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 is a new rule to make it easier for managers to fire government workers if they don't do their jobs well or behave badly, but it might make workers feel less safe in their jobs.
Summary AI
The S. 662 bill, known as the “Modern Employment Reform, Improvement, and Transformation Act of 2025” or the “MERIT Act of 2025,” aims to change how federal employees in the United States can be removed for reasons related to their performance or misconduct. It proposes stricter standards and new procedures for firing employees and limits their ability to appeal. The bill also focuses on the discipline of supervisors, the way furloughs are handled, and includes measures for recouping awards from employees under investigation. Additionally, it lengthens probationary periods for employees in certain positions within the federal workforce.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
Overview of the MERIT Act of 2025
The Modern Employment Reform, Improvement, and Transformation Act of 2025 (the "MERIT Act") proposes significant changes to federal employment procedures, aiming to streamline processes and enhance accountability among federal employees. The bill provides new frameworks for handling performance and conduct issues, revises rules for employee furloughs, and modifies various procedural elements within the United States Code relevant to federal employment.
Key Provisions and Issues
Adverse Actions and Employee Rights
One of the notable provisions in the MERIT Act is the shift toward allowing federal agencies to pursue adverse actions against employees based on a "preponderance of the evidence." While this could potentially expedite procedural actions against underperforming or misconducting employees, it raises concerns about fairness and bias. Without a clear standard of what constitutes "sufficient evidence," there are risks of arbitrary or inconsistent application. This approach, lacking a prior requirement for a performance improvement plan, may overlook opportunities for employee growth and rectification.
The prohibition on grieving adverse actions, as outlined in Section 4, further complicates this issue, as it restricts employees from formally disputing potential injustices through grievances, potentially disrupting the balance of power between agencies and employees and undermining due process.
Extension of Probationary Periods
The extension of probationary periods from one year to two years for both Senior Executive Service positions and the competitive service is another significant proposal. While it is intended to allow for more comprehensive assessments of employee capabilities, the extended probationary phase may contribute to job insecurity among new employees. It generates uncertainty for individuals attempting to solidify their roles in a federal career and could affect employee morale negatively.
Financial Implications
The bill also addresses financial aspects such as the modification of annuities for employees convicted of felonies. The lack of clear criteria defining which felonies warrant annuity reduction risks inconsistent applications, jeopardizing the financial security of affected employees and their families. Similarly, the possibility of recouping bonuses or awards after an "adverse finding" lacks detailed guidelines, which complicates financial planning for both agencies and employees.
Potential Impacts
Broad Public Impact
For the general public, the MERIT Act could imply a more streamlined and accountable federal workforce, ideally leading to improved public service. However, the removal of protective measures for employees, such as the grieving process for perceived unfair actions, could lead to a less motivated workforce, potentially diminishing service quality.
Stakeholder-Specific Impact
Federal Employees: The bill's modifications are particularly consequential for federal employees. While some changes might incentivize performance improvements, others could foster uncertainties about job security and erode employee rights protections. The elimination of grievance options and the extension of probationary periods might reduce recourse options for employees facing adverse actions, fundamentally altering the workplace dynamics.
Federal Agencies: For federal agencies, the enactment of the MERIT Act might streamline certain procedural elements, providing a faster route to manage underperformance and misconduct. However, the absence of performance improvement plans could lead to ethical challenges, and the lack of clear standards for evidence and process could increase legal challenges and disputes.
Overall, while intending to increase efficiency and accountability, the MERIT Act of 2025 presents notable challenges and potential risks that need careful consideration. Balancing the goals of employee accountability with fair and supportive processes remains critical to maintaining trust and effectiveness within federal employment.
Issues
The prohibition on grieving adverse actions and reductions in force in Section 4 could significantly impact employee rights, preventing them from challenging potentially unfair decisions. This issue raises concerns about due process and the balance of power between federal employees and agencies.
Section 3's allowance for adverse actions against employees based on a 'preponderance of the evidence' without a clear standard for what constitutes sufficient evidence can lead to potential biases and unfair treatment of employees, impacting legal and ethical standards within the workplace.
The extension of the probationary period for both the Senior Executive Service (Section 10) and the competitive service employees (Section 11) from 1 to 2 years may cause job insecurity among new employees and requires justification of its benefits versus the potential negative impacts on employee morale and performance.
Section 8's provision for reducing annuities of employees convicted of a felony without clear criteria for 'felony' classification could lead to inconsistent applications and affect financial stability of employees and their families.
Section 5's repeal of pay retention provisions for career appointees removed from the Senior Executive Service might adversely impact employee morale and retention, affecting experienced workforce retention and organizational performance.
Section 9's recoupment of bonuses or awards paid to employees upon an 'adverse finding' lacks a clear guideline on determining such findings and repayment terms, potentially creating ambiguity in agency practices and financial stress for employees.
