Following recent “unauthorized disclosures,” the Office of Personnel Management on Tuesday announced its intention of drafting a governmentwide NDA that agencies can implement at their discretion for workers who have access to sensitive information, such as personnel records and operational plans.

“OPM believes that a standard NDA form will promote consistency across government, better protect confidential information and better inform federal employees of their rights and obligations regarding confidential information,” the proposal reads.

OPM’s proposal was published Wednesday in the Federal Register and opened a 30-day public comment period through June 26.

The OPM said the move follows several recent leaks of internal government information.

“There have been several recent instances in which internal agency communications related to rulemaking and policy development were disclosed without authorization,” the proposal says.

“Such disclosures risk chilling candid interagency feedback, disrupting orderly decision-making and weakening trust within and among federal agencies,” the proposal continues.

The draft lists several examples, with one dating back to 2022 when a Supreme Court opinion overturning abortion rights was leaked to a reporter, prompting the Court to implement its own NDA in 2024.

The proposal cited a 2025 incident in which several Federal Bureau of Investigation and Department of Homeland Security workers released immigration enforcement plans when unauthorized to do so.

More recently, in early January 2026, the proposal also claims that the New York Times and Washington Post received unauthorized disclosures from federal employees about the planned U.S. raid on Venezuela before it began, which prompted the organizations to postpone “publishing what they knew to avoid endangering US troops.”

The New York Times disputes that assertion.

“Contrary to some claims, however, The Times did not have verified details about the pending operation to capture Maduro or a story prepared, nor did we withhold publication at the request of the Trump administration,” the New York Times Executive Editor Joe Kahn wrote in January 2026 in response to questions from readers.

OPM’s announcement comes less than two months after President Donald Trump vowed to find the “leaker” behind the release of information involving a missing U.S. airman from a downed fighter jet in Iran. In an early April press conference, Trump did not specify which media company received the leak but did threaten to put the reporter in jail if they, or their organization, did not disclose their source.

OPM previously published a separate rule in June 2025 addressing federal employee “suitability and fitness” requirements with nondisclosure requirements.

The draft says that the NDA will be an “Optional Form,” allowing federal agencies to decide for themselves whether or not to use the agreement. If an agency decides to use the NDA, it would be given to new hires as well as current employees.

Even though the draft says that the proposal is not meant to implement “new substantive restrictions on employee speech or disclosure rights,” union leaders have criticized the move, calling it unnecessary and warning it could silence workers.

“This proposed NDA is another attempt by the administration to purge the civil service of nonpartisan career employees and replace them with loyalists who won’t speak out against waste, fraud and abuse,” Everett Kelley, the national president of the American Federation of Government Employees, the largest federal employee union, said in a statement.

Doreen Greenwald, the president of the second largest federal employee union, National Treasury Employees Union, said there was “no basis” for this action and that the union would oppose the proposal.

“Existing law protects our nation’s secrets. Non-disclosure agreements would preemptively chill First Amendment-protected speech and dissuade protected whistleblowing activity,” Greenwald said in a release.

There are currently over two million federal employees, according to OPM, with the largest share of workers serving in the Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs.

There’s not enough data to determine the risk of long-term health effects caused by exposure to that kerosene-based aviation fuel, known as JP-5, according to the report, which was based on research conducted by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.

The authors did find “limited, suggestive evidence linking jet fuel exposure to short-term respiratory, gastrointestinal, skin and mental health symptoms,” which many military families experienced early on after the fuel leak.

The researchers cited the dearth of information and data about the detection, treatment and long-term effects of exposure to jet fuel in the 282-page report, titled “Clinical Follow-up and Care for Those Impacted by the JP-5 Releases at Red Hill.”

The research was sponsored by the departments of Defense and Veterans Affairs.

In a Thursday webinar, researchers said the limitation of data needs to be addressed so that long-term health effects can be better understood. They recommended various long-term research efforts.

Meanwhile, medical providers caring for people who were potentially exposed to the contaminated water should document exposure history, carefully evaluate and document symptoms and ensure continuity of primary care, the researchers recommended.

About 93,000 people were affected by the Navy’s two accidental releases of JP-5 in 2021. The fuel releases contaminated the drinking water supply for Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam and the Aliamanu Military Reservation.

Immediately after the contamination, Navy officials told families it was OK to drink and bathe in the water. Some families experienced severe rashes, diarrhea and other gastrointestinal problems, as well as respiratory problems, mental health symptoms and other issues.

