House to Trump: Keep Your Hands Off Federal Workers

So congratulations to the U.S. House of Representatives for doing the bare minimum act of democracy: seeing an executive order that basically yelled “national security” as a magic spell to bust unions, and voting to punt it into the sun.

On December 11, the House passed the Protect America’s Workforce Act, 231 to 195, to rescind Donald Trump’s March 2025 executive order that stripped collective bargaining rights across a huge chunk of the federal government, according to the Washington Post’s coverage of the vote (House votes to repeal Trump order ending union rights at federal agencies). And because the political gods enjoy slapstick, about 20 Republicans wandered off the reservation and joined Democrats to do it, as reported by AP (House votes to nullify Trump order and restore bargaining rights for federal workers) and the Washington Post (Democrats push; some Republicans join).

That’s the story. The commentary is the fun part.

Trump tried the oldest trick in the authoritarian handbook: call everything “security” so nobody can argue

Trump’s March 2025 order leaned on the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 to “exempt” agencies with national security missions from collective bargaining requirements, per the administration’s own White House fact sheet (White House fact sheet on exempting agencies). Sounds surgical until you look at the blast radius.

This thing hit more than two dozen agencies and sprawling components, including Defense, VA, State, Justice, and parts of Homeland Security, plus chunks of HHS, Interior, Energy, and Commerce, according to the Washington Post’s reporting when the order dropped (Trump administration moves to end union rights at many federal agencies). That’s not a scalpel. That’s a leaf blower aimed at workers’ rights.

And the human cost was massive: the Washington Post reports the change would affect roughly 600,000 of the 800,000 unionized federal employees represented by the American Federation of Government Employees, plus other unions in the federal labor ecosystem (Democrats push; some Republicans join). You can argue about the exact count (the reporting has varied), but you cannot argue about the intent: weaken labor where it’s hardest for workers to fight back.

And yes, federal unions already operate with one hand tied behind their back. They generally can’t strike, they can’t bargain over pay, and they’re negotiating working conditions and protections inside a system designed to keep the state running, not to let anyone “shut it down.” Even that was too much dignity for Trumpworld, per the background described by The Guardian on federal collective bargaining limits (Guardian on federal workers’ union rights).

The House didn’t politely ask permission, and that’s why this vote happened

Here’s the part that should make every “strong executive” fanboy sweat through their merch: the bill got to the floor because Rep. Jared Golden used a discharge petition to drag it there.

A discharge petition is basically Congress saying, “Leadership is blocking a vote, so we’re going around them.” Golden got enough signatures to force the issue despite GOP leadership resistance, per AP’s reporting (House votes to nullify Trump order). That doesn’t happen every day in a chamber where leadership normally controls the agenda like a bouncer at a club.

That’s why this vote reads as an unusually direct repudiation of a presidential power play. Trump took a broad statutory hook, claimed “security,” and tried to wipe out bargaining rights for vast swaths of the workforce. The House responded with: we’re voting anyway.

AFGE called it a “seismic victory” because it is

When you strip collective bargaining, you don’t just hurt “unions” in the abstract. You muzzle worker voice on staffing, safety, discipline procedures, and basic workplace conditions. The unions are the mechanism that keeps federal agencies from turning into petty fiefdoms where managers do vibes-based governance.

So when AFGE celebrated the House vote as a “seismic victory,” the Washington Post wasn’t quoting some random hype man. That’s the largest federal employee union recognizing a rare moment where Congress actually moved to reverse damage rather than merely tweeting about it (Democrats push; some Republicans join). The AFL-CIO was aligned right there with them, also according to the Post.

Meanwhile, Trump defenders keep pretending this was about protecting the homeland, as if the republic collapses the minute a VA employee has a contract. The Washington Post noted critics argued plenty of agencies swept up had only indirect connections to national security, and that the “security” rationale was aggressively broadened (Trump administration moves to end union rights). Which is exactly what you do when the goal is union busting but you need a justification that sounds heroic.

Courts let the order take effect while lawsuits drag on, because of course they did

The legal fight has been a mess, and it’s not over. An appeals court allowed enforcement of Trump’s order while litigation continued, per AP’s reporting on the court allowing the anti-union order to take effect (Appeals court allows Trump’s anti-union order). That’s the whole problem with relying on litigation as your only line of defense: workers lose rights immediately while lawyers argue for months.

Legislation is cleaner. If it becomes law.

The Senate is where good ideas go to die of “60 votes” disease

The House passing this bill is a real win, but nobody should pretend the Senate is a friendly environment. The Washington Post points out the reality: getting to 60 votes to beat a filibuster looks very unlikely given Republican opposition (House votes to repeal Trump order).

That’s the whole scam of modern governance. The House can reflect public outrage. The Senate can quietly sit on it and wait for the news cycle to change, protected by procedural junk that turns basic worker rights into an Olympic event.

Still, the bipartisan cracks matter. When roughly 20 House Republicans break with Trump on something this core to the GOP donor class agenda, that’s either fear of backlash from actual working people in their districts, or a recognition that “union-busting federal employees” is a weird hill to die on. Either way, it means the Trump brand of government-by-threat isn’t automatically obeyed by every Republican with a pulse.

Daddy Gavin enters the chat (in spirit)

California has spent the last decade proving that strong worker protections and competent governance are not opposites. You can run a massive, complex state economy and still back labor without breaking things (but hey, socialism is fine if its giving farmers a bail out after LITERALLY CAUSING THE PROBLEM).

The government should function, the workforce should have rights, and “national security” should not be used as a cheat code to vaporize collective bargaining.

MAGA loves to cosplay as the “working class party” while trying to silence hundreds of thousands of federal workers who keep the country running. They want the aesthetic of the hard hat and the paycheck, but they flinch at the moment workers gain any leverage.

Now we see whether the Senate wants to keep playing procedural games while federal workers sit in limbo.