The absence of a mandated performance improvement plan (PIP) before taking adverse actions against supervisors and employees in Sections 3 and 6 raises concerns about procedural fairness and support for improvement, which could lead to ethical and legal challenges.
The complex procedural elements and timelines for adverse actions across sections, such as the 7 business day response period and 15 business day decision period, might be overly burdensome for employees unfamiliar with such processes, increasing legal and administrative challenges.
Section 7's modification of procedures for furlough, specifically the undefined criteria for 'emergency furlough' and 'general furlough,' may lead to inconsistent applications impacting financial and job security for federal employees.
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 text outlines revisions to the adverse actions process against federal employees under section 7513 of title 5, allowing agencies to take actions based on employee performance or misconduct. It includes procedures for decision-making, rights of employees, appeal processes, and special rules for pay during demotion appeals, while also amending timelines related to disciplinary actions against supervisors retaliating against whistleblowers.
7513. Cause and procedure for actions other than furlough Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines the conditions under which a government agency can take disciplinary actions, other than furloughs, against federal employees. It describes the standards for deciding on these actions, the procedures for employees to respond and appeal, and the guidelines for maintaining records related to these actions.
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
The section modifies various aspects of the laws governing how government agencies handle performance and conduct issues among senior executives, including changes to pay entitlements, suspension procedures, and appeal rights. It details conditions for taking adverse actions, emphasizes the evidence needed for such actions, adjusts appraisal system requirements, and refines procedures for suspensions, terminations, and appeals, ensuring that due process is afforded to the affected employees.
7543. Cause and procedure Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
In Section 7543, the guidelines for taking disciplinary actions against federal employees are outlined. If an employee is found to have performed poorly or exhibited misconduct, based on substantial evidence, an agency may proceed with disciplinary actions, while the employee has rights to respond, seek representation, and appeal decisions to the Merit Systems Protection Board.
6. Actions against supervisors for performance or conduct Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines the procedures and standards for taking adverse actions against supervisors in federal agencies based on their performance or conduct. It specifies factors to consider when making such decisions, timelines for responses and final decisions, the process for reducing a supervisor's grade, and the rights of supervisors involved in these actions, including the right to receive notice and be represented by a lawyer.
7514. Supervisors Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The text outlines the procedures and standards an agency must follow when taking action against a supervisor for poor performance or misconduct. It details the factors for decision-making, the supervisor's rights to respond and appeal, and clarifies that these actions can proceed without a performance improvement plan, impacting the supervisor's job grade and pay.
7. Modification of procedures for furlough Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines changes to federal furlough procedures, including definitions and rules for both "general" and "emergency" furloughs. It requires the Office of Personnel Management to establish regulations about when and how furloughs can happen, ensures that affected employees receive appropriate notice and have the right to appeal certain furlough actions, and amends existing legal codes to align with these new rules.
7504. General furlough and emergency furlough cause and procedure Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines the procedures for two types of furloughs for employees: general furloughs, which are meant to enhance the service's efficiency and allow employees certain rights and procedures, and emergency furloughs, which can happen with minimal notice and offer limited procedures compared to general furloughs. Regulations will be set by the Office of Personnel Management to guide how these furloughs are handled.
7515. Furlough cause and procedure Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
An employee can be furloughed if it helps improve service efficiency, and they have a right to certain procedural safeguards. The Office of Personnel Management must set rules about when and how furloughs happen, what information is given to employees, and how they can appeal the decision within 10 business days.
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 outlines the reduction of retirement benefits for federal employees who are convicted of felonies related to their job performance. It specifies conditions for reducing these benefits, provides a process for employees to appeal, and details exceptions for spouses who cooperate with investigations.
8323. Reduction of benefits of employees convicted of certain crimes Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
If a government employee is convicted of a felony related to their job duties, their retirement benefits may be reduced, and the felonious service period won't count towards their pension. However, if their spouse helps law enforcement with the investigation, the spouse may still receive certain benefits. The employee can appeal benefit reductions, and any changes to retirement records must be processed promptly by the agency and the Office of Personnel Management.
9. Authority to recoup bonuses or awards paid to employees Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines a new rule that prevents federal employees from receiving bonuses if they are found to have committed serious misconduct, such as violating agency policies or laws, which can lead to removal, suspension, or imprisonment. If an employee has already received a bonus and is later found guilty of such misconduct, they will be required to repay the bonus, with a possible repayment plan option, and they can appeal the decision to the Merit Systems Protection Board.
4531. Certain forms of misconduct Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
In this section, it defines an "adverse finding" as when an agency head determines an employee broke agency policy or law, leading to potential suspension, removal, or imprisonment. It prohibits awarding a bonus to such an employee for five years and requires repayment of bonuses under certain conditions, allowing appeal through the Merit Systems Protection Board.
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 proposes changes to extend the probationary period for certain federal employees to two years, instead of one, and requires agency heads to clearly communicate these terms and related requirements to employees. It also allows the Office of Personnel Management to issue regulations for implementing these changes.
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.