Unions for Weather Service, Patent Office Sue Trump for Ending Collective Bargaining

Labor unions representing employees of the National Weather Service (NWS) and the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) filed a lawsuit on Sept. 2 challenging President Donald Trump’s Aug. 28 directive to end collective bargaining for the two Commerce Department agencies.

On March 27, Trump signed an executive order to end collective bargaining at federal unions representing employees working at agencies with national security missions. The Aug. 28 order expanded the list to include more agencies, including the NWS and PTO.

On Sept. 2, the National Weather Service Employees Organization (NWSEO) and the Patent Office Professional Association (POPA) filed the lawsuit against Trump and three administration officials, including Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

The defendants’ actions violated the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (FSLMRS), the First Amendment, and the Fifth Amendment guarantee of equal protection through its due process clause, the lawsuit contends.

The FSLMRS establishes the rights and obligations of federal workers and related unions, including their right to organize and bargain in good faith. The two Trump orders excluded the NWS and PTO from FSLMRS coverage, thereby ending their bargaining rights, the plaintiffs said.

The lawsuit argues that the president can exclude agencies from FSLMRS coverage only if these agencies have “intelligence, counterintelligence, investigative, or national security work” as a primary function.

Claiming that national security work is neither the primary function nor a responsibility of the NWS or PTO, the two unions claimed that “the President clearly exceeded the authority granted to him by Congress” by excluding the agencies from FSLMRS coverage.

The lawsuit alleges that Trump’s Aug. 28 order was retaliation against NWSEO and POPA because the unions had criticized the administration’s policies.

For instance, the labor groups had previously raised grievances against the Trump administration for policies such as ending telework or remote work, according to the complaint.

“The fact that the POPA and NWSEO bargaining units were not included among the first tranche of exemptions in the March Executive Order but were excluded after they engaged in robust opposing to the Defendants’ policies, evinces that national security concerns were not the motivation for their exclusion,” the complaint reads.

“The Executive Orders collectively constitute ‘viewpoint discrimination’ because they exclude those labor organizations which have been supportive of the Defendant Trump.”

The lawsuit asks the court to declare certain sections of Trump’s executive order unlawful and provide relief to the unions.

In an Aug. 28 fact sheet, the White House justified Trump’s executive order ending collective bargaining for agencies such as the NWS and PTO.

“Certain procedural requirements in Federal labor-management relations can create delays in agency operations,” it states.

“These delays can impact the ability of agencies with national security responsibilities to implement policies swiftly and fulfill their critical missions.

“President Trump is taking action to ensure that agencies vital to national security can execute their missions without delay and protect the American people. The President needs a responsive and accountable civil service to protect our national security.”

Ending collective bargaining is one of the measures that the Trump administration initiated to reform the federal workforce.

In February, Trump signed an executive order directing agency heads to work with the Department of Government Efficiency to reduce the number of employees and limit hiring.

After a lower court blocked the order, the Supreme Court lifted the block on July 8, allowing the Trump administration to carry on with its job cuts and restructuring of federal agencies.

On July 7, Trump issued a memorandum extending a federal hiring freeze until Oct. 15.

Exemptions have been granted for certain roles such as military personnel or those related to national security, public safety, and immigration enforcement.

The White House did not respond to a request for comment on the lawsuit by publication time.