The vote comes as unpaid employees now have received payless pay distributions, on top of only a partial one previously, and just ahead of the November 15 end of what would be a third unpaid pay period. Image: William Potter/Shutterstock.com
By: FEDweek StaffThe Senate for the second time has come up short of the 60 votes needed to pass a bill (S-3012) to immediately pay federal employees during the shutdown even as it continues, after broadening the bill to included those on furlough along with those who have remained on the job. The issue remains in focus with employees wondering if they are going to experience the same pay uncertainty in the event of a future lapse.
As in the earlier vote, the Senate vote was a procedural one to test whether there is enough support to avoid a potential filibuster and as in that vote, the overwhelming majority of Democrats voted against the measure.
In the earlier vote, Democrats objected that the bill provided pay only for employees who have continued to work but not those furloughed; they also said it should include a rollback of RIFs ordered since October 1 and protections against the shutdown, or a future one, being used in that way. Main sponsor Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., in turn indicated willingness to consider broadening the bill to include furloughed employees, although not the RIF language.
His revised bill brought to the second vote would provide back pay—and ongoing pay as long as the shutdown continues—both to employees working unpaid and to those furloughed. It attracted the support of employee organizations including the AFGE union, the Federal Managers Association, the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association and the National Air Traffic Controllers Association.
However, Sen. Gary Peters, D-Mich., objected to a GOP bid to pass the bill under a shortcut procedure, saying “I am concerned that Senator Johnson’s bill still leaves too much discretion up to President Trump. There is too much wiggle room for the administration to basically pick and choose which federal employees are paid and when.”
“I am also deeply concerned that this would allow the administration to actually transfer this money to other purposes that are unintended by Congress, which, unfortunately, we have seen happen repeatedly in this administration,” said Peters, the ranking Democrat on the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.
Johnson replied that “This bill is completely silent on presidential authority in terms of who he can furlough. As a matter of fact, everybody is included, every employee is now included. There is no discretion whatsoever in terms of who is furloughed, who gets brought back to work, who gets paid.”
The bill also would not give the president additional authority to reprogram funds, said Johnson, a former chair of that committee. He indicated willingness to examine alternative language proposed by Peters, although adding that anything that restricted presidential authority “won’t be signed into law.”
The vote came as the Senate continued to be unable to reconcile the competing demand of the two parties even after the general outlines of what could be a resolution there had taken shape. It also comes as unpaid employees—whether still on the job or in enforced idleness at home—now have received payless pay distributions, on top of only a partial one previously, and just ahead of the November 15 end of what would be a third unpaid pay period.
Meanwhile, a separate bill, S-3141 has been introduced to reverse any RIFs ordered during the current shutdown and prevent agencies from carrying out a RIF “or any similar effort” during a future funding lapse, while S-3156 has been offered to entitle employees to a period of forbearance on certain mortgage loans.
Most of the RIFs since October 1 have been blocked by a judge’s order, although agencies contend that the order does not extend to several hundred of the roughly 4,000 employees who received layoff notices.
It’s unclear if the shutdown ending bill would pre-authorize salary funds for a future shutdown. The Johnson bill, S-3012, would do that. The text of the second one, S-3168 hasn’t been posted but it is represented as doing that, as well. The 2019 law guaranteeing that employees would receive back pay did not preauthorize funding, which is what the White House has argued during the 2025 shutdown – claiming Congress still must separately provide the money, with the implication that President Trump might not agree to a bill providing that money.
Missed TSP Investments to Be Made Up, but No Earnings Credited
Agencies Instructed on Canceling Shutdown RIFs, Reinstating Employees with Back Pay
NTEU Sues for Release of Positions Recommended for Schedule Policy/Career
House Forces Vote to Override Trump Order on Unions
Guidance Addresses Leave, Other Considerations on Shutdown’s End
Premium Increases, Coverage Changes Lie Ahead in Health Insurance Plans
See also,
What Retirement Date Maximizes My Federal Benefits?
Health Savings Account for 2026? Why I Love My HSA
Does My FEHB/PSHB Plan Stack Up? Here’s How to Tell
OPM Details Coverage Changes, Plan Dropouts for FEHB/PSHB in 2026
FERS Retirement Guide 2025 – Your Roadmap to Maximizing Federal Retirement Benefits
