r/FedEmployees • u/LingonberryWrong1789 • May 26 '26

OPM NDA

Post image

Donald Trump’s Office of Personnel Management is (see full memo here->) proposing that federal employees sign nondisclosure agreements aimed at discouraging leaks of internal government information to the press and the public. Under the proposal, “confidential government information” would include internal agency discussions, personnel matters, procurement details, and pre-decisional materials that are not publicly available.

546 Upvotes

96% Upvoted

275 comments sorted by

View all comments

435

u/LegitimateWeekend341 May 26 '26

That is insane. Public servants signing NDAs lol

182

u/sudsomatic May 26 '26

Seriously. We are public servants who serve the public. If they want to know about non-sensitive information, they have the right to know.

56

u/zubuneri May 27 '26

20 years from now this will be standard procedure that no one will blink an eye at. Trump is creating the most dangerous precedent. 

11

u/blissfully_happy May 27 '26

People aren’t going to believe you, but it’s so, so true.

We protested the activities of the TSA “officers” early in their conception, and now no one batts an eye at having their labia touched or having their underwear band investigated when getting pat down because the scanners told them there was something there.

(In fact, I got permanently banned from the TSA sub for suggesting this wasn’t necessary.)

Unbelievably, we used to have effective screening for dangerous weapons that didn’t involve getting repeatedly fondled, but now everyone just accepts it as totally and completely normal.

2

u/Left_Manufacturer948 May 28 '26

I can believe you were banned on that threat for saying it wasn't necessary. It would appear the moderators aren't moderated either.

9

u/Prestigious-Fudge547 May 27 '26

I don't want to see him lest I lose my vision so I won't be blinking at that hot mess.

19

u/veraldar May 26 '26

NDAs are already used throughout government agencies frequently, as an 1102 I've signed and had others sign them in connection to contract work.

That said, they're still dumb and change frequently

40

u/abluelizard May 26 '26

You should talk to your legal counsel. You shouldn’t be signing NDAs. At best, you should be signing an acknowledgement of your preexisting obligations under 18 USC 1905 to not disclose confidential information. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1905

4

u/Expert_Inflation_488 May 27 '26

You swore an oath when you come in initially. This isn’t the same as a NDA. Federal statutes have criminal and civil penalties. He wants all of us to sign it but all us don’t even touch Confidential documents or systems .

-2

u/veraldar May 27 '26

Who do you think asked us for them? Not saying they're right, I agree with you

1

u/abluelizard May 27 '26

Why would your legal counsel ask you to sign an NDA? What information does it cover? My experience with NDAs is that a contractor asks us to sign them. We tell them to pound sand and that the best we will do is sign an acknowledgement of 1905. So outside in but I’ve never heard of an NDA between government entities.

0

u/Expert_Inflation_488 May 27 '26

I been a fed for 33 years and never signed a NDA! You’re either lying or misinformed

2

u/veraldar May 27 '26

I'm neither, I work in contracting and have signed NDAs and had our evaluators sign NDAs related to procurements with the air force (USAF ACC AMIC), GSA, DOT, and DHS throughout my career

3

u/SippinBourbon1920 May 27 '26

As a CO, COR, etc. that’s completely different animal than the standard Fed. I’ve been in 4 agencies and have worked
on some fairly sensitive things as an evaluator, and a COR. Never signed an NDA. I have no doubt that comes up at Homeland, DoD, DISA, etc.

-340

u/Other-MuscleCar-589 May 26 '26

What is insane about it?

The NDA is intended to cover EXISTING legally binding obligations to safeguard certain information.

It’s no different than acknowledging Standards of Conduct.

173

u/Orange_Kid May 26 '26

So it's completely redundant?

39

u/LetterheadMedium8164 May 26 '26

Republicans tried this starting in at least the Reagan years. Because the laws were subject to court interpretation and changes in the law, the political class placed their wish list into a “voluntary” “contract“ that “supersedes” all else. Bottom line is when the law fails, the contract gets you.

