The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) faces a federal lawsuit over its decision to terminate a union contract covering approximately 8,000 civil servants, a move that labor leaders say threatens public health protections and scientific integrity.
The American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) Council 238 filed the lawsuit last month against the EPA and Administrator Lee Zeldin, seeking to restore collective bargaining rights that were revoked in a single day in 2025. The agency claimed the contract's protections posed a national security risk, a justification union officials reject as unfounded.
What did EPA workers lose when the union contract was terminated?
The terminated contract stripped workers of union representation in disciplinary proceedings, access to independent grievance and arbitration processes, and first-of-its-kind protections for employees reporting scientific misconduct or political interference. According to AFGE Council 238 President Justin Chen, the contract took years to negotiate and provided essential safeguards for career civil servants.
Chen, who authored an opinion piece on the dispute, argues the case extends far beyond workplace conditions. Federal employees serve the American public, not any administration or political ideology, he wrote. The right to collective bargaining in the federal civil service was recognized by President Kennedy in 1962 and later codified in the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute, which explicitly linked collective bargaining to safeguarding the public interest.
Why does union representation matter for environmental protection?
EPA employees include scientists, engineers, environmental specialists, enforcement officers, field inspectors, biologists, chemists and lab technicians. Their work directly protects communities from pollutants, contaminated drinking water and hazardous waste, including chemicals left behind by wildfires.
Union protections give these professionals the independence to follow evidence and raise concerns without fear of retaliation. Chen said this independence is increasingly critical as climate change, pollution and science itself have become partisan battlegrounds, with powerful industries lobbying for policies that serve their interests over public health.
What happened to EPA workers who spoke out?
In June 2025, hundreds of EPA employees signed a declaration of dissent raising concerns about political interference in science-based decision-making. The agency did not discipline the signers immediately. Instead, it moved to terminate the union contract first, eliminating workers' ability to challenge disciplinary actions.
After the contract was revoked, the EPA disciplined 139 employees. Twenty were fired and 119 were suspended without pay. Of those disciplined, 110 had been covered by the terminated contract.
Chen said the sequence of events suggests the agency deliberately stripped workers of protections before punishing them for exercising protected speech. The actions violated First Amendment rights by targeting employees who spoke on matters of public concern, he argued.
Is this part of a broader attack on federal workers?
The EPA case is not isolated. The administration has targeted collective bargaining at the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Food and Drug Administration, the Bureau of Prisons and the Department of Defense.
Chen described the pattern as a broader attack on a federal workforce whose mission is to serve the public, not to bend to political ideology. Public servants must be able to tell the truth without first asking whether the truth will cost them their jobs, he said.
Administrations come and go. Our responsibility does not.
The lawsuit seeks to restore the contract and defend the rights of EPA workers. Chen said thousands of dedicated civil servants remain committed to the agency's mission of protecting human health and the environment, and they are prepared to defend their ability to do their jobs in court and in public.