OPM has finalized a rule clarifying that federal agencies may remove employees for serious misconduct that occurs after hiring, a change aimed at closing what officials and lawmakers have long described as an “accountability gap” in civil service discipline. FedSmith reported the rule is intended to make it easier for agencies to pursue removal actions when post-appointment misconduct calls an employee’s suitability into question.
- Agency: Office of Personnel Management (OPM)
- Action: Final rule clarifying agencies’ authority to take removal actions for serious on-the-job misconduct occurring after an employee is hired
- Who’s affected: Federal civil service employees covered by agency disciplinary procedures and adverse action rules
- Why it matters: FedSmith said the rule addresses a long-cited gap in how agencies apply “suitability” concepts versus traditional misconduct discipline, potentially changing how some removals are charged and defended
- Bottom line: Agencies may have a clearer regulatory path to pursue removals for severe misconduct without relying solely on narrower interpretations that have been litigated in past cases
FedSmith framed the change as a clarification designed to reduce confusion about when agencies can use suitability-based authorities after an employee has already been appointed. Historically, agencies have relied on a mix of tools—misconduct-based adverse actions and suitability determinations—to address behavior that undermines the efficiency of the service. FedSmith reported that critics of the current system have argued some serious misconduct could be harder to address quickly or cleanly depending on how it is charged and what standards apply.
The final rule, as described by FedSmith, is intended to standardize expectations across the civil service and reinforce that serious misconduct after hiring can be grounds for removal. While the rule does not eliminate due process requirements, it may influence how agencies draft charges, assemble evidence, and select the procedural route for discipline—especially in cases where agencies believe the misconduct implicates an employee’s fitness for continued federal employment.
What it means for you
- If you’re a federal employee: Expect agencies to cite clearer OPM language when pursuing removals tied to serious workplace misconduct occurring after appointment. Your rights to notice and an opportunity to respond depend on the action type and bargaining-unit status.
- If you’re a supervisor/manager: The rule may affect which authorities HR and counsel recommend for high-severity cases and how removal proposals are structured.
- If you’re in a union-covered position: Local agreements and statutory appeal routes can still shape timelines and procedures, but agencies may feel more confident pursuing removal in severe cases.
Source: FedSmith