H.R. 2249 (119th)Bill Overview

Preserving Presidential Management Authority Act

Government Operations and Politics|Government Operations and PoliticsLabor-management relations
Cosponsors
Support
Republican
Introduced
Mar 21, 2025
Discussions
Bill Text
Current stageCommittee

Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 23 - 21.

Introduced
Committee
Floor
President
Law
Congressional Activities
01 · The brief
Plain-English summaryWhat this bill actually does

The bill adds section 7107 to 5 U.S.C. chapter 71, giving the President, acting through agency heads, authority to terminate provisions of federal employees' collective bargaining agreements that are in force at the time the President is sworn in. It also declares that any CBA provision the President or an agency head determines conflicts with a presidential rule, executive order, memorandum, or other presidential order is not enforceable.

Why people may split

Progressives emphasize erosion of bargaining rights; conservatives emphasize restored managerial authority.

Watch point

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a clear statutory vehicle to grant broad new authority to the President over federal collective bargaining agreements and contains a concise statutory text doing so, but it lacks explanatory context, procedural detail, fiscal acknowledgement, and robust integration with existing statutory enforcement mechanisms or oversight.

The bill adds section 7107 to 5 U.S.C. chapter 71, giving the President, acting through agency heads, authority to terminate provisions of federal employees' collective bargaining agreements that are in force at the time the President is sworn in.

It also declares that any CBA provision the President or an agency head determines conflicts with a presidential rule, executive order, memorandum, or other presidential order is not enforceable.

The authority in subsection (a) may not be exercised by an incumbent President, and agency heads must notify exclusive representatives in writing when terminations or conflict determinations occur.

Passage25/100

Narrow but highly partisan change with significant stakeholder opposition and probable Senate resistance and litigation risk.

CredibilityMisaligned

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a clear statutory vehicle to grant broad new authority to the President over federal collective bargaining agreements and contains a concise statutory text doing so, but it lacks explanatory context, procedural detail, fiscal acknowledgement, and robust integration with existing statutory enforcement mechanisms or oversight.

Contention70/100

Progressives emphasize erosion of bargaining rights; conservatives emphasize restored managerial authority.

02 · What it does

Who stands to gain, and who may push back.

Likely benefits vs burdens50% / 50%
Federal agenciesFederal agencies

These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.

Likely helped
  • Federal agenciesEnables rapid implementation of new presidential policies across federal agencies on day one.
  • Potential benefitClarifies that presidential orders can preempt conflicting collective bargaining provisions.
  • Federal agenciesIncreases managerial flexibility to reorganize or change agency procedures without negotiated delays.
Likely burdened
  • Federal agenciesReduces enforceable collective bargaining protections for federal employees at the start of a presidency.
  • Potential burdenMay harm employee morale and retention by removing negotiated terms without bilateral agreement.
  • Potential burdenCould prompt increased litigation and grievances over the scope of ‘‘conflicting’’ presidential actions.
03 · Why people split

Why the argument around this bill splits.

Progressives emphasize erosion of bargaining rights; conservatives emphasize restored managerial authority.
Progressive15%

This persona would likely view the bill as a significant rollback of federal employee bargaining protections that concentrates power in the presidency.

They would be concerned about weakening unions, sidelining negotiated employee rights, and politicizing workplace terms.

Likely resistant
Centrist45%

A centrist would see a legitimate need for presidential ability to implement administration policy but worry this bill grants broad, poorly specified power that could destabilize employee relations.

They would weigh managerial flexibility against legal clarity and labor stability.

Split reaction
Conservative85%

This persona would largely support the bill as restoring necessary presidential management authority over the federal workforce and preventing collective bargaining terms from obstructing executive action.

They view it as reinforcing executive primacy and managerial control.

Leans supportive
04 · Can it pass?

The path through Congress.

Introduced

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Committee

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Floor

Still ahead

President

Still ahead

Law

Still ahead

Passage likelihood25/100

Narrow but highly partisan change with significant stakeholder opposition and probable Senate resistance and litigation risk.

Scope and complexity
52%
Scopemoderate
24%
Complexitylow
Why this could stall
  • Ambiguity about timing and 'incumbent' clause enforcement
  • Absent official cost or regulatory impact analysis
05 · Recent votes

Recent votes on the bill.

No vote history yet

The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.

06 · Go deeper

Go deeper than the headline read.

Included on this page

Progressives emphasize erosion of bargaining rights; conservatives emphasize restored managerial authority.

Narrow but highly partisan change with significant stakeholder opposition and probable Senate resistance and litigation risk.

Unlocked analysis

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a clear statutory vehicle to grant broad new authority to the President over federal collective bargaining agreements and contains a concise statutory text doing s…

Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.

Perspective breakdownsPassage barriersLegislative design reviewStakeholder impact map
Open full analysis