The bill bars agencies from creating a Schedule F or otherwise moving positions out of the competitive service except under the existing schedules A–E as codified in 5 C.F.R. §6.2 on September 30, 2020, and under the part 6 terms in effect on that date. It prevents creating new excepted-service categories and narrows transfers of occupied positions between competitive and excepted service.
Practically, the measure requires OPM approval for transfers into Schedule C, caps transfers from the competitive service to the excepted service at the greater of 1 percent of an agency’s workforce or five employees per presidential term, and mandates prior written employee consent for transfers between services. The Director of OPM must issue implementing regulations, and the rule applies to positions under chapters 73 and 74 of title 38 despite section 7425(b).
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill freezes federal hiring authorities to the A–E excepted-service schedules as of Sept. 30, 2020, forbids new excepted schedules like Schedule F, limits transfers into excepted service, and requires OPM approval and written employee consent for many transfers.
Who It Affects
Executive agencies that use excepted-service hiring authorities, managers seeking to reclassify or transfer occupied positions (especially into Schedule C), the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), and career employees whose positions could be moved out of the competitive service.
Why It Matters
It constrains agency flexibility to reassign or reclassify positions for policy reasons and centralizes oversight at OPM, while preserving competitive-service protections for career staff and narrowing avenues to convert jobs to political or excepted status.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill prevents agencies from creating new excepted-service categories beyond the existing schedules A through E by locking the regulatory baseline to 5 C.F.R. §6.2 and part 6 as they stood on September 30, 2020. That means an agency cannot adopt a new schedule—explicitly including any ‘Schedule F’—or rewrite the scope of excepted service authorities to move positions out of competitive hiring unless they fit those predefined categories.
For occupied positions the bill tightens the rules on transfers. Agencies may not move jobs among excepted schedules except into schedules A–E and may not transfer occupied competitive-service positions into Schedule C without prior OPM approval.
The bill also imposes a numeric cap: over any four-year presidential term an agency cannot move more than 1 percent of its workforce or five employees (whichever is greater) from the competitive service into the excepted service.Crucially, the bill makes transfers contingent on employees’ written consent: an employee in the excepted service cannot be moved to a different excepted schedule without consent, and a competitive-service employee cannot be shifted into the excepted service without written agreement. The Director of OPM must issue regulations to implement these provisions, and the statute explicitly applies to positions in title 38, chapters 73 and 74, despite a statutory cross-reference that might otherwise exempt them.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill freezes the excepted-service universe to schedules A–E as defined in 5 C.F.R. §6.2 and part 6 as of September 30, 2020, and bars establishing new schedules (including any Schedule F).
An agency may not transfer any occupied competitive-service or excepted-service position into a schedule outside A–E, and cannot move occupied positions into Schedule C without prior written consent from OPM’s Director.
During any four-year presidential term, an agency may move at most 1% of its workforce or five employees (whichever is greater) from the competitive service into the excepted service.
The bill requires prior written consent from the employee before transferring a competitive-service employee into the excepted service or before moving an excepted-service employee to a different excepted schedule.
OPM must issue regulations to implement the law, and the statute explicitly applies to positions under chapters 73 and 74 of title 38 (Veterans’ preference statutes), notwithstanding 38 U.S.C. §7425(b).
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title — 'Saving the Civil Service Act'
This is the technical naming provision. Its practical effect is that subsequent references to the Act will use the short title; there are no operative obligations here, but the short title frames the bill’s purpose for interpretive context.
Limits on excepting positions from the competitive service
Subsection (a) forbids agencies from excepting competitive-service positions except by placing them into schedules A–E as those schedules and part 6 existed on Sept. 30, 2020. That locks the regulatory baseline: agencies cannot expand or create new excepted-service buckets beyond that regulatory snapshot. For compliance, agencies must map any proposed excepted appointments to those preexisting categories and cannot rely on later regulatory changes or new schedules to justify exceptions.
Transfer restrictions, OPM consent, caps, and employee consent
Subsection (b) contains multiple, operationally significant constraints. It bars transfers of excepted-service positions into any schedule other than A–E, requires the Director of OPM’s prior consent for transfers of occupied positions into Schedule C, caps transfers from competitive to excepted service at 1% of an agency’s workforce (or five employees) per presidential term, and makes written employee consent mandatory for moving employees between services or into a different excepted schedule. These are concrete, administrable requirements agencies must track and document for each personnel action.
Scope, VA positions, and regulatory implementation
Subsection (c) clarifies coverage and implementation: the law applies to positions under chapters 73 and 74 of title 38 (which cover many Department of Veterans Affairs personnel) despite potential statutory carve-outs, and it directs the Director of OPM to promulgate regulations to implement the section. That gives OPM rulemaking authority to define procedures, forms, reporting, and any exemptions, but the statute provides the substantive guardrails OPM must follow.
Definitions
Subsection (d) provides definitions for 'agency,' 'competitive service,' 'excepted service,' and 'Director,' tying those terms to 5 U.S.C. and clarifying the universe of covered entities. By using the existing statutory definitions, the bill ensures these limits attach to the standard legal concepts agencies already use in personnel law and regulations.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Government across all five countries.
Explore Government in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Career competitive-service employees and their unions — The bill preserves competitive hiring protections and makes it harder for agencies to reclassify career roles into excepted or political positions, reducing risk of involuntary reclassification without employee consent.
- Applicants seeking competitive-service jobs — By constraining expansions of excepted hires, the bill keeps more positions subject to competitive hiring processes, maintaining open competition and standard qualification procedures.
- Merit-system advocates and watchdogs — The statute centralizes oversight with OPM and restricts ad hoc excepting of positions, strengthening institutional safeguards against broad reclassification of career roles.
Who Bears the Cost
- Agency program managers and political leadership — The bill reduces flexibility to reassign or convert positions for policy implementation, emergency surge staffing, or to staff politically sensitive roles, requiring OPM approval and employee consent.
- Executive agencies (human-resources offices) — Agencies will face added administrative burdens to track caps, obtain written consents, document OPM sign-offs, and comply with new OPM regulations; small HR shops may be strained.
- OPM — The Director must promulgate implementing regulations and process consent and transfer approvals, increasing OPM’s regulatory and oversight workload without an appropriation mechanism in the text.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The bill's central dilemma is a tension between protecting the merit-based, competitive civil service by preventing mass conversions to excepted or political status, and preserving executive-branch flexibility to reclassify or rapidly staff positions for legitimate operational or policy needs; tightening procedural controls reduces the risk of politicization but can also impede managerial agility and emergency responsiveness.
The bill resolves one problem—preventing wholesale reclassification of competitive-service jobs—by imposing bright-line regulatory locks and procedural hurdles. That clarity is useful, but it creates trade-offs.
Freezing the excepted-service rules to a 2020 regulatory snapshot could prevent necessary, legitimate innovations in hiring authorities that address new mission needs or workforce models unless Congress or OPM updates the underlying statute or regulations. The statute gives OPM rulemaking authority, but it constrains substantive change by anchoring the allowed schedules to a past regulatory state.
Implementation details matter but are thin in the text. The statute requires OPM consent and written employee consent, but it does not specify timelines, standards for OPM approval, documentation formats, or remedies for noncompliance.
The lack of enforcement language or specified sanctions — and no appropriation for OPM to carry out the new workload — could lead to inconsistent application across agencies, legal challenges, or delayed approvals. The explicit inclusion of title 38 positions closes a potential loophole, but interactions with other statutory hiring authorities and emergency exemptions remain ambiguous and will depend on OPM’s forthcoming regulations and potential litigation.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.