
The Office of Personnel Management now has new questions for civil service hires at GS-05 and above. These questions include political commitment to the Trump agenda:
“How would you help advance the President’s Executive Orders and policy priorities in this role? Identify one or two relevant Executive Orders or policy initiatives that are significant to you, and explain how you would help implement them if hired.”
GS-05 hires are NOT political policy positions. They do not and should not require any commitment to Trump policies and executive orders. GS-05 positions include jobs such as nurse, veterinary medical officer, construction manager, border patrol agent, and transportation security officer. These are civil service positions, which are supposed to be non-political, with hiring based on competence, not politics. They are supposed to be career jobs rather than political appointments that change with each president.
“I cannot think of anything like this level of politicization being formally introduced into the hiring process. Under the George W. Bush administration, it was a scandal when appointees in the Justice Department were caught scanning candidate CVs for civil servant positions to try to discern their political leanings. Now they will just ask them to explain how they can serve President Trump’s agenda. Within the space of a generation, backdoor politicization practices went from being a source of shame to a formal policy.”
The ban on political tests or preferences for civil service employees goes all the way back to the Pendleton Act of 1883.
“The Pendleton Act provided that federal government jobs be awarded on the basis of merit and that government employees be selected through competitive exams. The act also made it unlawful to fire or demote for political reasons employees who were covered by the law. The law further forbade requiring employees to give political service or contributions. The Civil Service Commission was established to enforce this act.”
The Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 mandates that:
“All employees and applicants for employment should receive fair and equitable treatment in all aspects of personnel management without regard to political affiliation, race, color, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, age, or handicapping condition, and with proper regard for their privacy and constitutional rights.” [Section 2301(b)(2), emphasis added]
The Trump administration is trying to remove civil service protection from 50,000 current civil service employees, making them political appointees. This attempt, formerly known as Schedule F is proposed as a rule called “Improving Performance, Accountability and Responsiveness in the Civil Service.” Don Moynihan has a great post explaining how to oppose Trump’s attempt to roll back civil service protections. As Moynihan explains:
- “Federal comments really do matter. By law, they must be read by the administration, and substantive comments require a response. Failure to do so can see the rule tossed out by courts.
- “It’s easy: Enter a comment here. No log in. Just click on the “submit a public comment” button. You can enter text, or upload a document.
- “The volume of opposing comments matters, so writing something short and sweet is great. You don’t need to read the rule in depth or be an expert. The proposed rule is bad and protecting nonpartisan civil servants is good. See more details below or take a look at the comments people have already posted.”
You can register your opposition by posting a comment on this rule. I’ve done it—it’s easy.
Again, here’s the one-step link for posting your comment opposing this politicization of civil service. Do it now—the deadline for commenting is June 7.
Discover more from News Day
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.