

We believe that facts matter, and AFGE will continue to debunk these misconceptions as they come in.

Myth: 

The federal government is too centralized in the Washington area, and relocating agencies around the country will make it more effective. 

Fact: 

Just 15% of our nation’s 2 million federal workers live in the Washington, D.C. metro area. The remaining 85% already live across the country, in all 50 states, in big cities and rural areas, on military installations and in our communities, and everywhere in-between. 


Myth: 

The bloated federal workforce is at an all-time high. 

Fact: 

Over the past 50 years, the number of federal workers has grown by roughly 6%. At the same time, the U.S. population has increased by 57%. The ratio of federal workers to national population has steadily decreased for the more than a half-century at this point. In 2024, the total federal workforce compensation of $293 billion amounted to just 4.3% of the federal budget. Meanwhile, federal contractors accounted for $759.2 billion, or 11.4%. If federal workers were paid equally to private sector workers, their pay would make up a 10% share of the budget.


Myth: 

Federal workers are overpaid. 

Fact: 

Federal workers earn nearly 25% less than private sector and state and local workers who perform similar jobs.


Myth: 

Federal workers don’t seem to understand or care who they work for. 

Fact: 

About 642,000 federal workers are veterans of the U.S. military. More than half (58%) of all federal workers hold jobs that directly support our troops (Army, Navy, Air Force, DoD), our veterans (VA), or our seniors (SSA, CMS). Federal workers know better than anyone who they work for – the American people – because they devote every single day to delivering vital public services that hundreds of millions of American rely on. They do not cater to any corporate contractor’s bottom line; they serve only their fellow American citizens. 


Myth: 

Federal workers have “fake jobs.” 

Fact: 

Federal workers perform essential work on behalf of everyone who calls this nation home. They’re the doctors and nurses who care for our veterans, the people who get Social Security benefits out on time, the corrections officers in federal prisons who protect us from dangerous criminals, the USDA inspectors who make sure our food supply is safe, the FEMA specialists who assist disaster survivors, the TSA screeners who protect the flying public, the border patrol agents who stop drug smugglers and human traffickers, and so much more. 


Myth: 

We only have 6% of our federal workforce actually going into work every single day. 

Fact:  

54% of federal workers hold jobs that require them to report in-person to their duty station every day... Among those whose jobs permit telework, 61.2% of working hours are spent in-person. 


Myth: 

Americans are being put on hold by bureaucrats who are phoning it in. 

Fact:  

Mischaracterizing telework as failing to show up for work is a deliberate attempt to demean and disparage federal workers and ultimately eliminate and/or outsource their jobs. Both private and public sector employers have found that hybrid telework arrangements improves employee engagement, recruitment and retention. Hybrid work arrangements actually reduce wait times and allow better service for citizens.


Myth: 

Federal workers are low-skill workers who would be unqualified for private sector employment. 

Fact:  

Federal workers are both highly skilled and highly qualified. 66% of the federal workforce has a bachelor’s degree, compared to 43% of private sector workers, while 33% of federal workers have an advanced degree, compared to just 15% of private sector workers. 


Myth: 

98% federal bureaucrats are enrolled in a taxpayer-funded pension (compared to just 15% of private sector employees with access to a defined benefit pension plan). That locks federal employees into government employment & comes with a massive cost: nearly $1.2 trillion in unfunded liabilities for the main federal pension system. The cost of pensions is a key reason why most employers have moved away from them. 

Fact:  

While federal pay continues to lag far behind private sector pay, the average yearly pension for Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS) retirees is just $25,000. As it stands, those benefits are no match for rising costs and exorbitant health care expenses that many seniors face. Yet, even as President-elect Trump, Elon Musk, and Ramaswamy plan to extend tax cuts and handouts to the wealthy, they are plotting to cut the key retirement benefits that federal workers have earned. 

The Trump Administration will waste no time dismantling the government and targeting AFGE for extinction. We can’t afford to waste a moment preparing ourselves to survive and thrive in this hostile environment. Here is one step you can take now to keep updated.

Update Your Contact Information

  • Update your contact information at www.afge.org/update so we can get you the latest information and alerts when it matters most. Sign up for text alerts: text AFGE to 59129

TELEWORK UPDATES

December 7th, 2024 | Posted by admin in Did you know? | TeleWork | Uncategorized - (1 Comments)

Contractual improvements secured to the AFGE-SSA Telework Article 41!

The Union recently negotiated improved protections to this Article. These changes became effective on November 27, 2024, with the approval of the agency head, Martin O’Malley. Here are the highlights we will soon see incorporated into the contractual language:

  1. The current number of telework days, eligible positions, and percentages of employees permitted to telework will remain effective through the duration of our current contract, October 25, 2029.
  2. Although management retains sole discretion to change, reduce, or suspend telework for operational needs, the new language specifies that any such changes will be temporary.
  3. Episodic telework improvements:
    1. Requests can be made at any time for personal circumstances.
    1. The language for denials of episodic telework was strengthened to specify the basis of “bona fide operational needs.”
    1. Management agreed to provide an employee with a specific reason, in writing on the Telework Program Request and Agreement, whenever an episodic telework request is denied.
    1. The option to split a workday between the ADS and the ODS can now be made by employees. If the request is denied, the employee may request an explanation to which management must respond.
  4. Section 11 in this Article was eliminated, to reduce the possibility that the Agency could legally make significant changes while the contract remains in effect.

