**Federal Workforce Undergoing Major Shifts: OPM Finalizes Sweeping Changes to Appeals and RIF Processes**
The Trump administration has finalized a major overhaul to federal employees’ avenues for disputing adverse actions, while also revising how agencies prioritize which employees to retain — or remove — during reductions in force. Taken together, a host of final rules that the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) issued mean that federal employees will now, in many cases, have to appeal their case to OPM if they believe their agency wrongfully terminated them — transitioning the deciding authority away from the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB), where it has been for decades.
**Key Changes to Federal Employee Appeals and Retention**
Going forward, OPM will retain the “sole and exclusive” authority to decide the outcomes of employee appeals for adverse actions taken during reductions in force (RIFs) or while serving a probationary period, as well as employee removals due to suitability standards. At the same time, agencies are now required to create RIF retention registers based most heavily on performance, after OPM finalized a separate rule that reduces the importance of seniority and tenure in RIF decisions.
The four final rules are set to take effect 30 days after OPM’s regulations are published to the Federal Register. According to OPM, these changes are intended to make the process faster, more consistent, and less expensive. However, the moves have drawn sharp criticism from employee advocates and unions, with 99% of commenters opposing the plan to transition RIF appeals away from MSPB. Critics argue that shifting the appeals process undermines the independence, fairness, and completeness of reviews, as MSPB has historically provided a more neutral forum with its own administrative judges and oversight structures.
OPM Director Scott Kupor has emphasized that the changes are not meant to erode independence. “Our proposed internal appeal processes are designed to be faster, more efficient and, critically, structurally independent, with separate staff handling determinations and appeals,” Kupor said. Nevertheless, concerns remain over OPM’s capacity and staffing, especially given reported declines in agency headcount and questions about whether the OPM office designated for appeals has the expertise traditionally associated with MSPB’s administrative judiciary.
**What Prompted the Changes?**
These sweeping regulatory changes follow significant reductions to the federal workforce throughout 2025. Alongside the overhaul of appeals and RIF processes, the Trump administration has broadly reshaped firing and removal rules for federal employees. This includes changing the factors agencies must consider when taking adverse action and implementing the Schedule Policy/Career classification. In June, OPM also finalized a rule making current federal employees fireable based on suitability and fitness standards previously reserved for applicants, expanding the grounds for removal.
Additionally, OPM has overhauled the government’s performance management system, allowing for a forced distribution system that limits the number of employees agencies can rate as high performers. A rule to reorder the factors agencies consider during RIFs—placing performance above seniority and tenure—has also been finalized, ending the long-standing “bump and retreat” process. Under the new approach, employees designated for reassignment during a RIF will receive assignment rights to a qualifying position held by another employee with lower retention standing in the same tenure group.
**Criticism and Safeguards**
Many commenters and advocacy groups argue that the new framework risks making RIFs more subjective and less contestable before independent adjudicators, potentially enabling managers to target individuals rather than positions. In response, OPM has pointed to stricter record requirements for agencies and, in some limited cases, allowed employees to raise additional allegations if new material arises. The agency has also stated that it may adjust internal staffing levels “as necessary” and, at present, believes it has sufficient staffing and resources to manage all three categories of appeals.
OPM has further clarified in the final rule that agencies must abide by “all applicable laws, including the merit system principles,” when conducting a RIF. However, critics remain skeptical that these safeguards will fully address the risks of bias and subjectivity.
**FAQ**
**Q: What authority will OPM have over federal employee appeals starting with these new rules?**
A: OPM will hold the “sole and exclusive” authority to decide appeals related to adverse actions during RIFs, probationary periods, and removals based on suitability standards.
**Q: How will RIF retention registers be determined under the new rules?**
A: Agencies must base retention registers primarily on performance, with seniority and tenure playing a secondary role as tiebreakers. Performance ratings will be the leading factor in deciding who stays and who goes.
**Q: What happens to the “bump and retreat” process in RIFs?**
A: The “bump and retreat” process has been eliminated. Employees affected by a RIF will receive assignment rights to a qualifying position held by another employee with lower retention standing within the same tenure group.
**Q: Will federal employees still be able to appeal adverse actions through MSPB?**
A: No. The new rules transition primary appeal authority for RIFs, probationary actions, and suitability-related removals from MSPB to OPM’s designated offices.
**Q: Are there safeguards in place to ensure fairness and prevent bias in RIF decisions?**
A: The final rules include stricter record requirements for agencies and limited provisions for employees to raise new allegations if new material arises. OPM has also stated that it will monitor performance rating systems to prevent manipulation.
**Conclusion**
The recently finalized OPM rules mark a significant shift in how federal employees can contest adverse actions and how agencies will manage workforce reductions. By centralizing appeal authority within OPM and reordering RIF criteria to prioritize performance, the administration aims to streamline processes and reduce costs. However, questions about capacity, independence, and potential bias continue to spark debate. As these changes take effect, their impact on federal morale, retention, and the broader merit system framework will become clearer. Federal employers and employees alike will be watching closely to see how the new framework plays out in practice.
