Trump has staggered federal unions, but they refuse to be knocked out

Beaten and weakened, but not busted. Distressed and depleted, but not defeated. That's the state of federal unions this Labor Day, more than 17 months after President Donald Trump issued Executive Order 14251, one of the most aggressive attacks by the federal government on organized labor in American history. While Trump's action stripped more than 950,000 federal employees of vital workplace rights and procedures, their unions remain in fighting form, even though they are a diminished force. Yet, while Trump's action stripped more than 950,000 federal employees of vital workplace rights and procedures, their unions remain in fighting form, even though they are a diminished force. Those unions have retaliated with more than a dozen lawsuits and various political actions that in some cases blunted Trump's blow. But there's no doubt his dictate hit the unions like a stunning military attack, devastating in significant ways their ability to represent federal employees. For a broad array of federal offices, the March 27, 2025, executive order killed collective bargaining, prohibited automatic payroll union dues collection and eliminated employee grievance procedures. The EO made the blatantly bogus claim that even agencies such as the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service should be excluded from collective bargaining because they have as 'a primary function intelligence, counterintelligence, investigative, or national security work.' In February 2025, the American Federation of Government Employees had 331,765 members. According to a statement from AFGE, the largest federal union, it lost 'roughly 100,000 members due to agencies being dismantled, mass firings, deferred resignation and attacks on collective bargaining.' AFGE membership is now down about 25% since Trump's second inauguration. Republicans have a long history of bashing government workers. Animated by decades of small-government ideology, they have moved to cut federal employee compensation, facilitate faster firings of federal employees and block avenues for union reps to communicate with management about things like workplace conditions that affect union and non-union members alike. Trump dragged that antagonism to new lows, with his first presidential campaign pledge to 'drain the swamp,' a cruel term that likens federal employees to swamp dwellers. Trump's prohibition against automatic payroll union dues deductions was a particularly painful mugging. 'We lost 50% of our membership overnight,' said Randy Erwin, president of the National Federation of Federal Employees. The union's membership fell another 10% when some feds accepted Trump's deferred resignation program. That program pushed them to quit instead of being fired through Elon Musk's so-called Department of Government Efficiency, a purge that was based more on MAGA politics than any employee's individual performance. Republicans have a long history of bashing government workers. Animated by decades of small-government ideology, they have moved to cut federal employee compensation, facilitate faster firings of federal employees and block avenues for union reps to communicate with management. But NFFE demonstrated labor's resilience by organizing 65 new agency bargaining units in a year, compared to typically 10 or fewer, according to Erwin. Now, NFFE's membership is down about 10% from the beginning of Trump 2.0, Erwin said, 'and we're trending upward.' Both unions moved to electronic dues collections, with members paying automatically by credit card, debit card or bank account deduction. 'We had a plan' before Trump took office again, AFGE President Everett Kelley told me. 'We had prepared. We've been implementing that plan … every day.' That preparation included a confidential 10-point plan for confronting Trump's belligerence. Switching to electronic dues collection was a vital strategic objective. From past experience, AFGE officials knew Trump would kick local union reps out of rent-free office space in government agencies, another indignity making it harder for them to connect with members. So, another point in the plan urged union locals to find alternative spaces or transition to virtual operations. 'We saw what he did in his first administration, Kelley said, 'and we learned from him.' Joseph McCartin, a labor historian at Georgetown University, said in an interview that Trump's actions have been among the 'most significant union-weakening or union-busting efforts' in the history of the United States. They're certainly the most significant since 1962, when President John F. Kennedy signed Executive Order 10988, which gave federal workers limited collective bargaining rights for the first time. (They are not allowed to negotiate over salary, benefits and other issues.) Trump's order is an about-face. His administration claims the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, which enshrined federal collective bargaining in statute, 'enables hostile Federal unions to obstruct agency management. This is dangerous in agencies with national security responsibilities.' The administration doesn't care how far from real national security responsibilities those agencies really are. Stronger laws are needed to protect federal labor rights from the whims of an anti-union White House. Collective bargaining should not be erased by the stroke of a president's pen. Notably, federal law enforcement personnel, who are directly involved in national security, including Border Patrol and Immigration and Customs Enforcement, were excluded from Trump's anti-union tirade. Their unions endorsed Trump. The White House declined to comment on Trump's exclusion of law enforcement personnel. What's next for federal unions? Many of their lawsuits remain in litigation. Legal action has helped labor in some cases, but it is slow. Federal labor can expect no substantial legislative relief if Republicans continue to control Congress and Trump sits in the White House. Even if a Democrat is elected the next president, there's no guarantee the labor organizations will regain all they have lost. Even if they do, another Republican president could strip them of power again. Stronger laws are needed to protect federal labor rights from the whims of an anti-union White House. Collective bargaining should not be erased by the stroke of a president's pen. As McCartin argued, Trump has demonstrated how weak labor rights are under a president claiming imperial power. If unions only regain the rights they had before Trump, he said, then that 'will have been a failure.' Joe Davidson Joe Davidson was The Washington Post's Federal Insider columnist and a Washington and foreign correspondent for The Wall Street Journal. He is a cofounder of the National Association of Black Journalists. Become a Member to join the discussion Comments