While these improved contractual protections for bargaining unit employees are welcomed, we will need to remain vigilant to confront any threats of nullification through legislative or executive branches.

Every bargaining unit employee needs to be vigilant to take action against threats to the Social Security Administration and other domestic programs that benefit the American public in addition to attacks on the protections and benefits afforded to Social Security employees and other federal employees.

One of the earliest actions that may impact the Union, is a statutory change that will prohibit agencies from deducting Union dues from paychecks. The local is preparing to roll out a secure, electronic dues payment alternative. Find out more at our next local membership meeting on December 11 at 6:00pm below.

Other important business matters are planned for our next local membership meeting on December 11, 2024 at 6:00pm CST. At that meeting, members have an opportunity to weigh in on our fiscal 2025 budget and a small increase in dues that will partially adjust for inflationary pressures. Bargaining Unit employees deserve a strong Union and a working budget and dues increase will help keep the organization ready to fight new and on-going attacks on our rights and benefits.  To request materials for this meeting, email afge1395@afge1395.org with subject line “Membership Meeting Documents Request”.

AFGE Monthly Membership Meeting 12/11/2024 6pm Zoom Link:

https://us02web.zoom.us/j/82128943665?pwd=Ylp4cjFNeXgrNk5iMnpXdDAwNWY3dz09

If you are not yet a member of the American Federation of Government Employees, we need you to join us! We know that we will need everyone’s support to protect ourselves and the customers we serve. We need your help at our monthly membership meetings and other activities we are planning. It’s easy to join! Just contact us via email or phone for details.

For our current members, we appreciate your support of federal workers, the public, and the larger labor force. Make sure AFGE has your most up-to-date contact information, so you can timely get the latest developments and news as well as action opportunities to show your support and effectuate positive change.

AFGE President Everett Kelley pushed back on the incoming administration’s plan to drastically cut the federal workforce and agencies without analyzing the impact they have on the American people. 

Appearing on C-SPAN Nov. 22, Kelley responded to recent statements by Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy that 75% of the federal workforce and agencies need to be cut in addition to the use of reduction in force and moving federal agencies outside Washington, D.C. The business duo, who have no previous experience in government, have been tasked by Trump to lead the newly created Department of Government Efficiency.  

“First of all, when you say you want to cut them without further analyzing and see what our government really needs, I think is misguided,” Kelley said. “I welcome an opportunity to sit down and talk about how we can make the government more efficient. To think that you can take the federal employees inside of D.C. and send them out into the states to work, well guess what? Only 15% of federal employees work inside of D.C. They’re already dispersed throughout the United States. I just think that they need to educate themselves on what federal employees really do and where they are located.” 

To make the government more efficient, Kelley pointed to Medicare, which has an opportunity to save $60 billion by combating fraud. Tax evasion also cost the government $1 trillion this year alone. 

The AFGE president took issue with Musk and Ramaswamy calling federal workers “bureaucrats,” reminding them that these employees are Veteran Affairs doctors and nurses taking care of our country’s veterans, Transportation Security Officers who keep our skies safe, the meat inspectors who make sure the food we eat is safe, Bureau of Prisons correctional officers who protect their communities, Social Security Administration workers who cut checks to seniors, and the list goes on. 

“It’s a little patronizing to even think about the possibility of cutting 75% of the federal workforce. I see it as a direct attack against veterans. I am a veteran myself. Of the workforce, about 642,000 of that workforce are veterans, so when you say you’re gonna cut 75%, that means it’s a direct attack on veterans and I am appalled by that,” Kelley added.  

He also doesn’t think the new administration is trying to make the government more efficient. Rather, they want to drive away workers so they can give the jobs to contractors who are two to three times more expensive than federal employees.  

As a federal contractor, Musk himself has benefited from taxpayers’ dollars. 

“It’s not a matter of not their patriotism of people that I represent. It’s about the bottom line. It’s about making the dollar,” Kelley said. 

Kelley has also appeared on CNN and wrote a letter to the editor to the Wall Street Journal combating the slash and burn philosophy of Musk and Ramaswamy. 

Thousands of Federal Employees Land Work-From-Home Deal Ahead of Trump Term

(Bloomberg) -- A Biden administration appointee has agreed to lock in hybrid work protections for tens of thousands of Social Security staff, part of a slew of organized labor efforts that complicate President-elect Donald Trump's efforts to reshape the federal workforce.

The American Federation of Government Employees, a union representing 42,000 Social Security Administration workers, reached an agreement with the agency last week that will protect telework until 2029 in an updated contract, according to a message to its members viewed by Bloomberg.

Full Article can be found here: Telework Saved