Military officials later gave families the choice of moving to hotels while the fuel was being flushed from the water distribution system and paid their expenses.

More than four years later, families continue to be concerned about their long-term health, including their children. Many babies were bathed in the contaminated water. Some people have had persistent, continuing symptoms. About 2,000 military families have filed lawsuits against the government alleging negligence and harm to their health.

There are no diagnostic or screening tests to determine past exposure, and there are no specific laboratory tests for detecting JP-5 in blood or urine. The report recommended research to develop and validate biological markers of petroleum associated with exposure to jet fuel, supported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institutes of Health, DOD and VA.

There are no known medical procedures that can detox or neutralize the effects of JP-5, the researchers stated.

In addition to their extensive review of available scientific evidence, the researchers visited Red Hill and the Honolulu Board of Water Supply and held 15 meetings with those affected in the community, including service members, military families, civilians and other Oahu residents. They also held additional in-person and virtual listening sessions.

A central theme that emerged from these community interactions was the breakdown of trust between residents and the medical system, researchers found. Families reported repeatedly trying to seek help for themselves and their children, while their conditions worsened.

Those individuals who were affected by the fuel leaks have been encouraged to sign up for registries, including the University of Hawaii Red Hill Independent Health Registry and, for the DOD population, the Red Hill Defense Occupational and Environmental Health Readiness System (DOEHRS) Registry.

But the researchers recommended that DOD link their Red Hill registry with patients’ electronic health records and claims data. Many in the mobile military community who were affected have relocated, and their electronic health record follows them.

Researchers recommended that DOD maintain this registry and expand it to include all individuals who lived or worked at Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam or Aliamanu from May 6, 2021 to March 18, 2022.

Based on their review, the Academies researchers recommended other actions that could make a positive impact on the lives of people who are affected by these incidents in the future, such as developing a standardized environmental sampling and chemical analysis methods to test for petroleum contamination in drinking water.

“For military families, the event was experienced as a breach of trust, while for many civilians and Native Hawaiians, it confirmed enduring concerns about military activities and their impact on land and water,” the report stated.

“The contamination of drinking water at Red Hill stands as a defining environmental health event for Hawaii and for the nation,” the report continued. “It reveals how deeply the safety of water, the health of communities and the integrity of institutions are intertwined.

“For thousands of families the crisis raises serious questions about drinking water safety and breached trust with institutions.”

With the U.S. and Israel attacks against Iran in their third week, Americans’ thoughts and actions have been turning toward sending care packages with various hygiene products, snacks and a host of other items.

But according to the U.S. Postal Service, there are currently 28 ZIP codes where mail services have been temporarily suspended, all of which appear to be Army or Air Force post offices. No ships are currently listed, although mail service is sporadic in many locations because of operational needs and restrictions. There are also 17 Diplomatic Post Office (DPO) suspensions.

The U.S. Postal Service doesn’t share exact locations associated with APO, FPO or DPO ZIP codes with the public, said David P. Coleman, a spokesman for the Postal Service. The decisions about suspensions of service to military and diplomatic post offices are made by the Military Postal Service Agency and the Department of State.

The Military Postal Service Agency serves as an extension of the U.S. Postal Service and provides postal services to Defense Department personnel and their families at locations around the world.

What happens to those care packages if they can’t be delivered?

Packages that were accepted before their particular ZIP code suspension took effect are held for future delivery after the suspension is lifted, Coleman said.

“No packages are being returned to sender at this time,” he said.

If a customer takes a package to a postal counter for mailing, the automated system will inform the postal employee that mail services have been suspended for that ZIP code, and the representative will hand the package back to the customer. If the customer drops off the package in a receptacle, the package will be held for future delivery after the suspension is lifted.

Scott Raab, director of operations for Troopathon, a nonprofit charity that has sent over 1,000 tons of hand-packed boxes of items to troops over the past two decades, said he sent 1,000 boxes to the aircraft carrier Gerald R. Ford on March 12, and another 2,000 boxes to troops elsewhere that week.

The organization always checks to make sure service members’ ZIP codes are not on the suspension list, he told Military Times. He urges others to check the U.S. Postal Service’s suspension list, which is updated frequently, and has been updated daily this week.

While Troopathon primarily uses the Postal Service, they also have contacts within units, where they can find additional ways to get boxes to troops to fulfill their needs. There’s a form for requesting a care package at Troopathon.org. Troops can request the packages, and families can request them for their deployed service members.

