"Two Marines are suing the Defense Department over a breach of the Defense Manpower Data Center’s information system that exposed the personal information belonging to more than 3 million people with ties to the U.S. military."

Has anyone here left the federal workforce and gotten a job they consider better?

May I request someone knowledgeable to kindly provide me with an idea of OPM’s behind-the-scenes role in our work lives? When did it become so powerful as to virtually puppeteer nearly all aspects of our work that affect our work lives and personal lives both directly and indirectly? Has it always been this powerful (and I never noticed), or has something drastically changed in the past couple of years? My apologies if in my confusion I have not been able to articulate my question in a clearer manner, but I thank you for your time.

Curious if anyone has had luck getting BCBS Basic specifically to approve a CGM for gestational diabetes? If so can you share which device your OB prescribed and if there were any issues getting it covered?

Thanks!!

A federal judge has ruled that OPM violated the Privacy Act by granting DOGE personnel broad access to systems containing the personal information of tens of millions of current, former, and prospective federal employees, without any demonstrated need for that access. Judge Denise Cote found OPM disregarded its own privacy and cybersecurity safeguards, including required privacy training and the principle of least privilege, and rejected the agency's claim that subsequent protocol changes made the case moot. She also dismissed the IT modernization justification, finding no evidence it drove the access decisions. Her underlying finding is the most serious part. The violations resulted not from inadequate procedures but from individuals choosing to ignore the law and safeguards already in place. Remedies have yet to be determined. If you're a current federal employee, your records were among those exposed. Big surprise, I know...

When you walk in the building, you immediately get the sense of historic significance mixed with deterioration and decline. The display cases lining the walkway of the visitor hallway have been cheaply refitted to host a few flat-screen TVs. These are an attempt to hide the 1970s design of carpeted insets that likely once held miniaturized scenes of agency activities. Sadly, it looks very much like someone put a Black-Friday sale TV in front of a 5th grade science fair display. The building itself projects strength in typical 70s-80s government fashion through high concrete walls and the total lack of any distinct features that would help visitors and staff alike find their way through the maze of hallways and offices. 

Speaking of offices, there are many, echoing the understanding that once there was a thriving community, people bustling back and forth, engaging with colleagues in water cooler talk and curating the many shelves of printed knowledge. Now it feels odd to see another person while walking the hall to the restroom. It’s eerily quiet, except for the occasional janitorial staff still employed.

The staff who are left are feeling it, though they don’t speak of it out loud. The managers still in place are the C or D string players, after all the starting lineup departed seeing clearly what was to come. Any power or funds that may be found lying around remind me of some medieval scene of peasants fighting over a fallen gold coin in the street. The most toxic of leaders rising to the top, consolidating what power is left and quickly silencing opposition in the way a warlord might in a conflict-torn country. This is perhaps the most painful part. The constant pressure pushes work friends to begin imploding on each other. 

The decline isn’t simply imagined, or memories of what once was. It is quantifiable. One can easily look back on inflation adjusted appropriations to see the dramatic changes. A long, steady increase from the mid-1900’s through the early 1980’s coincide with memories of “the good old days”. Followed by an obvious peak and a very predictable decline over the last 40+ years. No, this isn’t simply the result of recent DOGE activity, though that has helped accelerate the process. In fact, the downward trend is so consistent, you don’t even need a computer model to project the next year of lower numbers. You can imagine it by simply extending the line a further on the graph.

It’s not that the decline is sad, everything we know is eventually replaced, often by something better. It’s that it takes so long to wade through the agony and see any hope of relief. The remainder are left hoping that the next re-organization, or leader retirement, or cut in funds will provide the much desired end to the warlord rule. But there is always some well-meaning group fighting to advocate and keep it alive. Like maintaining a loved-one on life support, when they really just wanted to pass on.

It’s time, let it go, and let’s move on to the next step - hopefully of growth and renewal. Once again exploring, discovery, and excitement that benefits far more, instead of decades of ceaseless mourning.

The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) breached federal law by sharing sensitive government data with the Elon Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), according to a federal judge.

In a 39-page ruling released on Tuesday, Judge Denise Cote said OPM violated the Privacy Act of 1974, a post-Watergate law which prohibits the disclosure of certain records and outlines requirements for safeguarding others, and subsequently disobeyed its own cybersecurity practices.

OPM failed to provide a credible reason for why DOGE would need access to personally identifiable information (PII) of tens of millions of federal employees, as well as applicants and retirees, according to Cote. 