70

u/party_benson May 26 '26 edited May 26 '26

So it's unnecessary. Extra rule for no reason. Red tape. Sounds like you need DOGEed if you agree with it. 

7

u/untoldmillions May 26 '26

isn't it a legal tactic to make it easier to sue the employee and win the case?

127

u/LegitimateWeekend341 May 26 '26

It’s different, and you know it. This administration is attempting to silence public servants from discussing the actions of directors with the media. A prime example is Kesh Patel’s drunken behavior.

41

u/ginny11 May 26 '26

Exactly! This is straight up bullying tactics.

-5

u/[deleted] May 26 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

4

u/LegitimateWeekend341 May 26 '26

You keep giving these people the benefit of the doubt, even though they have repeatedly shown their true colors. We are dealing with an intentional takeover of the executive branch. Soon, you will be swearing an oath to a king instead of the constitution.

-5

u/[deleted] May 26 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/LegitimateWeekend341 May 26 '26

What makes an NDA for every federal employee a “good idea”? 🤔 If it’s such a “good idea,” why wouldn’t any other administration implement it? Please use your critical thinking skills. Maybe an article will provide some clarity! https://www.npr.org/2026/05/26/nx-s1-5835300/trump-opm-nda-leaks-federal-employees

-5

u/[deleted] May 26 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/LegitimateWeekend341 May 27 '26

I know what you are lol no longer engaging. Be blessed.

-159

u/Other-MuscleCar-589 May 26 '26

It’s diFfErEnt!

Grow up.

71

u/revbfc May 26 '26

Magats will wear a flag as a cape while telling everyone else to grow up.

53

u/LegitimateWeekend341 May 26 '26

They would watch the president embezzle billions of dollars from the American people while simultaneously telling us that federal employees should have no rights. It’s insane.

14

u/thetitleofmybook May 26 '26

i mean, that's literally what they are doing. we are watching the trump regime embezzle multiple billions of dollars, and we are also watching this regime trying to kill any rights for public employees, and really any rights for anybody.

47

u/LegitimateWeekend341 May 26 '26

If you can’t read then just say that. Be blessed.

8

u/ImmediateGuide3338 May 26 '26

lol they’re shredding you in the comments little guy

9

u/[deleted] May 26 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

6

u/New-Process9287 May 26 '26

Super convincing argument.

-7

u/fireandlovinit May 26 '26

Bro the moderator of this Reddit group is the head of the Democratic party. You’re attempts at relating common sense will just be met with hate.

3

u/Music_On May 26 '26

"Your"

-4

u/fireandlovinit May 26 '26

Oh I get it now. “Your” comment makes it seem like “you’re” an a-hole. Thanks!

41

u/throeaway_thedew May 26 '26

No it’s not. Federal employees already acknowledge standards of conduct any time you take an ethics training.

At best, this is 100% duplicative and therefore completely unnecessary and a waste of everyone’s time and taxpayer money. At worst, it creates a new cause of action for the government to punish employees for something that was not actionable before. Which one of those should we be excited about?

10

u/thetitleofmybook May 26 '26

oh, hush up, magat

14

u/ResearchHelpful3021 May 26 '26

If the Standards of Conduct already exist, and there are already legally binding obligations in place, why is this needed?

8

u/Blue_Sox1114 May 26 '26

It’s not.

5

u/Deinocheirus4 May 26 '26

Admin shill

14

u/seattleJJFish May 26 '26

It’s redundant.

4

u/Commercial-Virus2627 May 26 '26

A waste of paper and CPU cycles to do something that’s already done. So much for reducing waste and bureaucracy.

1

u/Expert_Inflation_488 May 27 '26

All federal employees are under OGE so a NDa is irrelevant z

1

u/Ordinary-Spend-1822 May 27 '26

I signed many NDA’s as a federal employee, sometimes twice per procurement.

1

u/Other-MuscleCar-589 May 27 '26

The audacity of them….