Overview

Title

To amend title 5, United States Code, to provide for an alternative removal for performance or misconduct for Federal employees.

ELI5 AI

The MERIT Act of 2025 aims to change the rules on how government workers can be let go if they don't do their job well or if they behave badly. It suggests longer waiting times before job security kicks in, limits how workers can complain about punishments, and makes it easier for the government to take back bonuses if a worker gets into serious trouble.

Summary AI

H.R. 687 seeks to amend Title 5 of the United States Code to change how federal employees can be removed for poor performance or misconduct. The bill, known as the "Modern Employment Reform, Improvement, and Transformation Act of 2025" or "MERIT Act of 2025," includes provisions to end certain performance-based actions, limit union grievances over disciplinary actions, and extend the probationary periods for federal employees and those in the Senior Executive Service. It also introduces new procedures for handling furloughs and authorizes the government to recoup bonuses from employees found guilty of serious misconduct.

Published

2025-01-23
Congress: 119
Session: 1
Chamber: HOUSE
Status: Introduced in House
Date: 2025-01-23
Package ID: BILLS-119hr687ih

Bill Statistics

Size

Sections:
19
Words:
9,317
Pages:
42
Sentences:
192

Language

Nouns: 2,485
Verbs: 717
Adjectives: 322
Adverbs: 83
Numbers: 450
Entities: 487

Complexity

Average Token Length:
3.95
Average Sentence Length:
48.53
Token Entropy:
5.25
Readability (ARI):
24.77

AnalysisAI

The proposed "Modern Employment Reform, Improvement, and Transformation Act of 2025" aims to amend various employment-related sections of the United States Code, specifically regarding federal employees' performance evaluations and disciplinary actions. It is intended to streamline processes and outline clear guidelines for handling poor performance or misconduct within federal agencies. The legislation introduces several changes, such as providing alternatives for removing federal employees due to performance or misconduct, extending probationary periods, and establishing new procedures for furloughs.

General Summary

The bill seeks to overhaul current practices by repealing or modifying sections of the U.S. Code that deal with performance-based actions and adverse actions against federal employees. Some notable changes include extending the probationary period for certain positions, especially within the Senior Executive Service, to two years, prohibiting grievances on adverse actions, and redefining procedural guidelines for actions against misconduct among federal employees, including supervisors and senior executives. The bill further details how bonuses or awards can be recouped and mandates reductions in annuities for employees convicted of felonies connected to their employment.

Significant Issues

  1. Extension of Probationary Periods: The Act extends the probationary periods for competitive service and Senior Executive Service positions from one to two years. Critics argue this extension lacks justification and might dampen employee motivation, with effects on retention and morale due to the delay in attaining job permanency.

  2. Prohibition on Grievances: By prohibiting grievances related to adverse actions and allowing the new procedures to override existing collective bargaining agreements, the bill might significantly impact employees' rights to challenge decisions they believe are unfair.

  3. Repayment of Bonuses: The bill's provisions to recoup bonuses from employees found to have misconduct, even after bonuses were awarded, might deter talent from pursuing roles that offer such incentives due to the perceived risk of retroactive financial penalties.

  4. Ambiguity in Definitions: Unclear terms such as "reasonable causes" and "substantial evidence" could lead to inconsistent decisions among various federal agencies. The lack of precise definitions may result in unequal treatment of employees, causing potential morale issues and disputes.

  5. Furlough Procedures: The nebulous definition of what constitutes an "emergency furlough" might lead to inconsistencies in its application, causing uncertainty and concern among federal employees about their job security during budgetary lapses or crises.

Impact on the Public and Stakeholders

The public's trust in government efficiency and fairness could be affected by how this bill reshapes federal employment practices. By prioritizing swift and decisive action against poor performance or misconduct, the government aims to maintain a high standard of public service. However, the bill's potential to streamline disciplinary actions might inadvertently lead to pressures on federal employees, impacting morale and job satisfaction.

Federal Employees: The bill might negatively impact federal employees by extending the period before job security is achieved, thus potentially affecting job satisfaction and retention. The limitations on grievances and possible swift disciplinary actions without a performance improvement process could be seen as reducing employee protections.