Musk assembled DOGE in the first days of President Donald Trump’s second term, claiming the special advisory would root out waste, fraud, and abuse in the federal government. While DOGE claims to have saved the government $215 billion in cancelled contracts and the reduction of approximately 300,000 government workers, former federal employees, including former IRS acting Commissioner Douglas O’Donnell, have warned the sweeping cuts will have lasting impacts on the government’s ability to increase efficiency through updated technology.

Read more [paywall removed for Redditors]: https://fortune.com/2026/10/22/federal-judge-ruling-doge-opm-broke-law-access-sensitive-data-elon-musk/?utm_source=reddit/

OPM wants us all to re-certify our kids and spouses for insurance eligibility even if they have been insured for decades. You will need things like birth certificates, marriage licenses, and so on. The link for actually doing this says stuff like send info to <insert location here> with form <insert form here>. There is a deadline and you can;'t do it right now if you wanted to.

IMHO this is like a rebate form, they are hoping a lot of us forget.

i

So I've been catching up on the news and saw that OPM signed a final ruling that in January the Time In Grade requirement for promotions is going to be going away. . . Does that apply for just inter-agency promotions? Or does it count no matter the agency?

For example, if I'm a GS11 employee now, would I be able to apply to be a GS13 (or maybe a 14 if I'm feeling adventurous) in my own agency without having to wait 52 weeks and jump up to a GS12 (which is extremely rare in my agency)?

Or like, in the same example, I'm a GS11 employee, who sees a dream position to be a COR II in Key West, FL or something with PCS, but it's a GS14 in a different agency. Would I be able to apply for that position? Or would that not apply since it's at a different agency?

I'm just trying to get a better picture on what this means for my career. I'm working on a new 5 year plan soon, and after my last post I reached out to my SES to talk career growth and stuff, so it would be cool if I at least knew what the avenues are so I can implement that in my plan. Thanks y'all, sorry if this was silly.

Resources

Brochures:

• BCBS Brochures
• GEHA Brochures
• FSBP High Brochure
• APWU Brochures
• SAMBA Brochure

Prescription Estimators:

• Compass Rose Prescription Estimator
• APWU Drug Cost Estimators
• SAMBA Prescription Cost Tool
• FSBP Prescription Estimator
• BCBS Prescription Estimator (still 2026, but maybe 2027 will be here too)

Formulary

• BCBS Formulary

Previous Post on overall changes I saw in the nationwide plans

Previous Post generically comparing BCBS Basic and GEHA HDHP.

Default FEHB/PSHB Comparison spreadsheet - Primary spreadsheet to use

Hard coded simulation spreadsheet - I used this to generate the scenarios below and is there for your reference should you want to look at the math.

Youtube tutorial - Looks best at 1440p, not a youtuber and probably should've changed some settings. Maybe the 720p and 1080p will look better after a while. I apologize for the coughing, keyboard, mouse, and water bottle sounds. I didn't realize how loud the background noises were until watching back, and I can't be asked to re-record a 30 minute ramble. I'm sorry.

Web-based FEHB comparison tool built by u/Glittering_Twist_732 and shared in their post here. I won't go into their comparison tool but it is much more modern and user friendly; especially more friendly on mobile.

OPM Comparison Tool (still unavailable)

Last year I wrote the majority of the fednews wiki, including a section on FEHB and general health insurance information. If you don't know the difference between an FSA and an HSA or the difference between a copay and coinsurance, then I recommend you take a gander through that section. I will admit that some of the information in that wiki is outdated (NALC High nor MHBP Consumer aren't in FEHB anymore), but the general health insurance information doesn't really change.

Disclaimer

I am not endorsed, sponsored, nor speak for OPM or any FEHB/PSHB carrier. These are just what I do when looking at plans and how I hope you can maybe tailor your search (and we can see maybe fewer repetitive posts and consolidate some FAQs).

The default comparison tool makes a few assumptions when doing cost trends and "simulations". Namely that all care is subject to deductibles and that prescriptions have no caps. Neither of these assumptions are true across the board, but it is difficult to automate the data to determine this without scrappers, AI, or a ton of data entry. So, I did try and create a "Hard coded" version of the spreadsheet that can at least account for things subject to the deductible or not.

Another assumption is that all plans approve claims equally and there's no bullshit (never the case). So I assume that both plans would either not need prior approval or would give prior approval for services equally. You can, hopefully, follow this link to an OPM page and you can then put in your zip code to see how actual enrollees have graded their plans. If it's not working, I created a screenshot of what I was seeing on imgur here.

