US judge questions Trump's motives for curbing union bargaining by federal workers

By Daniel Wiessner

April 23 (Reuters) - A federal judge on Wednesday said President Donald Trump appeared to be targeting unions that have challenged his policies in court by stripping hundreds of thousands of federal employees of the ability to collectively bargain over working conditions.

Senior U.S. District Judge Paul Friedman during a hearing in Washington, D.C., seemed to agree with the National Treasury Employees Union that Trump's March executive order eliminating bargaining at more than a dozen federal agencies was an act of retaliation.

Trump in the order had said that curbing collective bargaining was necessary to protect national security and that union contracts were preventing agencies from enacting some policy changes.

Friedman on Wednesday read at length from a White House fact sheet on the order that said unions like NTEU, which have filed several lawsuits against the Trump administration, had "declared war" on Trump's agenda and that the Republican president "will not tolerate mass obstruction."

“He's willing to be kind to those that work with him, but those that have sued him … he’s not going to bargain with,” Friedman said to Emily Hall of the U.S. Department of Justice. “How else can you read what he's done?”

Hall pushed back, saying Trump's order impacted a number of unions that have not sued his administration. She said NTEU's claim that it could cease to exist because of Trump's order was overblown, noting that about 60,000 of the union's 160,000 members were not affected.

Paras Shah, an in-house lawyer at NTEU, said the union is losing $2 million a month in dues after agencies stopped deducting them from employees' paychecks.

"They won't bargain with us, they won't meet with us, (and) we're losing chances to advocate for our workers at a time when they're under unprecedented attack," Shah said.

Unions have challenged various efforts by Trump to downsize the federal workforce, including the mass firings of recently-hired workers, a deferred buyout program and a policy making it easier to fire many career civil servants. Unions have seen mixed results so far in those cases, which are mostly in early stages.

Friedman, an appointee of Democratic former President Bill Clinton, is considering NTEU's request to block Trump's order from being implemented pending the outcome of the lawsuit.

While he seemed leery of Trump's motives, the judge did not indicate how he could rule on the motion. Hall argued that courts cannot review the president's determinations to exempt agencies from collective bargaining, and that NTEU was required to bring its challenge to the Federal Labor Relations Authority before suing in court.

In the executive order, Trump excluded from collective bargaining obligations agencies or offices within them that he said have "intelligence, counterintelligence, investigative, or national security work" as a primary function. He also directed agencies to determine whether offices not covered by his order could be exempted.

The order applies to the Justice, State, Defense, Treasury, Veterans Affairs, and Health and Human Services departments, among others. It affects about 75% of the roughly 1 million federal workers represented by unions, according to court filings. It significantly expanded an existing exception from collective bargaining for workers with duties affecting national security, such as certain employees of the CIA and FBI.

Federal agencies have also filed lawsuits against dozens of local union affiliates seeking to invalidate existing union contracts covering thousands of workers.

Eliminating collective bargaining would remove obstacles for agencies to alter working conditions and fire or discipline workers. And it could prevent federal worker unions from challenging Trump administration initiatives in court.

NTEU in its lawsuit says none of the agencies covered by the order are primarily involved in intelligence or national security work. The union says that Trump's primary motivation was to punish federal-sector unions that have opposed his policies.

Trump's order is also being challenged in a separate lawsuit in California federal court by the American Federation of Government Employees, the largest federal worker union with more than 800,000 members.

The case is NTEU v. Trump, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, No. 1:25-cv-935.

For NTEU: Paras Shah

For the government: Emily Hall of the U.S. Department of Justice

Read more:

Unions move to block Trump from nixing bargaining for federal workers

Union sues to block Trump from ending collective bargaining for many federal workers

Trump administration sues to invalidate dozens of union contracts

Trump's plan to reclassify, fire federal workers challenged by unions