Agencies will soon get leeway to promote federal employees more quickly, after the Office of Personnel Management on Monday finalized regulations to eliminate a longstanding “time-in-grade” restriction.
The now-rescinded rule had previously required General Schedule employees to work in their current paygrade for one year before becoming eligible for a promotion.
“It was probably a well-intentioned idea at one point in time, but to me, this is what I would quite frankly just consider an anti-merit-based principle,” OPM Director Scott Kupor said in an exclusive interview with Federal News Network. “If [employees] truly are performing above and beyond what we expect at that level, we should be able to promote them as necessary and as appropriate, in whatever timeframe the managers deem appropriate.”
Eliminating the time-in-grade rule doesn’t automatically entitle federal employees to a promotion after one year, nor does it compel agencies to promote employees earlier in all cases, OPM said in its final rule. Agencies may continue including additional prerequisites for a promotion, such as demonstrated competencies and required training. The change becomes effective Jan. 19, 2027.
“It now gives managers the flexibility and ability to move people at the pace that is appropriate with their demonstrated skills,” Kupor said.
Some organizations, however, have raised questions about the possibility of favoritism or subjectivity arising in promotion decisions. While generally supportive of the time-in-grade elimination, the Partnership for Public Service argued that the rule should also be replaced with a new system that ensures accelerated promotions are objective and merit-based.
“Managers and HR offices will not automatically know how to implement this new process well. This will require deliberate investment in guardrails, training and oversight, not just the removal of a rule,” Partnership for Public Service President and CEO Max Stier said in July public comments on the proposed rule. “OPM should identify both best practices as well as some structure for ensuring employees aren’t moved to higher grades without the correct procedures, which includes skills assessment, strong performance management and alignment with agencies planning.”
Democracy Forward, an organization that has been critical of the Trump administration, similarly said it was not opposed to removing time-in-grade rule, but questioned OPM’s decision to eliminate the regulations without creating new “meaningful standards,” particularly amid major federal workforce overhauls.
“The Trump-Vance administration has focused on employee loyalty and repeatedly sought to expand political control over career hiring, firing, performance management and workforce structure,” wrote Rob Shriver, managing director of Democracy Forward’s Civil Service Strong and Good Government initiatives. “In that context, eliminating [time-in-grade] without replacement safeguards creates the obvious risk of accelerated promotions and pay increases that can be used to reward loyalists or politically aligned employees, including Trump-era hires, while bypassing equally or more qualified career employees.”
Michael Fallings, managing partner at Tully Rinckey law firm, said without a real replacement, the lack of promotion standards will reduce clarity for federal employees seeking to understand how they can move up to the next grade level.
“I do understand the decision-making that time in grade is a bit archaic, but it does need to be replaced with something that still provides some clarity and some objectivity for employees rather than just relying purely based on performance,” Fallings said in an interview. “OPM should recognize that there is going to be more subjectivity and potential for favoritism by managers.”
In its final rule this week, OPM opted not to establish new governmentwide standards for accelerated employee promotions. The agency said the requirements governing promotion decisions are addressed under federal regulations separate from the time-in-grade rule.
“What the qualification standards require, and will continue to require, is that an employee actually be qualified for the position to which the employee is promoted and demonstrate that qualification through job-related evidence,” OPM said. “Eliminating a tenure-based measure of qualification does not eliminate the requirement of qualification; it requires that qualification be shown directly rather than inferred from the passage of time.”
“Variation across agencies that reflects genuine differences in occupations and missions is a feature of a merit promotion system administered by agencies subject to governmentwide standards, not a defect in it,” OPM continued.
OPM’s final rule additionally argued that the time-in-grade restriction was not a primary safeguard against subjective promotion decisions.
“[Time in grade] prevents nothing that a supervisor intent on favoritism cannot accomplish by waiting 52 weeks,” OPM said. “What it reliably prevents is the timely promotion of employees who are ready.”
While not formally setting governmentwide promotion standards through the final rule, Kupor said he still expects agencies to “establish very clear criteria” for evaluating employees.
“That may take some time, obviously, for agencies to roll that out,” he said.
The government’s time-in-grade restrictions have been in place for General Schedule employees in competitive service positions since the 1950s. When the requirement was first established, it aimed to prevent a top-heavy workforce with too many federal employees being promoted too quickly.
But more recently, OPM has argued that the rule is no longer needed. The Trump administration proposed regulations to remove time in grade in May, saying it would help reduce administrative burdens, add flexibility, reward high performers and strengthen federal recruitment and retention.
Kupor said the removal of time-in-grade restriction could also boost interest in federal jobs from early-career employees — a longstanding demographic where the federal government has been seeking to increase recruitment.
“We need to make sure again we don’t have time-based things that ultimately limit [early-career employees’] ability to progress to the organization,” he said.
The time-in-grade elimination is one of several overhauls OPM has made to the performance management system for federal employees. OPM is requiring agencies to limit how many employees they rate highly on their annual performance reviews, and calling for bigger bonuses for top performers.
The Trump administration has also put forward a rule mandating agencies to prioritize employee performance over tenure or seniority during future reductions in force (RIFs).
Many critics of OPM’s performance overhauls have warned of negative impacts the changes will have on morale, productivity, retention and teamwork.
“I don’t think there’s anything nefarious about actually recognizing people differentially for the contribution they make to the organization,” Kupor said.
If you would like to contact this reporter about recent changes in the federal government, please email drew.friedman@federalnewsnetwork.com or reach out on Signal at drewfriedman.11
Copyright © 2026 Federal News Network. All rights reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.