On behalf of the Professional Managers Association–the non-profit professional association that has, since 1981, represented professional managers, management officials, and non-bargaining unit employees at the Internal Revenue Service (IRS)–we strongly urge OPM to withdraw its proposed rule “Improving Performance, Accountability, and Responsiveness in the Civil Service.” This proposal is deeply flawed—it threatens the nonpartisan foundation of federal service, undermines effective tax administration, and risks politicizing our nation’s civil workforce.
Background
PMA has long stood against attempts to undermine the merit system. The previous attempt to convert thousands of career officials into a “Schedule F”–thereby stripping these employees of their merit protections–was a dangerous affront to the merit system that, under the guise of efficiency, would have deeply disrupted the fair and equal delivery of taxpayer services. Most problematically, that proposal – like OPM’s proposed Schedule Policy/Career - are an affront to the law established by Congress, and Congress’s unequivocal pronouncement in the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 (CSRA) that the administration of the law requires neutral competence and civil service expertise on the front line.
At the IRS, like all federal agencies, political appointees already lead high level policy positions answerable to the President. These employees are separate from the tens of thousands of IRS employees in career positions, who simply implement the laws of Congress based not on presidential politics, but loyalty to the law and Constitution and commitment to public service. Already, the American people are provided little transparency into who politically appointed individuals are and what experience they bring to the roles they serve. Nonetheless, it is understood that our civil service requires both political leaders to formulate policy and career managers and employees based with the expertise to implement that policy.
Our nation has seen the dangers of injecting partisanship into the IRS. Abuses during the Nixon administration, including related to injecting partisan politics into tax administration, sparked the onus on Congress to pass the CSRA. More recently, when accusations of partisan tax enforcement rattled the IRS 15 years ago, the American people were deeply disturbed by the prospect of a partisan IRS targeting tax penalties based on political or religious affiliation. Following review, it was proven no systematic discrimination occurred. Without due process and merit protections allowing career civil servants to safely raise alarm about abuse, these scandals will become common place with little accountability.
Career civil servants are responsible for the equitable delivery of taxpayer services precisely because they swear to enforce the laws of the Congress as per the Constitution rather than the political will of the President. Converting these individuals to partisan positions and removing them at-will when they refuse to serve a partisan agenda, follow unlawful orders, or violate the law and rights of Americans, is dangerous for our democracy.
For these reasons, further detailed below, this rule is critical to our democracy and the proper functioning of the federal government.
I. Erosion of Merit Principles and Non-Partisan Governance
One of the cornerstones of the federal civil service is the Merit System Principles, which require that hiring, advancement, and disciplinary actions be based on ability, performance, and conduct—not political loyalty or ideology.1
If the president can bypass the civil service framework established by Congress in the CSRA by simply moving employees to a new excepted service, it would undermine the intention of the CSRA and make its extensive employee protections obsolete.
At the IRS, this would also significantly curtail the administration of the nation’s tax system. The IRS is no stranger to accusations of political interference. Generally, these accusations come from both sides of the political aisle, based on complete misconceptions about how the IRS operates. Still, the last thing the IRS needs is more political interference causing partisan scandals. IRS career leaders have significant knowledge about complex tax laws and vast congressional mandates. Their knowledge expedites the onboarding process for political appointees, provides expert insight into other employees, and ensures timely, accurate information is relayed to stakeholders and taxpayers.
OPM’s justification for this rule—greater flexibility in managing poor performers—is misleading. Managers already possess tools for performance-based removal under 5 CFR Part 432 and Part 752. The real problem is agency culture, inconsistent application and lack of leadership and HR support, not statutory inflexibility.2 Replacing these structures with political discretion will exacerbate fear-based leadership and dissuade accountability rather than strengthen it.
The creation of a new Schedule Policy/Career appears to circumvent these long-standing principles, potentially allowing political considerations to influence employment decisions. This threatens the non-partisan integrity of federal agencies like the IRS, which must operate with impartiality and independence to maintain public trust.
1 The Merit System Principles: Keys to Managing the Federal Workforce
2 Addressing Misconduct in the Federal Civil Service: Management Perspectives
Undermining these principles opens the door to:
• Political patronage systems that erode fairness.
• Workforce instability driven by shifting political winds.
• Loss of institutional knowledge as experienced career professionals are replaced for political reasons rather than performance.
Such a shift risks turning agencies into tools of whichever administration is in power, not vehicles for delivering programs and services Congress has enshrined in law and appropriated funds for, damaging long-term mission continuity and public confidence.
Career federal leaders ensure the consistent and reliable application of the law–the central component of the rule of law. Their institutional expertise balances the role of the Commissioner and the Chief Counsel—the only Senate-confirmed political appointees directing administration priorities within the IRS. The Commissioner can pursue the policies of the administration and the Chief Counsel can advise on all matters pertaining to the interpretation, administration, and enforcement of the law, but the civil service keeps those policies within the bounds of the law.
