A bipartisan group of 110 lawmakers sent a letter to congressional leadership last week asking them to reject President Trump’s proposed 2027 pay freeze for federal civilian employees. The letter, addressed to Senate Majority Leader John Thune, House Speaker Mike Johnson, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, asks for a raise of at least 3.8% — and preferably 4.1% — to be included in Fiscal Year 2027 appropriations legislation.
Get an alert when the official 2027 federal pay raise (or freeze) is determined
Enter your email on this form [CLICK HERE] and we’ll send you an email alert as soon as the 2027 pay raise (or freeze) is finalized — plus what it means for your specific grade and step.
A Bipartisan Letter, but With Only One Republican Signer
Twelve senators and 98 House members put their names on the letter, for a total of 110 signatures. Rep. James Walkinshaw (D-VA) and Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) led the effort, with Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD) and Sen. Brian Schatz (D-HI) also identified as leaders of the push. The bipartisan label, however, rests on a single Republican signer: Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA). Of the other 109 signers, 108 are Democrats and one — Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont — is an independent who caucuses with Democrats.
That partisan breakdown is important context for understanding the letter. The lawmakers are asking a Republican-controlled Congress to override a pay decision made by a Republican president, making the letter different from a broadly bipartisan congressional push for a federal pay increase.
The Argument: If It’s Good Enough for Law Enforcement
The letter’s central claim is one of consistency. President Trump’s own pay plan provides a 3.8% increase for certain federal law enforcement personnel, while the administration has proposed substantially larger raises for many military service members, with recruitment and retention among the reasons cited for higher compensation. The signers argue that similar concerns apply to the rest of the federal workforce.
They point to staffing challenges across the federal government, including at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the Social Security Administration (SSA), and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA). The letter argues that freezing civilian pay could make it harder to recruit and retain employees responsible for work ranging from food and drug safety and benefit processing to cybersecurity and protection of critical infrastructure.
Recent Raises Have Lagged Current Inflation
The letter also leans on a trend line. Federal employees received an average 2% raise in 2025, while most received a 1% raise in 2026. Consumer prices, meanwhile, were 3.4% higher in August 2026 than a year earlier, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). If prices continue rising while civilian pay is frozen in 2027, employees would lose additional purchasing power.
The lawmakers characterize the proposed freeze as an effective pay cut once increases in the cost of living are taken into account. That does not mean every federal employee’s personal expenses have risen by the same amount as the Consumer Price Index, but it illustrates the purchasing-power argument behind their request for a raise.
What the Freeze Order Actually Says
It’s worth reading Trump’s August 26 letter to Congress rather than relying on secondhand summaries, because the numbers get simplified in ways that can mislead. Under the Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act (FEPCA) of 1990, the President must submit an alternative pay plan to Congress by September 1 each year or allow the statutory formula to take effect. Trump’s letter states that without an alternative plan, the statutory formula for January 2027 would produce a 3.1% across-the-board base pay increase plus an average 20.6% increase to locality pay — a combination the administration estimates would cost $26 billion in its first year. Citing fiscal responsibility, Trump set both adjustments to zero for civilian employees.
The administration separately directed the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) to provide a 3.8% increase in compensation for certain federal law enforcement personnel under separate statutory authority. The administration has also proposed military pay increases of 7.0% for grades E1 through E5, 6.0% for E6 through O3, and 5.0% for O4 and above, while proposing a 3.6% increase for other uniformed service members. The federal civilian pay rates are not yet final; final 2027 pay tables are normally established through a presidential executive order later in the year.
The FAIR Act Has Not Advanced Out of Committee
The letter’s preferred outcome — an average 4.1% raise — comes from the Federal Adjustment of Income Rates Act (FAIR Act), H.R. 7480, introduced by Rep. Walkinshaw in February 2026. The legislation would provide a 3.1% increase in statutory pay rates and a 1% increase in locality pay, producing an average increase of approximately 4.1%. A Senate companion has also been introduced by Sen. Schatz.
Neither bill has advanced out of committee. And when the question actually came to a vote, it lost: during the House Appropriations Committee’s markup of its Fiscal Year 2027 Financial Services and General Government (FSGG) spending bill, Rep. Hoyer offered an amendment to add a 3.1% civilian pay raise. It failed 28-32 along party lines, and the bill that advanced out of committee says nothing about a 2027 civilian pay raise. That vote provides a more concrete indication of where the House Appropriations Committee stood on the issue than either bill’s committee status, since committee Republicans voted against adding a raise rather than simply leaving the legislation untouched.
Does the 2019 Precedent Actually Apply Here?
The letter cites 2019 as proof that Congress can override a presidential pay freeze, and the basic history checks out: Trump proposed freezing civilian pay that year as well, and Congress overrode the freeze, setting an average 1.9% raise instead through February 2019 spending legislation that applied retroactively to the start of the year.
The political environment was different, however. Democrats controlled the House, and the pay raise emerged from the broader appropriations negotiations that followed the 35-day partial government shutdown. The current Congress has a different partisan alignment. The 2019 episode nevertheless demonstrates the narrower point the lawmakers are making: an alternative pay plan submitted by the President does not prevent Congress from subsequently setting a different federal pay increase through legislation.
Federal Employee Groups Have Already Opposed the Freeze
Federal employee organizations were quick to object when Trump formally transmitted his alternative pay plan in August. The National Active and Retired Federal Employees Association (NARFE) and the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) both criticized the freeze, with NARFE National President William Shackelford calling it a “more work for less pay” policy and AFGE National President Everett Kelley calling it a “slap in the face.”
The International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers (IFPTE) also publicly applauded the congressional letter and urged lawmakers to provide a 2027 pay increase. Federal employee organizations have separately pointed to Federal Salary Council data showing that federal salaries lag comparable nonfederal pay by nearly 25%. Taken together, opposition from unions and federal employee organizations has focused largely on persuading Congress to address civilian pay through the appropriations process.
What Happens Next
The letter by itself does not change the 2027 pay plan. Congress would have to enact legislation providing a different increase. In the House, the appropriations process has so far moved in the opposite direction: the House Appropriations Committee rejected Hoyer’s 3.1% amendment on a 28-32 party-line vote, and the FSGG bill that advanced from the committee contains no civilian pay increase.
The government is currently funded through a continuing resolution that runs through December 11, 2026. That means FY 2027 appropriations remain unfinished, leaving Congress another opportunity to address federal pay when lawmakers take up whatever funding legislation replaces the current continuing resolution. Any such provision would have to emerge later in the appropriations process despite the House Appropriations Committee’s earlier rejection of Hoyer’s pay amendment.
For now, the operative 2027 civilian pay policy is the 0% adjustment contained in Trump’s alternative pay plan unless Congress enacts a different increase. Final federal pay tables from the Office of Personnel Management are normally established through a presidential executive order later in the year.
Federal employees weighing retirement timing should also keep in mind that a frozen year can affect more than a single year’s paycheck. Annuities under the Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS) and Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS) are generally calculated using an employee’s highest average basic pay over any three consecutive years of creditable service. A 0% year that falls inside that High-3 period — or that leaves future basic pay lower than it otherwise would have been — can therefore have an effect that extends into retirement. Federal employees can learn more about how pay rates are structured in our General Schedule (GS) pay guide.