The Troopathon boxes are always free to the troops or their families who request them, and they contain a couple hundred dollars’ worth of items, Raab said. Troopathon also raises money for postage, which is generally about $15 to $20 for each 12X12x6 box. Popular items include basic hygiene products, snacks, cookies, coffee and socks.

One military mother posted on social media about the needs of her son’s squadron at his base in the Middle East after their military exchange had to close. That post quickly spread to other spouse groups, and Amazon found out about it — and contacted her about sending items.

“Now all of these people from all over the world are sending his base thousands of dollars of goodies like protein bars, cans of coffee, energy drinks, tampons, toilet paper, body wipes and toothbrushes,” she told Military Times.

“I don’t know when they’re ever going to get it because they’re not delivering mail, because they have more important things to deliver, but when they do deliver, they’re going to have a whole lot of goodies coming their way,” added the Air Force mother, who asked to remain anonymous.

“I told my son, ‘I understand that you guys aren’t getting any mail, but there’s going to come a time when your people get tired and they’re going to need some care packages just for morale.’”

Those civilians, who aren’t eligible beneficiaries of military medical care, include a variety of people, from Department of Defense civilian employees to other civilians who received emergency and trauma treatment at any military treatment or clinic, both overseas and stateside, since June 21, 2023.

Military medical facilities can provide care to individuals who aren’t eligible beneficiaries in certain circumstances, by law, usually on a reimbursable basis. But the high cost of medical care was putting some of these civilians in financial distress. So Congress passed a provision in the 2023 National Defense Authorization Act that gave DOD the authority to protect patients from financial harm, to apply a sliding fee scale and catastrophic fee waiver.

The billing was paused in June 2023 in order for DOD to develop the new Military Health System Modified Payment and Waiver Program, to help these civilians who face financial difficulty.

Once the patient receives a medical bill, if they face financial harm, they are encouraged to apply for the program, officials stated in an email response to questions.

“We encourage all non-beneficiary civilians who received treatment in an MTF or clinic after June 21, 2023 to take full advantage of this program to see how much financial relief they may qualify for when they receive their bill,” officials stated.

While officials did not provide a timeline for the bills, a Feb. 6 Federal Register final rule implementing the program stated it became effective March 9. Information was not available about the estimated total amount of the billing. Each individual bill will vary and is determined by the length and type of treatment.

According to the Military Health System, if patients have other health insurance, the military hospital or clinic where they received care will file medical claims on their behalf. The patient will be responsible for copays, coinsurance, deductibles, nominal fees and non-covered services.

Those without health insurance will get a bill from the military hospital or clinic where they received care.

Each bill will include instructions on how to apply for financial relief through the program.

All complete applications will be evaluated based on the standards outlined in the final rule, applying a sliding fee scale and catastrophic waiver benefits, officials said. The final rule also guarantees flexible installment plans to allow patients to spread out their payments over up to 72 months.

The Federal Register rule outlines an initial process for determining the sliding fee discount and catastrophic fee waiver, using the Federal Poverty Guidelines. Those whose annual household income is at or below 100% of that year’s Federal Poverty Guidelines may receive a full discount on their bill; others receive discounts based on the sliding scale. Those federal guidelines are based on annual household income and family size.

For example, for those in the U.S., except for Alaska and Hawaii, a household of four people with an annual income of $32,150 would be at 100% of the federal poverty level in 2026.

Instructions for applying for financial relief are also available at the MPWP web page. Patients can also contact the Defense Health Agency’s Debt Adjudication office for assistance, Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Central Standard Time at 210-295-3344, or by email at DHA-MPWP-Inquiries@health.mil.

According to an advanced Federal Register notice, the rescission will be effective immediately on publication, expected early Friday morning.

In the notice, VA officials said that while the rule was meant to clarify existing policy, “stakeholders have expressed uncertainty” about its impact on claims and leaving the rule in place during the codification process “could undermine confidence in the benefits system.”

“VA always takes veterans’ concerns seriously and recognizes that many commenters construed the interim final rule as something that could result in adverse consequences,” the notice read.

The rule, published Feb. 17, generated significant backlash from veterans, advocacy groups and lawmakers who said the proposal could have financially penalized veterans who adhere to medical treatment or encourage those seeking a disability rating to forego medications prior to a compensation and pension exam, putting their health at risk.

