Browse regulations

Procedures for requesting general statements of policy or guidance from the Federal Labor Relations Authority, detailing eligible requesters, required written content, service on interested parties, opportunity for input, and decision factors such as preventing case proliferation and promoting constructive labor relations.

Adds bureaucratic overhead for a narrow federal labor relations niche, increasing CFR complexity and compliance costs for minimal public benefit. Unseen effects include potential delays in guidance, discouragement of informal resolution, and institutionalization of process that could be handled more efficiently via agency discretion without codification.

This regulation establishes consultation rights between federal agencies and labor organizations, requiring agencies to provide notice and opportunity for input on proposed changes to conditions of employment for unions representing at least 10% of employees or 3,500+ members, with formal petition processes and administrative procedures for eligibility determination.

This regulation institutionalizes mandatory union consultation on federal operations, creating bureaucratic overhead that slows government decision-making and increases costs. It entrenches special interest power in federal agencies, forcing taxpayers to fund union negotiations on workplace policies that should be managed directly by elected officials accountable to voters. The compliance costs and administrative burden distort federal operations while benefiting politically-connected union bureaucracies rather than the public interest.

Defines terms for the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute, establishing collective bargaining procedures, representation elections, and the Federal Labor Relations Authority for federal employees.

Mandates costly federal collective bargaining, enabling union capture and higher government spending. Public sector unions distort accountability and impose hidden tax burdens; labor relations should be controlled by elected officials without a permanent pro-union bureaucracy.

Regulation prohibiting ex parte communications in Federal Labor Relations Authority proceedings to ensure fairness and transparency in administrative decision-making processes.

Prevents unfair influence on administrative proceedings and maintains public trust in the impartial adjudication of labor disputes.

Regulation implements the Government in the Sunshine Act for the Federal Labor Relations Authority, mandating open meetings with specific exemptions and establishing procedures for closures, voting, public announcements, and record-keeping.

Deleting this would undermine transparency and accountability in an agency that adjudicates labor disputes. The procedural rules ensure predictable compliance with the Sunshine Act while balancing legitimate confidentiality needs (e.g., personnel, trade secrets). Without them, the FLRA could operate with excessive secrecy or create arbitrary procedures, reducing public oversight and increasing risk of abuse. The administrative costs are modest compared to the democratic benefit of open government.

OMB policy and procedures for enforcing post-employment restrictions on former government employees under the Ethics in Government Act and 18 U.S.C. 207, including definitions, restrictions, exemptions, and administrative enforcement mechanisms.

This regulation creates a complex administrative enforcement regime for post-employment restrictions that imposes significant compliance costs and bureaucratic overhead on government agencies. The restrictions limit career mobility for former employees, potentially deterring talented individuals from public service, while the enforcement mechanisms create a new layer of administrative proceedings that consume resources without clear evidence of preventing actual corruption. The regulatory capture concern is particularly acute here - former government employees often possess valuable expertise that the private sector needs, and these restrictions artificially constrain that knowledge transfer, benefiting incumbent firms that can afford to navigate the compliance labyrinth.

This regulation establishes federal compliance with state child support and alimony garnishment orders, requiring federal agencies to treat government payments like private wages and withhold funds for family support obligations.

Americans would be worse off if this regulation was deleted because it ensures federal employees and benefit recipients cannot evade child support and alimony obligations by claiming government immunity. Without this, custodial parents and former spouses would lose crucial financial support that courts have ordered, creating hardship for millions of families who depend on these payments.

OPM regulations for grade and pay retention provide federal employees with protection when moved to lower-graded positions, entitling them to retain their previous grade for 2 years or their previous pay rate to prevent reductions from management actions.

This regulation creates a costly entitlement program that distorts federal workforce mobility and incentivizes employees to remain in positions they would otherwise leave, while imposing significant administrative burden on agencies and taxpayers.

This regulation governs the Senior Executive Service (SES), defining terms, establishing procedures for agencies to classify positions as 'general' or 'career reserved,' setting a minimum of 3,571 career reserved positions government-wide, requiring OPM approval for designation changes, and allowing interchange agreements with other executive personnel systems.

