Is Schedule Policy/Career a Risk for Federal Statistical Agencies?
Introduction
On April 23, 2025, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) issued a proposed rule that will make changes to federal employee classifications, setting up new parameters to move many federal employees into Schedule Policy/Career – a designation dependent on job functions with a policy impact and job security more aligned with political appointees. CAROW reached out to Erica Groshen, the Senior Economic Advisor at Cornell University of Industrial and Labor Relations and former Commissioner of the US Bureau of Labor Statistics to understand the possible impacts of this change, particularly to employees at federal statistical agencies. The 30-day comment period on a rule to institute Schedule Policy/Career is currently underway and the public can provide comments here.
Q. What is the key change that is being proposed under this rule?
If the rule is implemented, the President will be empowered to designate a set of federal positions as Schedule Policy/Career jobs via a subsequent Executive Order. Employees holding jobs in these reclassified positions will lose the protections of the traditional civil service system, particularly the right to appeal terminations, making them more akin to at-will political appointees that serve at the pleasure of the President. The goal is to streamline the alignment of the federal workforce with the President’s policy objectives.
Q. What is the history of this proposed rule? How did this come about?
On October 21, 2020, the Trump administration introduced Executive Order 13957, which created "Schedule F" within the civil service. This aimed to reclassify federal employees in positions of a "confidential, policy-determining, policymaking, or policy-advocating character." The stated goal was to increase agency head flexibility and accountability.
The Biden administration rescinded Schedule F via Executive Order 14003 on January 22, 2021. In April 2024, the Biden administration adopted a regulation named "Upholding Civil Service Protections and Merit System Principles" that allows employees to keep existing job protections even if their positions were reclassified, preventing most of the effects of a future reinstatement of Schedule F.
On January 20, 2025, the second Trump administration issued Executive Order 14171 to implement similar policies to Schedule F, now referred to as "Schedule Policy/Career." This order is titled "Restoring Accountability to Policy-Influencing Positions Within the Federal Workforce." The Biden Administration’s rule about reclassifying employees delayed implementation of the new order by several months. On April 23, 2025, OMB posted a proposed regulation called “Improving Performance, Accountability and Responsiveness in the Civil Service,” in the Federal Register for a 30-day comment period. Any member of the public may comment, and OPM must respond to the comments received before adopting the rule. Here is the link to the website: https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2025-06904.
Q. How many employees does this change impact?
OPM estimates 50,000 positions will ultimately be reclassified into Schedule Policy/Career, approximately 2% of the Federal workforce. The proposed rule does not directly move positions into Schedule Policy/Career. That will be done by a subsequent executive order after a final rule issues.
Q. How does this apply to Federal Statistical Agencies? Are these workers uniquely positioned?
If applied to their staff, Federal statistical agencies would be particularly vulnerable to the negative impacts from Schedule Policy/Career. Schedule Policy/Career could lead to the politicization of the federal statistical workforce. Official federal statistics clearly influence public policy of all sorts: monetary, fiscal, regulatory, etc. Thus, a President could classify many statistical agency positions as Policy/Career. For example, Bureau of Labor Statistics’ leaders could be fired for releasing or planning to release jobs or inflation statistics unfavorable to the President’s policy agenda. They might also face pressure to change methodologies or reveal pre-release information. By making it easier to remove employees if a President determines that they are interfering with his or her policies, it increases the potential for passivity or political loyalty to be prioritized over expertise and experience. Politicization has had dramatic consequences for statistical agencies and their leaders in other countries, notably Argentina and Greece.
Statistical agencies, such as the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the Census Bureau, and the National Center for Health Statistics, need professional autonomy to provide impartial, objective, reliable data. Professional autonomy is the ability to act independently from political or other undue external influence regarding its operations, such as data collection and analysis, staffing, and publications. Erosion of professional autonomy in the operations of statistical agencies would undermine their perceived or actual independence, leading to a loss of public trust in the data they produce.
Schedule Policy/Career would deprioritize and thus weaken the norms that uphold the ethical and professional standards that are critical to the success of statistical agencies. Senior leaders help craft, model and reinforce norms within their agencies and between their agencies and other parts of the government. Examples include how agencies interact with staff, data users, data subjects, outside experts and host agencies. See Principles and Practices for a Federal Statistical Agency for examples of these critical norms. These norms reflect and go beyond the laws, rules, and policy directives that govern agencies’ operations. Weaker norms threaten trust, efficient operations, and data quality.
Q. Do you anticipate changes to staff turnover related to the proposed change?
These agencies rely on highly specialized professionals, including statisticians, economists, and data scientists, who possess unique technical expertise and long-term institutional memory. Statistical agencies stand to lose experts who see their career paths as less secure and merit-based than before. The loss of these experts or frequent turnover in key positions could disrupt agency operations, hinder long-term planning, undermine the agency's ability to fulfill its mission, and impair the quality and accuracy of the data. The uncertainty and fear of arbitrary dismissal could also negatively impact employee morale, leading to decreased productivity and difficulty in attracting and retaining top talent.
Q. How does this impact ongoing modernization efforts at statistical agencies?
To support their missions, statistical agencies must invest in long-term efforts such as extensive research, critical modernization projects, and efforts to ensure data access and continuity. Schedule Policy/Career could subject agencies to changing presidential priorities, increasing senior staff turnover and disrupting modernization efforts, measurement of trends, and meaningful research.
Q. Are there groups and institutions weighing in on these issues?
Yes, federal statistical data is used by a wide variety of stakeholders and some are already weighing in on how this federal employment policy change could impact those data. One group is The Friends of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, you can find more of their info related to the proposed rule here.
Q. How can individuals express their support or concerns for this change?
Here is the link to the website for submitting comments on the proposed rule for Schedule Policy/Career: https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2025-06904. The deadline for submitting comments is May 23, 2025.
Q. How would you sum up the impact of this proposed rule on Federal Statistical Agencies?
Overall, Schedule Policy/Career poses a significant threat to the effectiveness of federal statistical agencies and to the integrity and quality of their products. By undermining the principles of merit-based employment and threatening the job security of senior career civil servants, Schedule Policy/Career could lead to politicization, loss of trust and expertise, decreased morale, and disruption of agency operations. Businesses, the public, and policymakers must speak up to protect the trustworthiness of the federal statistics they rely on.
Questions posed by Megan Thorsfeldt, Associate Director, CAROW
Photo credit: Rawf8
