By Chip Rogers, CEO Americans for Fair Treatment

At Americans for Fair Treatment, we believe the law should protect workers, not serve political interests. That is why we are using our voice in AFGE v. Noem, a case about the de-unionization of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), where we have joined as amicus curiae to help the court understand what is truly at stake. This lawsuit is not just about a union contract. It is about whether federal agencies can ignore Congress, create unauthorized labor frameworks, and trap employees in systems that fail them.

For more than a decade, the unionization of TSA screeners has rested on shaky legal ground. In 2011, then-TSA Administrator John Pistole unilaterally authorized collective bargaining for screeners, even though Congress had never granted that authority. His decision was not rooted in statute or precedent. It was political.

Let’s be clear. Congress explicitly denied collective bargaining rights to TSA screeners. Under the Aviation and Transportation Security Act (ATSA), passed in the wake of 9/11, screeners were designated as a unique class of federal employees. Congress gave the TSA Administrator sole authority to hire, fire, and set employment terms for screeners, “notwithstanding any other provision of law.” In other words, Congress prioritized flexibility, not unionization, in these national security roles.

The results of this unlawful union experiment speak for themselves. AFFT has heard directly from TSA screeners about how union involvement worsened their workplace experience. Screeners faced inconsistent policy enforcement, had complaints of discrimination and harassment ignored, and were subjected to disruptive pandemic policies that put politics ahead of safety. The union often seemed more aligned with management than the screeners it claimed to represent.

That is why, in 2023, we filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request seeking the legal justification for TSA’s union arrangement. The result? Nothing that would hold up in court. No statute. No legal opinion. Just vague memos expressing misguided policy preferences. We published those records because screeners and the taxpayers funding this system deserve transparency.

Now, after Secretary Kristi Noem rightly ended this unlawful policy, AFGE is asking the court to reinstate it through a preliminary injunction. They want to bring back a collective bargaining agreement that never should have existed. That is not just misguided. It is illegal.

In our brief to the court, we lay out the facts and the law. Congress never authorized unionization for TSA screeners. Federal agencies cannot fabricate their own labor systems. Reanimating unionization for TSA screeners would undermine the foundation of federal labor law, which is built on congressional authority, not administrative invention by fiat.

AFFT’s position is not anti-union. We are standing up for the rule of law and for tens of thousands of TSA screeners who deserve better. It is about restoring merit, accountability, and transparency in one of the most sensitive national security roles in government.

We are proud to stand with workers who want fairness without politics. We urge the court to reject AFGE’s attempt to revive an unlawful bargaining scheme. The American people and TSA screeners both deserve a workforce that is secure, professional, and perhaps above all, lawful.

Chip Rogers, CEO Americans for Fair Treatment

Join AFFT here.

Have a tip? Submit here.