This entrenches a protected class of unelected bureaucrats with minimum staffing mandates, insulating senior management from democratic accountability. The OPM review process and designation change approvals create bureaucratic inertia that shields the administrative state from presidential control. The 3,571 career-reserved floor forces agencies to maintain positions regardless of need, violating limited government principles. These unseen costs stifle executive leadership's ability to direct the bureaucracy and perpetuate the permanent administrative state the Founders warned against.

The regulation grants OPM sweeping authority over federal personnel management, including rulemaking, investigating employee qualifications, evaluating agency compliance, ordering corrective actions (such as separations), and compelling testimony, with enforcement through pay stoppage certifications to the Comptroller General.

Excessive centralized control imposes heavy compliance costs, creates arbitrary discretionary power through variations, and coercively enforces uniformity, undermining agency autonomy and innovation. The hidden tax of bureaucracy and chilling effect on personnel decisions outweigh any marginal benefits of top-down oversight, which could be achieved through simpler, decentralized mechanisms.

This regulation establishes GAO's personnel policies covering labor relations, equal employment opportunity, political activity restrictions, and disciplinary procedures (suspensions and adverse actions). It ensures employees' rights to form unions, prohibits discrimination, sets recruiting goals for minorities and women, restricts partisan political activity to maintain nonpartisanship, and provides due process protections for disciplinary actions.

Deletion would undermine GAO's nonpartisan mission and leave employees without essential procedural safeguards. The regulation achieves critical protections—due process, anti-discrimination, and political neutrality—that would be difficult to maintain consistently through ad hoc measures, risking arbitrary treatment, politicization of audits, and reduced accountability.

This regulation establishes pay principles and compensation systems for Government Accountability Office (GAO) employees, including equal pay for equal work, pay comparability with private sector, retention of pay during position changes, merit pay systems, and applicability of federal personnel policies from various chapters of title 5, U.S. Code.

This is internal federal personnel administration that should be handled through normal employment contracts and agency discretion rather than federal regulation. It creates unnecessary bureaucratic complexity, costs taxpayers through rigid pay structures, and represents federal overreach into agency management that could be resolved through market mechanisms and direct negotiation.

Regulation establishes performance appraisal systems and due process procedures for Government Accountability Office employees, including standards for evaluation, communication, rewards, improvement assistance, and adverse actions with notice, representation, and appeal rights. Applies federal personnel rules to GAO employees.

Americans would be worse off without these protections because GAO's ability to conduct independent, high-quality audits and investigations of federal programs depends on a professional, merit-based workforce shielded from political interference. Removing these due process safeguards would either make it too easy to fire employees for political reasons or too hard to address poor performance, both of which would degrade the accountability oversight that protects taxpayer dollars.

This regulation establishes that Government Accountability Office (GAO) employees are appointed based on merit and fitness but exempt from Title 5 competitive service requirements, while remaining subject to OPM regulations on recruitment (subchapter II) and personnel actions (subchapter VI). The GAO, as Congress's audit and oversight agency, maintains a separate personnel system from the executive branch competitive service.

Separate personnel systems create unnecessary complexity and administrative overhead. The GAO's oversight function could be adequately served through the existing competitive service with appropriate flexibility provisions. This exemption fragments the federal workforce, increases compliance costs, and creates opportunities for patronage appointments. A unified merit-based system under Title 5 would be more transparent, efficient, and consistent with limited government principles. The alleged benefits of specialized hiring flexibility are outweighed by the costs of Balkanization and reduced accountability to civil service standards that protect taxpayers from politicized staffing.

Establishes personnel management policies for the Government Accountability Office (GAO), including merit system principles, equal employment opportunity requirements, prohibited personnel practices, and preference eligibles for hiring. Covers anti-discrimination provisions, whistleblower protections, and appeal processes.

This regulation creates a costly federal bureaucracy for personnel management that should be handled by GAO's own HR department without federal oversight. The extensive anti-discrimination and whistleblower protections create legal liability and compliance costs that burden the agency while providing minimal public benefit, as GAO already has internal mechanisms for handling personnel issues.