Schedule F Memo is Out

[Anonymous]

As broadly as this is written it could cover half of DC's Federal workforce.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can’t this go to court? And I mean quickly? Why isn’t anyone seeking an injunction?

Nothing that goes to court happens fast.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain why this is a bad thing?

Not interesting in engaging with trolls on this. Go to google, look it up, and start a new thread if you’d like to discuss it.

That is what this thread is!

This is a different poster, just truly trying to understand what this means.

No you’re not. We know how the game is played. Google an answer for yourself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can’t this go to court? And I mean quickly? Why isn’t anyone seeking an injunction?

Nothing that goes to court happens fast.

I’d hope that the union seeks a TRO.

[Anonymous]

https://protectdemocracy.org/work/resources-for-civil-servants-on-the-new-schedule-f-order/

Some resources and info at link above.

“ The new administration has issued a series of executive orders and guidance documents that affect civil servants. One of the most sweeping is a new executive order purporting to reinstate and expand its 2020 Schedule F executive order. (The employment category once known as “Schedule F” has been rebranded “Policy/Career.”) The order claims it will turn a swath of federal positions into at-will positions (the precise positions covered are not yet clear), and it purports to cast aside the 2024 OPM regulations protecting civil servants.

This new order has already been challenged in court and we anticipate additional litigation in the days ahead. Our explainer from 2024 on the president’s Schedule F plans is here, and this Lawfare Primer on the Civil Service and the Trump Administration, from December, offers a more detailed look at some of the legal questions raised by Schedule F and other attacks on the civil service.”

[Anonymous]

They're trying to turn us into some kind of banana republic where half the federal workforce turns over with every election cycle.

[Anonymous]

does anyone have a sense of how quickly an injunction can be provided?

Or is this going to be one of those things where 10,000 of us get fired and then have to wait while the lawsuit makes its way through court?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:does anyone have a sense of how quickly an injunction can be provided?

Or is this going to be one of those things where 10,000 of us get fired and then have to wait while the lawsuit makes its way through court?

The union could file for a very fast temporary restraining order or a less fast prelim injunction, but as of this morning it has done neither.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:does anyone have a sense of how quickly an injunction can be provided?

Or is this going to be one of those things where 10,000 of us get fired and then have to wait while the lawsuit makes its way through court?

+1 why wasn’t anyone ready to fight this legally? he’s trying to overturn rule making via an EO. Come lawyers step up!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:does anyone have a sense of how quickly an injunction can be provided?

Or is this going to be one of those things where 10,000 of us get fired and then have to wait while the lawsuit makes its way through court?

First you'd want to ask the judge for a TRO (temporary restraining order). This could be accomplished in very short order, maybe 48 hours assuming you draw a judge who is prepared to act quickly. The TRO pauses things temporarily (status quo remains) while the lawyers file briefs about whether a preliminary injunction is warranted. This could take several weeks to a month.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can’t this go to court? And I mean quickly? Why isn’t anyone seeking an injunction?

Nothing that goes to court happens fast.

Plus they haven’t done it yet. It’s asking for a position review.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain why this is a bad thing?

Not interesting in engaging with trolls on this. Go to google, look it up, and start a new thread if you’d like to discuss it.

That is what this thread is!

This is a different poster, just truly trying to understand what this means.

Strips career people of their employment protections and makes them at will. In this admin, worry is that it is a job grab to fire hard-working, exceptional employees and install cronies/political spoil system

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:does anyone have a sense of how quickly an injunction can be provided?

Or is this going to be one of those things where 10,000 of us get fired and then have to wait while the lawsuit makes its way through court?

+1 why wasn’t anyone ready to fight this legally? he’s trying to overturn rule making via an EO. Come lawyers step up!

Treasury Employee Union already filed suit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:does anyone have a sense of how quickly an injunction can be provided?

Or is this going to be one of those things where 10,000 of us get fired and then have to wait while the lawsuit makes its way through court?

The union could file for a very fast temporary restraining order or a less fast prelim injunction, but as of this morning it has done neither.

Am assuming most of these positions are supervisory/non-BU

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can’t this go to court? And I mean quickly? Why isn’t anyone seeking an injunction?

Nothing that goes to court happens fast.

Plus they haven’t done it yet. It’s asking for a position review.

Can you explain what you mean by "it's asking for a position review"? thank you.