Overview
- Three unions—AFGE, AFSCME and NAGE—filed the case Thursday in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, naming the White House and the Office of Personnel Management.
- The challenge targets a May OPM merit-hiring plan that added four essays, including, “How would you help advance the President’s Executive Orders and policy priorities in this role?”
- The unions say the essays have been used on more than 5,800 job listings across varied roles such as meat cutter and laundry worker, while Reuters counted about 1,700 postings since October.
- The complaint argues the question imposes an unconstitutional condition on employment, compels political speech, and violates the Privacy Act by soliciting politically sensitive information.
- The administration says responses are voluntary and not scored, with an OPM official asserting presidential authority to ask such questions, while union-cited OPM training indicates leaders will review answers during hiring.