MERIT Act of 2025
- Bill Number
- H.R. 687
- Origin Chamber
- House
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 1
- Policy Area
- Government Operations and Politics
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2025-01-23: Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
- Last Updated
- 2025-02-28T20:32:28Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose of the Legislation
The Modern Employment Reform, Improvement, and Transformation Act of 2025 (MERIT Act of 2025) aims to streamline and expedite the process for federal agencies to discipline or remove employees for poor performance or misconduct. It seeks to promote efficiency in the federal workforce by reducing procedural delays, limiting certain employee protections, and enhancing agency authority while maintaining basic due process rights like notice and appeals.
Key Provisions
- Termination of Performance-Based Actions (Sec. 2): Repeals the existing framework for performance appraisals and actions under Chapter 43 of Title 5, U.S. Code, shifting all such cases to a unified misconduct and performance removal process. Actions started before the effective date remain under old rules.
- Adverse Actions for Performance or Conduct (Sec. 3): Revises procedures for actions like removal, suspension, reduction in grade, or furlough (over 14 days). Agencies must decide based on a "preponderance of evidence" standard (meaning more likely than not). Key factors include offense seriousness, job level, past record, and mitigating circumstances. Timelines are shortened: 7 business days for employee response, 15 business days total for notice, response, and decision (extendable only for suspected crimes). No performance improvement plan (PIP, a required trial period to improve) is needed. Employees get written notice, representation, and a 10-business-day window to appeal to the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB, an independent agency that reviews federal employee appeals). For grade reductions, employees receive the new grade's pay but cannot use paid administrative leave during appeals unless reporting for duty or using accrued leave.
- Prohibition on Grieving Certain Actions (Sec. 4): Bars use of negotiated grievance procedures (union or internal complaint processes) for adverse actions, long furloughs (>30 days), or reductions in force (RIF, layoffs due to budget or reorganization). Employees must use MSPB appeals instead.
- Actions Against Senior Executives (Sec. 5): Applies similar streamlined procedures to Senior Executive Service (SES) members (top career leaders). Ends pay retention for those demoted or removed for performance/misconduct (they get the lower position's pay). Extends suspension rules to SES. Defines misconduct broadly (e.g., neglect of duty). Appeals go to MSPB within 10 business days.
- Actions Against Supervisors (Sec. 6): Creates specific rules for supervisors (those with authority over others). Uses the same short timelines and factors as general employees, no PIP required. For grade reductions, pay drops immediately, and no administrative leave during appeals unless working or using leave.
- Furlough Procedures (Sec. 7): Distinguishes short furloughs (≤14 days, temporary unpaid leave), long furloughs (>14 days), and emergency furloughs (due to funding lapses). Short and emergency furloughs have minimal procedures (just notice). Long furloughs follow adverse action rules with MSPB appeals. Office of Personnel Management (OPM, the federal HR agency) must issue regulations within 180 days. Effective earlier than other sections if regulations are ready.
- Annuity Reduction for Felony Convictions (Sec. 8): For employees removed or who resign amid removal for performance/misconduct and later convicted of a related felony, excludes that "felonious service" period from retirement annuity calculations (reducing pension benefits). Includes 15-day notice and 10-day response period; appeals to MSPB. Spouses may still get benefits if they cooperated with prosecutors. Applies to acts after enactment.
- Recoupment of Bonuses (Sec. 9): Prohibits bonuses (performance or cash awards) for 5 years after an "adverse finding" (serious policy violation or crime >1 year imprisonment). Agencies can claw back (require repayment of) recently awarded bonuses after notice and hearing; employees certify repayment willingness. Appeals to MSPB.
- Extended Probationary Periods (Secs. 10-11): Doubles SES probation from 1 to 2 years. For competitive service (most federal jobs), sets 2-year probation, extended for required training or licensing. Agencies must notify employees and supervisors of timelines; certification required to retain post-probation. Applies to appointments after enactment. Updates appeal eligibility to reflect 2-year threshold.
- General Application (Sec. 12): Takes effect 1 year after enactment (except furlough rules). Supersedes conflicting collective bargaining agreements (union contracts). Defines "business day" as weekdays excluding federal holidays.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- Streamlined Timelines and Reduced Protections: Replaces separate performance (Chapter 43) and misconduct (Chapter 75) tracks with a single, faster process under Chapter 75, cutting response/decision periods from 30+ days to 15 business days and eliminating mandatory PIPs.