Government Agencies: Agencies may benefit from enhanced powers to manage underperforming staff efficiently, potentially resulting in improved overall productivity. However, they might face challenges due to the requisite administrative changes and potential increases in disputes over fairness and implementation of these new rules.

Taxpayers: By aiming to increase efficiency and accountability among federal employees, the bill appeals to taxpayers interested in a performance-driven government. However, the risk of hampered morale and potential erosion of employee rights might be seen as detrimental to the attraction and retention of skilled professionals in public service roles.

Overall, this legislation could mark a notable shift in federal employment policies, balancing the need for effectiveness with fairness in employment practices. The success of the bill likely hinges on the clarity and consistency of its implementation across federal agencies.

Issues

  • The extension of probationary periods (Sections 10 and 11) might face scrutiny without detailed justification for the necessity or benefits of such extensions. The impact on employee morale and retention, along with the lack of clarity on how this affects employee rights, could be significant.

  • Section 3 introduces a provision allowing agencies to act without a performance improvement plan (PIP) in Section 3(d), which might raise concerns about fairness in employee evaluations and corrective action processes, potentially leading to inconsistent applications across different cases.

  • Section 4's prohibition on grieving adverse actions, coupled with the potential superseding of collective bargaining agreements as stated in Section 12(b), might raise concerns about employees' rights to challenge potentially unfair decisions, impacting employee rights in adverse actions or reductions in force.

  • The reduction of annuity for employees convicted of a felony in Section 8 raises issues regarding the broad discretion given to agency heads and the potential retroactive application of 'felonious service,' affecting financial stability for employees and potential legal ramifications.

  • The lack of clear definition for terms like 'reasonable causes' and 'substantial evidence' in Sections 3(a)(2)(B) and 7543(c) could lead to subjective interpretation and inconsistent application across agencies, affecting the fairness and uniformity of disciplinary actions.

  • The provision for recouping bonuses from employees after an adverse finding in Section 9(c) introduces the potential for varied agency implementations and could discourage employees from taking bonus-eligible roles, affecting recruitment and retention strategies.

  • Section 7's lack of a precise definition for 'emergency furlough' and insufficient procedural guidance could lead to confusion about employee rights and agency responsibilities during furloughs, potentially raising ethical concerns in employment management.

  • The amendments regarding actions against senior executives and the specific conditions under which pay retention is denied (Section 5) might introduce complexities in employment contracts and affect the treatment of senior executives, with potential political and legal implications.

  • The short time frame allowed for written notice, response, and final decision in disciplinary actions (Sections 3(c)(1)(A) and 7515) might not provide sufficient time for employees or supervisors to prepare a defense, raising fairness concerns in the disciplinary process.

  • Section 2’s repeal of Chapter 43 performance-based actions lacks a clear effective date, potentially causing confusion and complicating the administration of performance management systems, impacting both morale and operational efficiency.

Sections

Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.

1. Short title; table of contents Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The Modern Employment Reform, Improvement, and Transformation Act of 2025, also known as the MERIT Act of 2025, provides a detailed outline of its contents, including provisions for handling performance and conduct issues among federal employees, prohibiting grievances on certain adverse actions, and adjusting probationary periods and procedures for specific employment actions.

2. Termination of authority for chapter 43 performance-based actions Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section eliminates the authority for performance-based actions under chapter 43 of title 5 in the U.S. Code by repealing section 4303. It specifies that this repeal doesn't affect actions started before a certain date and includes several updates to other related sections to conform with this change.

3. Adverse actions based on performance or conduct Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section of the bill outlines how agencies can take action against federal employees for poor performance or misconduct, detailing the decision-making process, pay implications for demotions, and employees' rights such as the ability to appeal decisions and be represented by an attorney. It also shortens the timeline for actions against supervisors who retaliate against whistleblowers and specifies that these changes do not apply to actions started before the section's effective date.

7513. Cause and procedure Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

Under regulations from the Office of Personnel Management, an agency can take actions like suspensions or demotions against employees for misconduct if there is enough evidence, and must follow a specific process including notifying the employee in writing, allowing them to respond, and providing a final decision. Employees have rights to legal representation and can appeal decisions to the Merit Systems Protection Board within 10 business days.

4. Prohibition on grieving adverse actions and reductions in force Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

Congress is proposing changes to certain sections of the U.S. Code to disallow grievances related to adverse employment actions or reductions in force, such as long furloughs, layoffs, or demotions, and is updating how similar matters are addressed in existing laws.

