We Believe in the Power of Solidarity

August 2025

• Official Statement Regarding the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Decision: AFSCME Local 2830 expresses profound disappointment in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals' decision to continue the administrative stay regarding the Exclusions from Federal Labor-Management Relations Programs Executive Order. While the stay precludes OJP management from engaging in direct collective bargaining, the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) remains in effect, allowing us to represent OJP Bargaining Unit Employees (BUEs) and file informal and formal actions per the negotiated procedures, as we have done for nearly five decades. 

• Alert: As previously noted, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has granted another administrative stay, prohibiting unions from engaging in collective bargaining for two-thirds of federal Bargaining Unit Employees (BUEs), including agency subcomponents such as OJP. AFSCME Local 2830 will provide updates from AFSCME International as soon as they become available.

July 2025

• Alert: Look out for notices about the new AFSCME Local 2830 Member Action Team (MAT). The MAT's purpose is to provide an ongoing opportunity for dues-paying members to discuss their office's labor-management issues with the Union so that we can address them informally and formally, as per the CBA. Participation on the MAT will also help mobilize employees regarding specific issues affecting OJP, recruit new members, and assist with planning brown bag sessions and other activities. Chief Steward Lindsay Waldrop and Steward Ethan Aaronson will lead the MAT with assistance from other Union officers. More information is forthcoming. 

•  AFSCME Local 2830 submitted a memo to OJP's Office of the Assistant Attorney General (OAAG) regarding adverse working conditions at the Office of Audit, Assessment, and Management (OAAM) per Article 2, Section 3 of the CBA. The memo included the Union's concerns and requested resolutions. If we receive additional information, we will file a Union Grievance per Article 23, Section 8 of the CBA. More information is forthcoming.  

• As previously noted, the United States District Court, Northern District of California, granted a preliminary injunction on June 24th to several Unions, including AFSCME International, ruling that the Exclusions from Federal Labor-Management Relations Programs Executive Order likely violated the law by not collectively bargaining with federal unions. 

• While the Court initially set a case management conference for today, a panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals granted an administrative stay of the ruling on July 10th, pending its decision on whether to pause the preliminary injunction while the Administration appeals. Therefore, until the Court issues a final decision, agencies do not have to collectively bargain with unions, even though CBAs are still in effect. 

June 2025

• Alert:  A federal judge granted a preliminary injunction this week after ruling that the White House likely violated the law by stripping nearly a million federal workers of their union rights. AFSCME and five other unions filed a lawsuit on April 3 challenging President Donald Trump’s March 27 executive order, which ended collective bargaining rights for about 950,000 federal employees the unions collectively represent. Click here for more information from AFSCME International.

• Official Statement Regarding the Unfair Labor Practice filed on June 11, 2025: By refusing to engage in collective bargaining regarding terminating remote employees' telework, which includes failing to notify us per the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA), AFSCME Local 2830 had little recourse other than to file an Unfair Labor Practice (ULP) with the Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA). 

• AFSCME Local 2830 filed an Unfair Labor Practice (ULP) against OJP with the Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) on June 11th. The Union claimed that OJP failed to notify us and negotiate remote employees' inability to telework. As a result, we contend OJP violated Article 2, Section 7, and Article 31 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA). We also claimed that OJP violated the FSLMRS (5 U.S.C. § 7101) by not bargaining at all, let alone in good faith. 

• Per the stay issued by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals in the National Treasury Employees Union lawsuit, it is "reverting to the initial guidance provided by OPM to agencies covered by EO 14251..." OJP will also provide additional information regarding deducting member dues. OJP is "reverting to the initial guidance," meaning it will pause most collective bargaining activities, even though it did not move to terminate the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) or decertify the Bargaining Unit.