The VA said the regulation simply formalized a practice that has been in place since 1958. Officials said it was needed because a 2025 court ruling, Ingram v. Collins, decided the VA must discount the positive impact of medication when issuing a disability rating.

The rule stated that the methodology dictated by the courts set a standard that was “unquantifiable, hypothetical [and] unwarranted.”

The major veterans groups, including Disabled American Veterans, the Veterans of Foreign Wars and American Legion strongly objected to ruling, which they said was crafted without any input from veterans outside the VA.

Nearly 20,000 veterans and advocates have flooded the Federal Register’s comment section on the rule, saying it would hurt veterans.

“As a former Army nurse, it seems this rule change could have unforeseen and harmful downstream effects for veterans, which is why it demands serious public scrutiny and possible legislative clarification from Capitol Hill,” VFW National Commander Carol Whitmore said in a statement shortly after the rule was published. “While VA has authority to amend the rating schedule, it must do so without adversely affecting veterans.”

Collins announced two days after publication that the rule would not be enforced. But it remained on the books, raising concerns among veterans.

At least one lawsuit was filed against the VA seeking to stop implementation and on Tuesday, 20 Democrat and independent lawmakers from the House and Senate wrote Collins asking the rule be revoked.

They said that leaving the rule on the books was causing veterans to “confront the unnecessary dilemma of continuing life-improving treatment for their conditions.”

“This rule forces veterans into an impossible choice: follow their prescribed treatment plan or risk losing their benefits,” wrote the lawmakers, including the ranking Democrats on the House and Senate Veterans Affairs Committees, Rep. Mark Takano of California and Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut.

In letter, the lawmakers said enforcement of the rule could have resulted in an estimated $23 billion in savings and objected to what they said was a “political maneuver aimed at cutting costs.”

The VA has filed an appeal to the Ingram v. Collins ruling, and the rescission does not resolve that court case which continues.

In the notice to be published Friday, officials said the department is “committed to its mission of ensuring that every claimant applying for benefits — especially veterans who have earned disability compensation through their honorable service to the Nation — receives all benefits to which they are entitled under the law as expeditiously as possible.”

In a Dec. 17 speech, President Donald Trump announced the payments, which he described as a “warrior dividend,“ would be made to 1.5 million troops, and said they were funded by revenue from tariffs and $2.9 billion in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act enacted last July. The Associated Press later reported that the payments weren’t being funded by tariffs.

Active-duty service members in pay grades O-6 and below, and eligible Reserve Component members, received the payments, which were described by the Pentagon as “supplemental basic allowance for housing payments.”

The IRS said in a release Friday that basic allowance for housing payments are “qualified military benefits,” and are specifically excluded from gross income in federal tax law, so they are not taxable.

“The tax-free Warrior Dividend places $1,776 directly in the hands of our warfighters and their families,” Pentagon press secretary Kingsley Wilson said in a Defense Department release Friday.

According to the IRS website, the agency will start accepting tax returns Jan. 26. The deadline to file federal tax returns for 2025, and to pay any taxes due, is April 15, although there are certain extensions available for service members, such as those stationed or deployed overseas.

Federal W-2 tax statements are scheduled to be available on DOD’s myPay site Wednesday for active-duty Army, Navy, Air Force and Space Force. They are already available for active and Reserve Marine Corps; Reserve Army, Navy, Air Force and Space Force members; and military retirees. But Defense Finance and Accounting Service officials note that system maintenance scheduled for Wednesday could affect account functionality between 10 a.m. and 4 p.m. Eastern Standard Time.

Service members and their families have access to free military-specific tax preparation software through MilTax, as well as free one-on-one help by tax consultants, all provided through Military OneSource. Those eligible can file their federal return and up to five state returns for free. Active-duty service members, eligible family members, survivors and recent veterans up to 365 days after their separation or retirement date can file their taxes for free through this benefit.

Some installations may also offer tax preparation services through their military legal assistance offices, on a space-available basis.

In a letter to House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., on Thursday, the chambers’ top Democrats — Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, both from New York — asked for a meeting on the looming fiscal issues early next week, to stave off a budget crisis.

“The government funding issue must be resolved in a bipartisan way,” the pair wrote. “That is the only viable path forward …

“It is past time you reveal your plans to meet the needs of the American people. Otherwise, it is clear that you have abandoned bipartisanship altogether and are preparing to shut down the government.”