This careful balance is rooted in our constitution and necessary for preventing drastic changes in the law from administration to administration. Taxpayers, from individuals to big businesses, rely on this stable and evenhanded application of the law.
II. Reduced Morale and Leadership Attrition
The uncertainty created by this rule—especially regarding who qualifies for conversion and what due process and employment rights they retain—will likely erode employee morale across all levels, but particularly among managers, who are already navigating immense pressure under workforce reductions, shifting priorities, budget reductions, and increased accountability demands.
When experienced leaders fear arbitrary removal or lack clarity on their future, their focus inevitably shifts from mission execution to personal risk management. For example, during the 2020 transition period, several IRS managers reported pressure to expedite audits or delay enforcement actions tied to political groups. Merit system protections and whistleblower channels allowed these professionals to reject those pressures and maintain impartiality and fairness in tax administration. If similar actions occurred under this proposed rule, managers could be silenced and fired before any abuse was reported. This harms:
• Employee engagement, as teams sense instability from leadership.
• Decision-making, as leaders become more risk-averse to protect their careers.
• Organizational performance, as uncertainty undermines collaboration and trust.
Without engaged, confident, and empowered managerial leadership, the IRS’s ability to deliver on its mission—to serve taxpayers, enforce the tax code fairly, and ensure compliance—will suffer significantly.
III. Increased Difficulty Attracting and Retaining Talent
Federal agencies already struggle to recruit and retain qualified personnel. The IRS has undergone historic hiring initiatives in recent years but still struggles to find qualified applicants for in demand positions. The constant villainization of IRS employees and calls for mass removals prevents qualified applicants from being driven toward mission critical IRS positions.
The federal government already struggles to compete with the private sector on pay for many specialized skill sets—such as technology, data analysis, and cyber security. Too few federal employees voluntarily raise their hand to join the ranks of management and executive leadership.
If federal employment is perceived as politically unstable or subject to loyalty-based hiring and firing, that challenge will worsen. Qualified candidates, particularly those with specialized skills or private-sector alternatives, are unlikely to risk their careers on an unstable system that may lack basic employee protections and fairness.
Further consequences include:
• Weakened succession pipelines, as rising talent seeks more secure and professional career environments elsewhere.
• Loss of diversity and expertise, as underrepresented or highly skilled professionals opt out of public service careers due to perceived instability.
• Damage to the agency’s reputation, making it harder to recruit future leaders and technical experts essential for the IRS’s evolving mission.
PMA’s Broader Concern
At its core, this proposed rule threatens to destabilize the federal workforce under the guise of reform. It would replace fair, merit-based management systems with uncertain, politicized, and inconsistent processes. PMA stands firmly against any proposal that undermines professionalism, fairness, or the long-term stability of the federal workforce.
IV. Additional Recommendations
The merit system, as implemented in the federal government, is far from perfect.
Many managers at the IRS are frustrated by an antiquated personnel system. To improve accountability in the federal system, PMA recommends:
- Investing in management talent management and succession planning as required by law.
- Streamlining employee performance and accountability processes while maintaining due process, and ensuring managers have regular training and support from
knowledgeable HR specialists on how to follow those processes.
- Extending probationary periods to more accurately reflect the time required to demonstrate competence in a role.
- Enhancing probationary periods by requiring managers to make an affirmative decision that an employee has the necessary skills to retain a permanent position.
- Effectively using the probationary period for new managers, as well.
PMA stands alongside a coalition of management organizations urging civil service reforms to enhance accountability and address poor performance.4 OPM’s proposed rule stretches several decisions of the Supreme Court applying to presidentially appointed and often Senate-confirmed officials, who are principal officers, arguing those rulings should apply all the way down to front line federal managers and employees at the IRS. The law does not allow a single president to assert unitary control over the federal workforce, politicizing the civil service system and undermining its role as established by Congress.
V. Conclusion
Civil service protections do not exist for federal employees. They exist for the American people–to ensure the equal, apolitical, and efficient delivery of taxpayer services. At its core, this rule threatens to destabilize the federal workforce under the guise of reform, replacing fair, merit-based management systems with uncertain, politicized, and inconsistent processes.
PMA stands firmly against any proposal that undermines professionalism, fairness, or the long term stability of the federal workforce.
Thank you for your consideration of PMA’s perspective.
Sincerely,
Kelly Reyes
Executive Director
Professional Managers Association
https://www.govexec.com/management/2022/08/theres-no-easy-button-modernize-civil-service/376417/
700 12th St NW Ste 700
PMB 95968
Washington, DC 20005
o: 202-793-6262
f: 888-396-6975
w: www.promanager.org
