Federal employees operate within a structured framework of rights that govern how they are treated in the workplace. These rights are grounded in statute, regulation, and case law, and they place real obligations on agency management. Understanding what those rights are, what the legal basis for each is, and how courts and adjudicative bodies have applied them is essential for HR professionals, supervisors, and employees alike.
- The right to appropriate pay for work performed
- The right to use annual leave, sick leave, and FMLA leave appropriately
- The right to refuse an order under specific, limited circumstances
- The right to a safe workplace under OSHA's General Duty Clause
- The right to a workplace free from discrimination and retaliation
- Privacy rights under the Privacy Act and the Rehabilitation Act
- The right to hold supervisors accountable for misconduct
The following sections cover each right with the applicable legal authority and relevant case examples.
This lesson is a preview from our Certified Federal HR Practitioner (cFHRP) Level I Certificate Program. Enroll in a course for detailed lessons, live instructor support, and project-based training.
This is a lesson preview only. For the full lesson, purchase the course here.
Employees have the right to be paid in accordance with law and regulation for work performed at management's direction or as part of their normal duties. This right is grounded in 5 U.S. Code Chapter 53 and in the Fair Labor Standards Act as amended.
The Right to Use Leave
Employees have the right to take annual leave, sick leave, and FMLA leave when the applicable criteria are met. However, agencies may discipline employees who use leave for purposes inconsistent with the reason for which it was requested. Two cases illustrate this limit.
In Beverly v. United States Postal Service, a supervisor was removed after being seen at a football game on a day she had claimed sick leave. The board sustained the action, finding that her claims were not credible and that the evidence did not support her defense. In Gray v. United States Postal Service, an employee was removed after it was found that he had worked a second job, including on days he was on FMLA leave from the agency. The board found that he had abused his FMLA entitlements and upheld the removal.
The Right to Refuse an Illegal or Dangerous Order
Employees may refuse to obey a direct order only when complying would place them in imminent danger of serious injury or death, or when the order is illegal. Outside of these two narrow circumstances, the applicable standard is "obey now, grieve later." If an employee refuses an order and neither condition is present, discipline can be upheld.
In Foster v. Department of the Interior, the board reaffirmed this principle, noting that even where there is substantial reason to believe an order is improper, an employee must first obey and then challenge the order, except in circumstances involving clear and serious danger or irreparable harm.
The Right to a Safe Workplace
Under OSHA's General Duty Clause, codified at 29 U.S. Code 654(a)(1), employers must provide a workplace free from recognized hazards that are likely to cause death or serious physical harm. In Thomas v. Department of the Air Force, the Merit Systems Protection Board sustained a removal of an aircraft mechanic who had tested positive for drug use, finding that the safety risk to those dependent on proper aircraft maintenance justified the action.
The Right to a Workplace Free from Discrimination
Employees have the right to a workplace free from discrimination and retaliation for opposing discriminatory practices or participating in EEO proceedings. As established in Koch v. Securities and Exchange Commission, the protections for EEO participation and opposition activity are broad and should be interpreted liberally. Permitting retaliation for EEO activity would have a chilling effect on individuals' willingness to speak out, and that is precisely what the anti-discrimination statutes are designed to prevent.
Privacy Rights Under the Privacy Act and Rehabilitation Act
Employees have privacy rights under both the Privacy Act and the Rehabilitation Act. An agency manager who intentionally violates an employee's rights under 5 U.S. Code 552a can expose both themselves and their agency to civil liability, including unlimited damages. In Dong v. Smithsonian Institution, the court found that questioning others about an employee's misconduct before questioning the employee directly may constitute an intentional Privacy Act violation.
The Rehabilitation Act protects confidential medical information. In Griffin v. Department of Homeland Security, EEOC found that supervisors who posted comments about an employee's EEO complaint in a public chat forum violated the Rehabilitation Act's confidentiality requirements by publicly disclosing the nature of the employee's injury and taunting him based on his EEO activity.
The Right to Hold Supervisors Accountable
Employees have the right to expect that the agency will hold supervisors accountable for their conduct. In Cisneros v. Department of Defense, the board found removal to be a reasonable penalty for a supervisor whose sexual misconduct toward three subordinate employees continued for approximately 18 months despite repeated requests to stop. The board found that the supervisor's behavior adversely affected the employees' work environments and their lives more broadly.
- Federal employees have the right to be paid appropriately under 5 U.S. Code Chapter 53 and the FLSA.
- Employees may use annual, sick, and FMLA leave when criteria are met, but abuse of leave entitlements is subject to discipline.
- Orders may only be refused when they pose imminent danger or are illegal. The standard is otherwise to obey first and grieve later.
- OSHA's General Duty Clause requires a workplace free from recognized safety hazards.
- Employees have broad protection from discrimination and retaliation for EEO activity under federal anti-discrimination statutes.
- The Privacy Act and Rehabilitation Act protect employee privacy, including confidential medical information, and violations can result in civil liability.
- Employees have the right to expect supervisors to be held accountable for misconduct, and agencies have a corresponding obligation to act.