- Limited Grievance and Appeal Options: Removes union grievance paths for key actions, shortens MSPB appeal windows from 30 to 10 business days, and excludes certain RIFs/demotions from grievances.
- Pay and Benefit Adjustments: Ends pay retention for demoted SES, mandates immediate pay cuts for grade reductions, bars paid leave during appeals, and introduces pension reductions/bonus clawbacks tied to misconduct.
- Probation Extensions: Increases trial periods for new hires and executives, delaying full appeal rights (probationers have fewer protections).
- Supervisor and Furlough Specifics: Adds dedicated rules for supervisors and clarifies emergency furloughs with no appeals, differing from prior uniform procedures.
Potential Impacts
- On Government Agencies: Eases removal of underperformers, potentially improving efficiency and accountability but increasing administrative burden for short timelines and documentation. May lead to higher turnover in SES and supervisory roles.
- On Citizens: Indirectly benefits by aiming for a more effective federal workforce (e.g., better service delivery), but could disrupt operations if mass removals occur without smooth transitions. No direct impact on citizens' rights or services.
- On International Relations: None apparent; focuses on domestic federal employment.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- Federal Employees: Particularly supervisors, SES members, and probationary hires; face faster discipline, reduced protections, and benefit risks, potentially lowering job security.
- Federal Agencies and Managers: Gain authority for quicker actions but must comply with strict evidence standards and notifications.
- OPM and MSPB: OPM handles regulations and oversight; MSPB sees more appeals in shorter windows, possibly straining resources.
- Unions and Employee Groups: Lose grievance options as contracts are overridden, limiting collective bargaining influence.
- Retirees and Taxpayers: Affected retirees may get lower pensions; taxpayers could save on bonuses/pensions but face costs from turnover/training.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal/Due Process: Maintains core rights (notice, representation, appeals) but accelerates processes, potentially challenging under the Fifth Amendment's due process clause if seen as overly hasty. MSPB's "substantial evidence" review provides some check.
- Constitutional: No direct conflicts noted, but extensions of probation and CBA overrides could face lawsuits from employees/unions alleging property interest violations in jobs/benefits.
- Political: Promotes "drain the swamp" accountability for federal workers, likely appealing to reform advocates but criticized as eroding civil service protections (merit-based, non-partisan system established by Pendleton Act). May polarize along partisan lines, with supporters viewing it as efficiency booster and opponents as anti-worker.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Rep. Loudermilk, Barry [R-GA-11]
Cosponsors (23)
Rep. Carter, Earl L. "Buddy" [R-GA-1], Rep. Houchin, Erin [R-IN-9], Rep. Crawford, Eric A. "Rick" [R-AR-1], Rep. Owens, Burgess [R-UT-4], Rep. Collins, Mike [R-GA-10], Rep. Luna, Anna Paulina [R-FL-13], Rep. Webster, Daniel [R-FL-11], Rep. Mann, Tracey [R-KS-1], Rep. Franklin, Scott [R-FL-18], Rep. Meuser, Daniel [R-PA-9], Rep. Babin, Brian [R-TX-36], Rep. Tenney, Claudia [R-NY-24], Rep. Baird, James R. [R-IN-4], Rep. Steube, W. Gregory [R-FL-17], Rep. Burchett, Tim [R-TN-2], Rep. Weber, Randy K. Sr. [R-TX-14], Rep. Hill, J. French [R-AR-2], Rep. Crane, Elijah [R-AZ-2], Rep. Rose, John W. [R-TN-6], Rep. Brecheen, Josh [R-OK-2], Rep. Harris, Andy [R-MD-1], Rep. Miller, Mary E. [R-IL-15], Rep. De La Cruz, Monica [R-TX-15]
Recent Actions
- 2025-01-23: Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
- 2025-01-23: Introduced in House
- 2025-01-23: Introduced in House
Bill Versions
- Modern Employment Reform, Improvement, and Transformation Act of 2025 — issued 2025-01-23 — PDF (42 pages)