OPM deemphasizes ‘favorite EO’ essay following legal challenge

The Office of Personnel Management last month quietly sought to backpedal on plans to evaluate federal job seekers on a series of essay questions, after critics accused the measure of politicizing the hiring process.

In May, OPM published its plan to reform federal hiring, advancing a variety of long-planned bipartisan initiatives like skills-based hiring and excising longstanding efforts to make the federal workforce more reflective of the American populace. But it also introduced a series of four essay questions for most job applicants, including one that asked about their favorite Trump administration policy.

“How would you help advance the president’s executive orders and policy priorities in this role?” the prompt asked. “Identify one or two relevant executive orders or policy initiatives that are significant to you, and explain how you would help implement them if hired.”

Last month, Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, an employee association made up of federal, state and local government workers, called on the U.S. Office of Special Counsel to take action against the questionnaire’s deployment and warn hiring officials that the essay prompt violates hiring laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of “non-performance factors” and political affiliation.

In an email to agency chief human capital officers and human resources directors late last month, OPM seemingly responded to those concerns, urging officials to deemphasize applicants’ responses to the essay questions when evaluating their candidacies. The new guidance was not widely published; rather, outside parties only became aware of it as part of OSC’s investigation into the matter.

“Answers to these questions are not scored or rated,” OPM wrote. “Agencies should treat responses to these questions int eh same way they would treat the submission of a cover letter. The questions give candidates an opportunity to provide additional information about themselves, their background, and dedication to public service, but must not be used as a mean of determining whether the candidate fulfills the qualifications of a position. The questions also must not be used to impose an ideological litmus test on candidates.”

The federal government’s dedicated HR agency further stipulated that agencies can elect to exempt jobs from the essay questions “at their discretion,” and that if applicants elect not to answer the questions, they “will not be disqualified or screened out.”

“During the hiring process, answers to the four essay questions will be reviewed only by the hiring manager and agency leadership (or a designee), as part of an application packet forwarded to the manager and later to agency leadership if the candidate is recommended for selection,” OPM wrote. “Hiring managers and agency leaders or designees must only use the questions in accordance with merit system principles, and should additionally be mindful of prohibited personnel practices.”

In a statement Wednesday, PEER applauded OPM’s “retreat” from requiring a loyalty test from federal job applicants.

“These changes may transform OPM’s use of the essays from an illegal screening tactic to a silly waste of time,” said PEER General Counsel Joanna Citron Day. “Asking federal job applicants how they feel about Trump has no place in the merit system. Such questions are highly inappropriate.”