Lawmakers have until Sept. 30 to pass a new budget for the next fiscal year (which starts Oct. 1) or approve a short-term extension of current agency funding levels.

Failure to do either will force a partial shutdown of most government activities until a new funding deal is reached.

For the Department of Defense, that will mean shuttering of some non-essential base offices and training. Troops will still be expected to report for duty, but their paychecks may be delayed.

At the Department of Veterans Affairs, most hospital and benefits processing offices will remain open, thanks to advance funding approved for the agency in the past. But some information hotlines will be shut down, and other non-critical services will halt during the political impasse.

Neither Republican leader offered an immediate response to the Democratic leaders’ request. Both men have said that resolving the funding issue will be their top priority when Congress returns from its summer recess next week.

Although GOP lawmakers hold a majority in both chambers, several prominent Republicans have suggested they may not support a short-term budget deal, preferring to return to regular order in the appropriations process. But the majority of funding bills still have significant work to be completed before final passage.

That would mean at least some Democratic votes will likely be needed to approve any funding package and avoid a shutdown.

Earlier this month, President Donald Trump said he would meet with Schumer and Jeffries to discuss potential points of compromise, but added that “it’s almost a waste of time to meet because they never approve anything.”

Defense Department leaders have warned about the potential detrimental impact of a government shutdown on military operations, even if troops and essential personnel remain on the job. They said that shuttering support services for military families and disrupting long-term procurement plans undermines force readiness initiatives.

The last major government shutdown occurred in December 2018 during the first Trump administration and lasted for 35 days. That dispute, which centered on immigration policy and funding, did not include the Departments of Defense or Veterans Affairs, but did result in delayed paychecks for tens of thousands of U.S. Coast Guard personnel.

Lawmakers are expected to return to Capitol Hill on Tuesday, Sept. 2.

During an Oval Office event with military families on Monday, Trump praised the work of VA Secretary Doug Collins thus far, asserting that the department now has a “93% approval rating” under his leadership.

“We had a great first term and it was pretty close to that then,” he said. “And then [President Joe Biden’s administration] took over and it went down into the 30s and 20s. It went down at one point to 28% or 29%, which is terrible … But now you’ve blown everyone away, Doug.”

Trump’s boast appears to reference VA’s periodic survey of veterans who have used department health care services in the last 90 days. As of the start of August, the satisfaction rate with VA medical care sat at 92.8%, the highest mark in the 30 months that the survey has been conducted.

When that polling began in March 2023 — during the Biden administration — the figure was 90.4%. It has steadily improved nearly every month for the past two and a half years, regardless of which administration was in charge.

The broader VA Trust survey, conducted quarterly since early 2016, shows a similar story. At the start of Trump’s first term in the White House, only about 55% of veterans said they trusted the department to “fulfill our country’s commitment to veterans.” By the time Trump left office at the end of 2020, the number was up to nearly 79%.

VA data shows the trust score remained between 78% and 81% during Biden’s entire term in office, far above the under 30% that Trump claimed on Monday. The latest department update shows that 79.2% of veterans expressed confidence in the department at the start of the summer, down about 1% from a year earlier.

Department researchers also began an annual outpatient survey in fiscal 2017, during Trump’s first term in office, to gauge satisfaction rates.

That year, 85% of patients said they were happy with how agency staff handled their outpatient care appointments and procedures. At the end of Trump’s first term in office, it had risen to 89.1%. At the end of last fiscal year — the latest data available — the number was up to 92%.

Trump claimed the improvement in veterans perception of VA came because the previous administration “gave away choice and accountability … and we put them back.”

That claim has been at the root of continued political sparring between administration officials and Democratic critics of Trump’s veterans policies. Republicans in recent weeks have pushed through a series of reforms designed to make it easier for veterans to access health care options outside the VA system, but the impact of those moves still remains to be seen.

During Monday’s event, Collins noted that department officials have reduced the disability claims backlog by about 40% since January. That number has also been in steady decline for the last two years, since the backlog spiked to more than 400,000 cases after the passage of the PACT Act.

Late last week, the Office of Personnel Management announced in an email to federal workers that they had canceled plans for the 2025 Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey, typically conducted each spring. Officials had said for months they were revising the poll to better focus questions on key workplace issues and not extraneous topics, such as diversity programs.

The survey is mandated under federal code and provides an annual snapshot of employee satisfaction. Administration officials have not said whether they will provide other avenues for tracking those metrics.

