The shift transfers adjudication authority from the Merit Systems Protection Board — where federal employee appeals have been heard for decades — to two OPM offices, marking one of the most significant restructuring of federal workforce due process in a generation. The change applies to appeals filed on or after the effective date; cases already in the MSPB pipeline will remain there until resolved.
How the New OPM Appeals Process Works
Under the implementation guidance OPM released Monday, employees will have 30 days from the date of an agency action to file an appeal. Agencies then get 30 days to respond with the reason for the action and all personnel and agency records tied to the case. The employee receives 15 days to reply and may submit additional allegations based on the agency’s record.
After that exchange, OPM adjudicators will review the case and issue an initial decision — in most cases based solely on the written record. OPM said it will conduct hearings or formal investigations only “when necessary and efficient,” and at its own discretion, removing what the guidance calls a “categorical right” that previously guaranteed employees a hearing.
OPM’s Merit System Accountability and Compliance office will handle reduction-in-force and probationary appeals, while the Suitability Executive Agent office will take over appeals tied to suitability-related adverse actions. The agency said both offices have prior experience adjudicating classification, compensation, and leave cases.
Director Review and Reconsideration Built In
The guidance adds a “director review” mechanism. Before a decision becomes final, the OPM director may reopen and reconsider any initial or reconsidered decision on the director’s own initiative, citing factors such as clear legal error, erroneous material factual findings, or issues of exceptional or governmentwide importance.
Once OPM issues a decision, appellants and agencies have 30 days to request reconsideration. If no request is filed, the initial decision becomes final. OPM framed the Sept. 2 cutoff as a clean line: “Nothing pending is disrupted, reopened or nullified. MSPB will finish the cases it has, and OPM will take new ones.”
Unions Warn OPM Cannot Be Both Policymaker and Judge
Federal employee groups have challenged the premise of the overhaul, arguing that OPM — which sets personnel policy for the executive branch — cannot serve as a neutral adjudicator of the same actions it helps shape. The National Treasury Employees Union said earlier this year that suitability and RIF appeals “belong before a neutral body like the MSPB, not a federal agency dedicated to carrying out the administration’s agenda.”
NTEU and other organizations contend the loss of hearing rights will erode due process and lead OPM to “rubber stamp” agency decisions. Former MSPB officials have raised similar concerns, warning that removing investigations and hearings from the process eliminates the fact-finding layer that has historically protected employees from arbitrary personnel actions.
OPM responded in its guidance that adjudicators will be “insulated from anyone involved in the challenged action” as a structural safeguard. The agency argued the written-record approach will streamline and speed up decisions.
Capacity Questions as OPM Staffing Falls
The appeals transfer lands as OPM operates with a sharply reduced workforce. The agency has seen a 35% staffing decrease under the Trump administration, and more than half of the employees who left had at least a decade of experience. A recent Government Accountability Office report warned that those departures risk widening pre-existing skills gaps at the agency.
MSAC, the office now charged with RIF and probationary appeals, experienced a 41% staffing decline between fiscal 2024 and fiscal 2026, according to GAO. Workforce experts have questioned whether MSAC staff — who lack experience adjudicating firings and adverse actions specifically — can absorb the new caseload without delays or quality problems.
OPM’s 2027 congressional budget justification outlines plans to use AI tools and modernize IT systems to support offices with lower staffing, and to prepare MSAC for its expanded adjudicatory role. The agency said it has “assessed expected case volume and staffing needs for each program and determined that SuitEA and MSAC can administer these appeals from day one,” and pledged to monitor appeal volume, processing times, and staffing throughout implementation.
What Happens Next
The Sept. 2 effective date will be the first real test of whether OPM can absorb MSPB’s appeals caseload without backlogs or due-process failures. Watch for early filing volume and processing times in the first 90 days, which will signal whether the written-record model delivers the speed OPM promises or the rubber-stamping critics fear. Federal unions are likely to challenge the rules in court, arguing OPM’s dual role as policymaker and adjudicator violates principles of administrative neutrality. Congress may also weigh in through oversight hearings, particularly if GAO’s skills-gap warnings materialize as adjudication delays. For federal employees facing adverse actions after Sept. 2, the practical reality is stark: the written record they submit will be their primary evidence, and the hearing they once could demand is now OPM’s discretion to grant or deny.
— Sofia Alvarez, government desk, AXO News