WASHINGTON, D.C. (Federal News Network) — While military spouses employed by the federal government “should” be able to continue working remotely, concerns mount for military families over the recent return-to-work order issued by the Trump administration and what it means for their jobs.
“People just don’t know what to think yet,” said Deborah McGee, a military spouse and the CEO of PZI Group.
The Jan. 27 memo from the Office of Personnel Management includes a footnote stating that employees may be exempt from returning to the office if they have a disability, a qualifying medical condition, or “other compelling reason” certified by both the agency head and the employee’s supervisor.
It adds that agencies “should also exclude military spouses working remotely based on the Military Spouse Employment Act.” The legislation allows executive agencies to hire military spouses for remote work positions and defines remote work as a type of telework where an employee is not required to report to an agency on a regular basis.
The memo also directs all agencies to develop an implementation plan by Feb. 7 detailing how they will comply with the directive. These plans should outline the criteria for determining what qualifies as “other compelling reasons” for exempting employees from returning to the office, including “limited, discrete categories such as military spouses working remotely, where categorical or indefinite exemptions may be granted.”
And as agencies have started rolling out instructions on the return-to-office order over the past week, advocates have started raising concerns that the guidance does not explicitly exempt all military spouses from returning to the office and that agency-level directives create more confusion and leave many questions unanswered.
The Department of Veterans Affairs’ directive, for example, states that exceptions “may be allowed” for military spouses with permanent change of station orders.
“It means it will be one by one. It will be dependent on the job. It will be dependent on the situation. It will be dependent on what’s required of that particular agency. It can even come down to the preference of the supervisor,” said McGee.
Meanwhile, the Defense Department’s memo states that employees approved for remote work because they are accompanying a service member spouse to a duty station “not in the vicinity of the agency worksite” are exempt from the return-to-office order.
“So that would seem to imply that if you are in the vicinity of the agency work site you would be expected to come into the office,” said Eileen Huck, the National Military Family Association acting director. “We are just looking for clarity from organizations and agencies about what the expectations will be and how they will implement the order. We want the demands of military life to be recognized when agencies are developing their policies.”
The memo also leaves it up to its components to submit additional exemption requests. Additionally, while the memo mentions remote work, it is not clear how the guidance applies to military spouses who are teleworking.
Dan Meyer, a partner at Tully Rinckey PLLC, said that ultimately, the defense secretary has discretion to shape policies within the framework of existing regulations — if he, for instance, chooses to grant exemptions for all military spouses from return-to-office orders, he has the authority to do so.
“The important thing is what does the employee need and can the secretary of defense provide it? There’s law here, but it’s regulation. This isn’t a statute. This isn’t something that really can be enforced in any court. So the defense secretary, as long as he’s within the guidelines of the regulations, can do what he wants to do. If he wants military spouses to have some sort of exempted special treatment, he can do that. That’s not a problem,” said Meyer. “This is not like a freebie or a giveaway. It’s a benefit we give to people because we recognize the importance of the family to our military mission. That’s what the defense secretary has to step up and show through his actions that the regulations will be what decides going forward, they’ll be interpreted the way they need to be interpreted, and they won’t be interpreted some other way by somebody two steps below him.”