Earlier this summer, in response to questions about workforce changes, Veterans Affairs officials said they would conduct their own all-employee survey in conjunction with the FEVS.

However, after last week’s decision, VA press secretary Pete Kasperowicz said that his department “is following OPM’s lead on this issue and will not be conducting the VA All-Employee Survey this year.”

He also dismissed concerns that the absence of the polling data would ignore concerns within the department’s workforce.

“VA employees are happy the department is fixing many of the problems left by the Biden administration and is making improvements across the agency,” he said in a statement.

The VA All-Employee Survey has been conducted every year since 2006. In 2012, the results ranked the department as the second-worst large federal agency to work for, out of 19 departments. By 2024, that ranking had risen to fifth-best.

About 72% of VA employees surveyed said they were satisfied with their jobs in 2024, up from about 55% a decade before. Officials from President Joe Biden’s administration frequently cited the survey as evidence that they were making workforce improvements throughout VA.

Whether this year’s survey would have shown continued optimism or new problems will remain unknown. Union officials and critics of President Donald Trump have strongly objected to a host of workforce reforms by his administration in recent months, including trimming nearly 30,000 jobs from the department payroll since January.

Earlier this month, VA Secretary Doug Collins announced plans sever ties with most federal employee unions, terminating their collective bargaining contracts.

About 450,000 federal employees currently work at VA hospitals, benefits centers and other offices. In the past, nearly three-fourths of the workforce participated in the employee surveys.

The move affects members of the American Federation of Government Employees, the AFL-CIO (AFGE), the National Association of Government Employees (NAGE), the National Federation of Federal Employees (NFFE), the National Nurses Organizing Committee/National Nurses United (NNOC/NNU) and the Service Employees International Union (SEIU).

AFGE alone represents about 300,000 employees working for VA. About 80% of the department’s roughly 450,000-person staff are union members.

Department officials said the move was made to “make it easier for VA leaders to promote high-performing employees, hold poor performers accountable, and improve benefits and services to America’s veterans.”

In a statement, VA Secretary Doug Collins attacked the unions as inefficient and harmful to veterans’ care.

“Too often, unions that represent VA employees fight against the best interests of veterans while protecting and rewarding bad workers,” Collins said. “We’re making sure VA resources and employees are singularly focused on the job we were sent here to do: providing top-notch care and service to those who wore the uniform.”

Members of President Donald Trump’s administration have fought with union officials for months. In April, VA stopped withholding union dues from most employee paychecks, citing an executive order excluding some federal agencies from labor-management relations programs.

Wednesday’s move does not impact unions representing 4,000 VA police officers, firefighters and security guards. Officials said the executive order does not apply to those positions.

Union leaders for months have protested against proposed cuts at VA and other federal agencies, arguing the smaller staffs will hurt delivery of benefits and health care. They’ve also accused Collins of working to “privatize” VA services by sending more money for medical appointments into civilian hospitals and medical offices, rather than VA clinics.

The unions have also filed numerous lawsuits against the president’s proposed changes to the federal bureaucracy. On Monday, a federal appeals court paused a preliminary injunction that had blocked department heads from making changes to collective bargaining agreements, allowing Wednesday’s contract terminations to move ahead.

At the time, AFGE National President Everett Kelley called the ruling “a setback for fundamental rights in America” and promised continued opposition to Trump’s proposals.

In a statement after Wednesday’s announcement, Kelley criticized Collins for attacking VA workers’ rights.

“[The] decision to rip up the negotiated union contract for majority of its workforce is another clear example of retaliation against AFGE members for speaking out against the illegal, anti-worker, and anti-veteran policies of this administration,” he said.

“We don’t apologize for protecting veteran healthcare and will continue to fight for our members and the veterans they care for.”

Officials from National Nurses United accused the Trump adminstration of “waging class warfare against working people of America” and similarly promised continued legal challenges.

“This president has made it clear he has no respect for the Constitution, but we believe strongly that our right to join together to collectively bargain is constitutionally protected,” the group said in a statement. “It cannot be swept away through an overreach of an executive order based on spurious claims.”

VA officials said that in addition to eliminating unneeded restrictions on hiring and firing policies, breaking union contracts will free up more than 187,000 square feet of office space currently being used by group representatives.

At the start of 2025, federal unions represented more than 1.3 million government workers across a host of agencies.