Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
This bill prohibits most federal employees who telework at least one day per week (or 20% under an alternative schedule) from receiving annual adjustments under 5 U.S.C. §5303. Covered employees would be paid at the basic pay rate for the "Rest of U.S." locality as of the date they become covered, and that locality designation would not be adjusted under 5 U.S.C. §5304.
Progressives emphasize pay cuts and equity harms; conservatives emphasize fiscal fairness.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill delivers a narrowly focused substantive change to federal pay law with clear statutory references and a defined effective date, but it lacks supporting fiscal, administrative, and oversight detail proportionate to the breadth of its impact.
This bill prohibits most federal employees who telework at least one day per week (or 20% under an alternative schedule) from receiving annual adjustments under 5 U.S.C. §5303.
Covered employees would be paid at the basic pay rate for the "Rest of U.S." locality as of the date they become covered, and that locality designation would not be adjusted under 5 U.S.C. §5304.
The law exempts certain groups (persons with disabilities with accommodations, Foreign Service members, federal law enforcement, active-duty military, and employees with official worksites outside the referenced regulation) and takes effect the first day of the first full fiscal year after enactment.
Technically simple and fiscally reducing, increasing House prospects; Senate filibuster and organized opposition from federal employees lower overall chances.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill delivers a narrowly focused substantive change to federal pay law with clear statutory references and a defined effective date, but it lacks supporting fiscal, administrative, and oversight detail proportionate to the breadth of its impact.
Progressives emphasize pay cuts and equity harms; conservatives emphasize fiscal fairness.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives emphasize pay cuts and equity harms; conservatives emphasize fiscal fairness.
Likely views the bill negatively as a pay cut and inequitable treatment of teleworking employees.
Sees potential harms to recruitment, retention, caregivers, and lower-paid staff, and worries about exacerbating workplace inequality.
Views the bill as a pragmatic attempt to align pay with in-office work and save money, but is cautious about workforce morale and legal risks.
Wants evidence, targeted exceptions, and phased implementation.
Likely supportive as a fiscally responsible and fairness-oriented measure that discourages remote pay premiums.
Sees it as restoring taxpayer fairness and encouraging on-site government work.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Technically simple and fiscally reducing, increasing House prospects; Senate filibuster and organized opposition from federal employees lower overall chances.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives emphasize pay cuts and equity harms; conservatives emphasize fiscal fairness.
Technically simple and fiscally reducing, increasing House prospects; Senate filibuster and organized opposition from federal employees low…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill delivers a narrowly focused substantive change to federal pay law with clear statutory references and a defined effective date, but it lacks supporting fiscal, admini…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.