Full Breakdown
Federal Judge Restores Union Contract for Bureau of Prisons Employees
By Drooid · · How we work
Core Event
On September 29, 2026, U.S. District Judge Vernon D. Oliver issued a preliminary injunction requiring the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) to reinstate its collective bargaining agreement (CBA) with the prison-workers union for the remainder of its term, which runs through May 28, 2029. The order follows a lawsuit filed by the National Council of Prison Locals (CPL-33), an affiliate of the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), after the BOP terminated the CBA on September 25, 2025.
Background & Context
President Donald Trump signed Executive Order 14,251 on March 27, 2025, directing agencies involved in national-security or intelligence work to eliminate collective bargaining requirements. The order did not require immediate termination of existing agreements. The BOP continued under its CBA for roughly six months before Director William K. Marshall III sent a termination letter citing the order.
Data & Statistics
- The CBA covers about 30,000 federal prison employees.
- West Virginia hosts six federal prisons, employing thousands of the unionized workforce.
- The agreement, last revised in November 2024, was set to remain in effect until May 28, 2029.
Official Statements & Responses
- Judge Oliver wrote that the BOP’s termination “was arbitrary and capricious” under the Administrative Procedure Act, noting the disconnect between the agency’s cited executive-order justification and Marshall’s public rationale. He emphasized that the injunction does not address the validity of EO 14,251 itself.
- Brandy White, president of the Council of Prison Locals, welcomed the ruling and warned that the Justice Department is likely to seek a stay while it appeals.
- William K. Marshall III defended the termination, stating the union was “not the kind of union” he supported and that the contract impeded needed reforms.
Criticism & Opposition
The BOP argues that eliminating the CBA enables faster modernization of policies and that the agency can still revise workplace rules without union involvement.
Verbatim Quotes
- “This has been a long fight and today is indeed a great day, our rights have been protected,” — Jason Hinkle, AFGE Local 0425 Vice President
- “This case does not concern the validity of EO-14,251 — that litigation is ongoing elsewhere throughout the nation,” — Vernon D. Oliver, judge
Conflicting Reports & Gaps
Sources differ on the primary motive for the September 2025 termination. The BOP’s letter cites the Trump executive order, while Director Marshall’s statement attributes the decision to the union’s perceived obstruction of reforms. The court highlighted this inconsistency as a factor in finding the action likely arbitrary. No public record details how the BOP intends to balance rapid policy changes with the restored bargaining rights.
What’s Next
The Justice Department is expected to file a motion seeking a stay of Judge Oliver’s injunction and to pursue appellate review. Union leaders say they will monitor any stay request closely and argue that the injunction is essential to protect employee safety, grievance rights, and workplace conditions. The broader litigation over EO 14,251 continues in other federal courts.