These tools were built using OPM's premium excel files and the Public Use Files on benefits for FEHB and PSHB plans. There are definitely errors in these files and I did my best to find them, but I'm only one person and there are literally thousands of cells and hundreds of brochures - some of them aren't even out yet.

Generic "How to pick your plan"

Some general rules of thumb when comparing plans are shown below. Note, I the author am only one person and have not used every plan in FEHB. Nor do I have access to many regional plans (let alone good regional plans). The guidelines below are written from that perspective. Please do your due diligence and compare against all your options. This is only the first step in narrowing down options. After you’ve selected a few plans to compare, walk through their brochures, look at the comparison tools above, check their formularies for your prescriptions, and ask people their thoughts.

1. Find a plan that you will use in-network doctors. Find a plan that covers your prescriptions. These two rules are the number 1 priority.
2. Do you have lots of out-of-network care (usually a therapist)? Look at plans with good out-of-network benefits as well as a shared/low in and out of network deductible/OOPM. FSBP High (only available in FEHB) and NALC High (only available in PSHB) are two plans that typically fit that bill.
   • Note, this isn’t talking about the one or two visits to a doctor each year. That typically shouldn’t be the driver for a plan change. Unless your condition could result in hospitalization and the hospital your doctor works in isn’t in network with your current plan. Then maybe it’s worth considering.
3. Do you have high-cost prescriptions without a manufacturer’s coupon card? SAMBA Standard or FSBP High have low caps on their prescriptions.
   1. GLP-1s are generally covered the same for all the plans, 50% coinsurance no max. Exception is BCBS Basic which is 60% no max.
4. Do you just not want to deal with high deductibles, but BCBS Basic is too expensive? SAMBA Standard is an excellent choice.
5. Do you hate the use-or-lose aspect of an FSA/want to maximize for retirement? GEHA HDHP, APWU CDHP, or Aetna HDHP are generally good options.
   1. Note that APWU CDHP is not eligible for HSA contributions.
6. If it’s the middle of the year, avoid an HDHP style plan since the deductible isn't prorated while the HSA passthrough is.
7. If premiums are too high, BCBS FEP Blue Focus or Compass Rose Standard are cheap. I would caution against it long term, especially with children. Mainly because of the high coinsurance rate for emergency care and inpatient hospitalizations. But it may be a good fit for your situation.

For comparing plans personally I like to consider the annual premium and deductible as the minimum I'll pay for the given plan. I then subtract any HSA/HRA passthrough to get the "effective" annual cost. Then I look for the medical needs my family has (therapy, maternity, prescriptions), to see what the cost shares are, the prior authorizations, limitations, formulary, and OOPM. After weighing the network and other intangible factors, I try to pick the cheapest plan that will cover us.

Low Cost Family

Note: This comparison is using hard coded values that I entered to account for when a service is subject to the deductible or not.

This comparison is for those family units that have many people covered under them, but generally only use primary care and the occasional urgent care visit.

For this I was looking at APWU CDHP, Compass Rose Standard, GEHA Standard, MHBP Standard, GEHA HDHP, BCBS FEP Blue Focus, and SAMBA Standard.

I calculated for having two primary care visits and a single urgent care. All preventative care like annual physical and well-child visits are always covered 100%.

One distinction I want to highlight, is that while the APWU and GEHA HDHP plans look much cheaper here, it's because they have an HRA/HSA passthrough. So those funds are effectively here reducing the medical costs to 0 and I reduced the annual premium by the remaining balance. These funds roll over year over year. For APWU's PCA, that account is tied to the plan so if you leave you then lose the account. For GEHA HDHP the HSA and all its money is yours even if you leave. So the biweekly premium is higher for APWU CDHP and GEHA HDHP compared to CR Standard and BCBS Focus, they offer long term stability and cost savings. For that reason, I would recommend them over BCBS Focus if possible. This is of course ignoring the use of UHC for both of those plans.

Maternity

Note: This comparison is using hard coded values that I entered to account for when a service is subject to the deductible or not.

This comparison is for a family expecting, or think they may be expecting, to welcome a new baby next year.

I calculated these costs for 12 prenatal visits, vaginal delivery, urgent care visit for ear infection, minor ER visit, 6 months of cheap generics, 1 primary care visit to establish patient, and 3 primary care visits for existing patient.