5. Actions against senior executives for performance or conduct Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

This section updates various provisions regarding the treatment of senior executives in the federal government, including rules for setting their pay if they are reassigned, the procedures for suspending or removing them, and their rights during these processes. It clarifies that certain protections and processes, such as notice and opportunity to respond, apply when actions like suspension or termination are taken against these employees, and it establishes timelines and appeals processes for such actions.

7543. Cause and procedure Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

An agency can take action against an employee for poor performance or misconduct if proven by evidence, and must follow specific procedures, including providing written notices and allowing the employee to respond. The employee can be represented, can appeal to the Merit Systems Protection Board, and is entitled to receive related documents. Misconduct includes neglecting duties or refusing job assignments.

6. Actions against supervisors for performance or conduct Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The text outlines a process by which government agencies can take disciplinary action against supervisors for poor performance or misconduct. It specifies the criteria for decision-making, timelines for notice and response, and details the consequences, such as potential reduction in pay and procedural rights, for supervisors facing such actions.

7514. Supervisors Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section outlines processes and rules for taking action against supervisors if their performance or misconduct justifies it. It specifies procedures for notice, representation, and decision-making, including timelines for responses and decisions, and addresses how reductions in pay and grade should be handled.

7. Modification of procedures for furlough Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section describes the changes to federal procedures for furloughing employees, outlining new rules for both short-term and emergency furloughs. It mandates that the Office of Personnel Management establish regulations to guide these processes, ensuring affected employees are informed and have certain rights, while allowing appeals for longer furloughs.

7504. Furlough and emergency furlough cause and procedure Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

An employee can be furloughed to enhance service efficiency, with specific procedures and rights such as receiving a written notice and being represented by an attorney. In emergencies, an employee may be furloughed with only a notice of explanation, and no other standard procedures apply.

7515. Furlough cause and procedure Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

Employees may be furloughed if it benefits the service, and they must follow specific procedures set by the Office of Personnel Management, which includes appealing to the Merit Systems Protection Board within 10 business days. Regulations will outline when and how furloughs can happen and what information must be provided to affected employees and the Board.

8. Reduction of annuity of employee convicted of a felony for which an adverse action is or would have been taken Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section establishes that if a federal employee is convicted of a felony related to their job, their pension will be reduced by excluding the period involving the wrongdoing from their retirement calculation. It also provides procedures for notification, response, appeals, and outlines exceptions for spouses who cooperated with investigations.

8323. Reduction of benefits of employees convicted of certain crimes Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section outlines rules for reducing the retirement benefits of government employees convicted of felonies related to their job duties. It specifies that employees facing such convictions may have their annuity calculated without considering the period of felonious service, allows for the possibility of appeal, and describes the administrative process for amending retirement records. Additionally, it provides exceptions for cooperating spouses to receive benefits and defines key terms such as "covered individual" and "felonious service."

9. Authority to recoup bonuses or awards paid to employees Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

In this section, agencies are prohibited from awarding bonuses to employees if there's an "adverse finding" against them, meaning they've seriously violated policy or law. If a bonus was given during the year of adverse finding, the employee must repay it, with the option to use a repayment plan and the right to appeal the decision.

4531. Certain forms of misconduct Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section outlines rules about misconduct by government employees, specifying that if an agency finds an employee guilty of serious misconduct, the employee cannot receive a bonus for five years. Additionally, if an employee gets a bonus and then is found guilty of misconduct in the same year, they must pay the bonus back, but they can appeal this decision.

10. Extension of probationary period for positions within the Senior Executive Service Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section changes the probationary period for certain government positions to two years instead of one year. This applies to people appointed after the law goes into effect.

11. Extension of probationary period for employees in the competitive service Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The bill extends the probationary period for certain federal employees from one year to two years, depending on whether the position requires formal training or a license. It also mandates that federal agencies provide clear information about the probationary period's terms and conditions, notify supervisors about the end date of the probationary period, and submit a certification to the President if an employee is retained after the probationary period.

12. Application Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section outlines that the changes made by the Act will begin one year after the Act is passed. It also states that these changes will override any existing collective bargaining agreements if they conflict with the new procedures. Additionally, it defines a "business day" as any day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or a public holiday.