DHS Tried Again To Kill The TSA Union Contract. A Judge Blocked It

The Trump administration has tried multiple times to void the TSA’s union contract, and courts have blocked them. That happened again on Thursday.

When the agency launched, TSA screeners were barred from collective bargaining under the Aviation and Transportation Security Act. Leadership issued a January 2003 determination saying union contracts weren’t compatible with the flexibility needed for counterterrorism and rapidly changing threats. Under the Obama administration, TSA Administrator John Pistole reversed course in February 2011. Then, the Trump administration sought to exit union constraints at the agency. However,

• In June, a judge issued a preliminary injunction blocking the agency from terminating the 2024 collective bargaining agreement with Transportation Security Officers.

• In September, DHS Secretary Kristi Noem issued a new determination voiding the contract using a detailed rationale framed around the agency’s national security mission, need for flexibilitiy, effectiveness, and traveler experience.

• In December, TSA told employees it would implement a new labor framework in January 2026 rescinding the 2024 CBA. They claimed the June injunction only addressed the earlier determination and didn’t bar implementation of the new September one.

• Then on Thursday, January 15, a new judge granted the union’s emergency motion to block this – the agency can’t make an end run around the first injunction by rescinding and reissuing its plan.

TSA screeners are governed by a special personnel system created by the Aviation and Transportation Security Act. The agency administrator has broad authority over the “terms and conditions of employment” and collective bargaining for TSOs exists only because prior leadership chose to allow it.

DHS argued the Secretary’s determination to allow or disallow collective bargaining is entirely at their discretion. However, so far the court has held that when the agency entered into its collective bargaining agreement, it created a self-imposed contract it has to honor. The agency lived under the view that collective bargaining benefited TSA and the traveling public for 15 years, and can’t just walk away from that.

If DHS believes the new determination should prevail, then they have to move to modify, dissolve, or stay the injunction. They can’t just ignore it.

They’re probably right that creating a security bureaucracy isn’t the best way to do security. Although if they were genuinely concerned with security they’d separate TSA functions of regulator and security provider. Having the agency both set screening standards and then do the screening is a recipe for unaccountability.

There are better and more important ways to fix security than reneging on an agreement. That said,

• If you accept that airport security is a high-variance, threat-driven environment then collective bargaining can slow rapid changes to staffing models, checkpoint procedures, and surge capacity.

• More formal grievance and arbitration processes can raise the cost in both time and management bandwidth of removing poor performers. And the role can’t accept error. Tens of thousands of TSA employees were subject of complaints but remained on the job.

• Even without strikes, disciplined adherence to minimum contractual requirements can degrade performance and responsiveness during peak travel and security events.

I wouldn’t have pushed the button to unionize TSA. But undoing that requires following legal procedures. There’s not a lot of patience or willingness to do that work in this administration.