Suspended EPA employees allege retaliation, whistleblower violations

Environmental Protection Agency employees, who were suspended last year after signing a letter criticizing the Trump administration’s leadership at EPA, are continuing to push forward with more than a dozen allegations of unlawful agency retaliation.

The EPA employees, who are now represented by attorneys at the Government Accountability Project and Lawyers for Good Government, have already filed 15 separate complaints with the Office of Special Counsel. Attorneys said they plan to file “many more” OSC complaints on behalf of EPA employees “promptly.”

The complaints argue that EPA’s decision to put some employees on two-week suspensions, following their endorsement of a “declaration of dissent” last summer, violated the employees’ First Amendment rights as well as federal whistleblower protection laws. David Seide, of counsel at the Government Accountability Project, called the employees’ cases “vitally important.”

“These employees do have constitutional rights, statutory rights, whistleblower rights,” Seide said in an interview. “We’re zealously representing them because they’ve been wronged and we think they should be vindicated — that’s what the law and the Constitution expect.”

An EPA spokesperson declined to comment, referring to the agency’s longstanding practice of not commenting on pending litigation.

In June 2025, more than 600 EPA employees signed a public “declaration of dissent,” which criticized EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin’s policies as reversing scientific progress at EPA and undermining public trust.

EPA quickly launched an investigation into employees who signed the letter, eventually resulting in dozens of employees receiving proposed termination notices. Dozens more who signed the declaration were suspended without pay for two weeks or longer. Some who were still within their probationary periods and had limited job protections were simply fired.

“Management completely bypassed our contract, completely violated the statutory rights of our members,” said Justin Chen, president of American Federation of Government Employees Council 238, which represents EPA employees. “Our hope is that the Office of Special Counsel does its job, investigates the issue and finds favor for our members.”

Generally, federal whistleblower laws are designed to protect employees from agency retaliation when employees report suspected wrongdoing at their agency. Attorneys specializing in federal employment law have said these types of disclosures can be made public, as long as the information contained within them is not prohibited by law from being released.

Employee whistleblower reports are considered “protected disclosures” when they involve a violation of law, rule or regulation; gross waste of funds; gross mismanagement; abuse of authority; or a danger to public health or safety.

“The declaration they signed has all of those elements in it,” Seide said. “They made protected disclosures by signing the petition, but then they were subjected to these adverse employment actions. That’s prohibited by federal whistleblower laws.”

OSC can review federal employee claims to determine whether there’s enough evidence to show that a prohibited personnel practice, such as whistleblower retaliation, occurred. The 15 complaints from EPA employees allege that their suspensions violated whistleblower protection laws and the First Amendment.

“The mere signing of a declaration, in exercise of one’s First Amendment rights, is not something that can or should be the subject of employment discipline,” Seide said. “But that’s exactly what happened here. These employees were victimized.”

Six former EPA employees who were fired after signing the dissent letter in 2025 have filed a separate case with the Merit Systems Protection Board, arguing that their terminations were a form of retaliation for “perceived political affiliation,” executed without cause, and in violation of their First Amendment rights.

But the pending OSC complaints focus on EPA employees who were instead suspended for two weeks. It’s a level of penalty that does not typically meet the requirements for filing a case with MSPB, which in most instances only handles disputes for suspensions lasting longer than 14 days.

“These folks were disciplined for exactly 14 days, so they were just below the threshold,” Seide said. “These are more cases with the same issues, but it’s for a group that was overlooked. We’re providing a vehicle for those people to have their rights vindicated.”

The OSC complaints seek relief for EPA employees — including providing back pay, removing the suspensions from their personnel records, and entitling them to any promotions or raises they may have missed out on as a result of the disciplinary actions.

“If the agency and management know what’s best, they should be providing restitution for these members,” Chen said. “They should pay them back for all the damages — at the very least, restore everything that they lost during the course of their suspensions, clear their records and apologize to them.”

If you would like to contact this reporter about recent changes in the federal government, please email drew.friedman@federalnewsnetwork.com or reach out on Signal at drewfriedman.11

Copyright © 2026 Federal News Network. All rights reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.