Federal Employee Return to Work Act
- Sponsor
- Rep. Newhouse, Dan [R-WA-4]
- Committees
- Oversight and Government Reform Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Jan 7, 2025
Bottom line
The bill aims to reduce compensation for a significant portion of the federal teleworking workforce by eliminating annual pay raises and reducing locality pay, potentially incentivizing a return to in-office work.
What it actually does
This bill, the "Federal Employee Return to Work Act," prohibits federal employees who telework at least one day per week (or 20% of an alternative schedule) from receiving annual across-the-board pay adjustments. It also mandates that these teleworking employees be paid at the "Rest of U.S." locality pay rate, regardless of their actual geographic location, and prohibits any future locality pay adjustments for them. The bill exempts disabled employees receiving accommodations, Foreign Service members, federal law enforcement, active duty military, and employees whose official worksite is not a traditional government office.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue that the bill promotes fairness by aligning compensation with in-office work expectations, encourages greater in-person collaboration and productivity, and could save taxpayer money by reducing federal payroll costs. They may also contend that telework has been overused, leading to decreased accountability and service quality, and that employees choosing to telework should not receive the same pay benefits as those consistently working in government facilities.
Opponents contend
Opponents contend that the bill would unfairly penalize federal employees who effectively perform their duties remotely, potentially leading to a significant pay cut for many. They argue it could harm federal recruitment and retention efforts, particularly in high-cost-of-living areas, and disproportionately affect employees who rely on telework for work-life balance or due to personal circumstances not covered by the narrow exemptions. Critics also suggest it could undermine agency flexibility and modern work practices.
The bill is concise and can be read quickly, allowing sufficient time for an informed reader to grasp its core implications.
Section 2(1)
Definition of "Covered Employee"
This section defines who is subject to the bill's restrictions. A "covered employee" is any federal employee who teleworks at least one day per week or 20% of an alternative work schedule. However, it explicitly excludes several groups, including disabled employees with accommodations, Foreign Service members, federal law enforcement officers, active duty military, and employees whose official worksite is not a traditional government office (e.g., fully remote workers without an assigned physical office).
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that defining "covered employee" this way targets those who have the option to return to office but choose not to, while protecting essential personnel and those with legitimate reasons for telework.
Critics contend
Opponents might argue that the definition is too broad, capturing many employees for whom telework is a critical tool for productivity or work-life balance, and that the exclusions are insufficient.
Tradeoffs
The bill attempts to balance the goal of reducing telework with the need to protect certain employee groups and maintain operational flexibility for specific roles.
Section 3
Prohibition on Annual Pay Adjustments
This provision states that any federal employee defined as a "covered employee" will not receive the annual across-the-board pay adjustment that other federal employees receive under 5 U.S.C. 5303. This means their basic pay would remain stagnant while non-covered employees' pay increases with annual adjustments.
Section 4
Locality Pay Area Reclassification
This section mandates that all "covered employees" will be paid at the basic pay rate for the "Rest of U.S." locality pay area, regardless of their actual geographic location. Furthermore, their pay in this locality area will not be subject to future adjustments under 5 U.S.C. 5304, which governs locality pay. This means an employee teleworking in a high-cost area like Washington D.C. or San Francisco would receive the lower "Rest of U.S." locality pay.
Excludes employees whose official worksite is not described in section 531.605(a)(1) of title 5, Code of Federal Regulations, from the definition of "covered employee." This regulation generally defines the official worksite for locality pay purposes as the agency's primary location for the employee's position. Therefore, this exclusion likely applies to fully remote employees who do not have an assigned physical government office as their official worksite.
Section 2(1)(B)(v)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice for precision and brevity by referencing existing regulations, but it makes the full scope of the bill less immediately obvious to a casual reader.
Case for: Proponents would argue this exclusion is necessary to protect genuinely remote workers who have no physical office to report to, ensuring the bill targets hybrid teleworkers rather than fully distributed teams.
Case against: Critics might argue that this distinction creates an arbitrary loophole, allowing some teleworkers to avoid pay cuts while others performing similar duties are penalized, depending on their official worksite designation.
Estimated impact: This exclusion significantly narrows the scope of the bill, potentially exempting a substantial number of federal employees who are fully remote and not expected to report to a physical office.