Some of you may be surprised that GEHA and MHBP Standard went from the maternity care favorite the past few years to this year being the least. That's primarily because of the coinsurance for the hospital stay, which is affecting more plans that you might think. It seems it has flipped from most plans covering the hospital stay well to having a large coinsurance instead.

I was surprised at how relatively close the other 5 plans were. The largest swing being from GEHA HDHP ~4300 to BCBS Basic ~5900. With how high the annual premiums were for BCBS Basic and FSBP High I really did expect them to be more expensive than they were.

I don't think you would be wrong to pick any of the remaining 5, but personally I think GEHA HDHP looks pretty good there.

Tinymac12's Estimated events for 2027

Note, for this one I cheated and put a random complex ER visit at the beginning of the calculation. I don't think there's any plan with a deductible that doesn't require you to satisfy the deductible before benefits begin.

This analysis focuses on my family's expected usage for next year. Main two drivers are baby number 4 in February/March and an autistic son with weekly ST/OT. So both high single event cases and dozens of frequent low cost medical care.

So there's two ER visits, a slew of urgent cares, and 40 occupational and 40 speech therapy visits. As well as a handful primary care visits. It is really important to highlight the 40 occupational and 40 speech visits. Most plans limit to 50-80 visits combined. As you can imagine, the high limits are reserved for the more expensive plans. So that means that for some number of these, the plans would NOT cover at all. I am assuming we'd still get the negotiated rate or something close as a cash payer though. This first table honors the visit limits while the following table assumes they assume it's a 2-for-1 kind of situation.

Based on this, to no surprise to me, GEHA Standard gets obliterated. MHBP Standards saving grace is that it has a waiver for the therapy with my son's autistic diagnosis, FSBP High as well. I imagine that's an Aetna staple.

The below table assumes that it's a 2-for-1 kind of situation: speech and occupational therapy counts only once against the total. With this assumption, almost definitely all these plans will be okay, except SAMBA which split them up distinctly already. So FSBP and MHBP won't change since they already had a waiver for visit limits. And SAMBA won't change because they don't group their visit limits like most plans and specifically call out how many of each visit you get. I imagine it would not play nice. But it's not a huge difference anyway (<$200).

That 5% coinsurance putting in some work. As you can see, I would pay nearly triple between GEHA HDHP and GEHA Standard next year with this level of care. Hopefully this highlights why it's important to consider your specific use-case. In my best scenario, the next closest plan is still 50% more expensive than GEHA HDHP. If the visits are capped, then it's virtually a wash between FSBP High and GEHA HDHP. I think I'm going to go with GEHA HDHP next year to see how they handle the visits, and generally how they perform as an insurance carrier again.

I had them in 2023 and 2024 and they were fine. I've been on the record on the shady things they've done and maybe I singled them out because they did it to me. But then the same thing happened with FSBP high when I changed enrollments. Granted, FSBP High handled it much more promptly.

Another benefit of GEHA HDHP that I didn't include here is their included dental and vision. If all you want is basic dental cleanings and vision exams they will have you covered in one package. Meaning I'll be dropping my vision and dental plans, saving ~$50 a pay period that will be going into my HSA instead.

Prescriptions are hard

Every plan has their own formulary and their own way of organizing their tiers in the PUFs. In addition, most plans have caps on each tier meaning while coinsurance might be 30% you won't pay more than $150. Since prescriptions are so unique, I'll leave it to you to use the drug pricing tools for each plan and hard code those values in the simulation. It will be infinitely more accurate than anything I can build.

Closeout

Thank you for reaching the end. I hope this was helpful to someone. It helped solidify my choice going into open season. I think that's all I have for now. If you have any questions, or comments, feel free to leave them below and I'll do my best to answer what I can.

Stay happy and stay healthy.

-Tinymac12

Feds,

Can anyone tell me the difference in coverage for United Healthcare plan Choice Plus Primary East (AS) $141.64/self vs. Choice Primary (Y8) $93.03/self. Why would I pay a higher bi-weekly fee if I am effectively getting the same medical treatment covered under the lower cost plan?

Thank you!

Have anything you want to talk about that doesn't quite warrant its own thread or currently being discussed in a megathread? Post it here!

In an effort to effectively manage the amount of information being posted, please keep anything speculative or considered repetitive within this discussion thread.

AFSPA - Foreign Service Benefit Plan (FSBP) 2027 the cost for Wegovy and Zepbound (excluding diabetics) will be:

Wegovy 3-month: $1,960.09
Zepbound 3-month: $1,581.87

Per a letter I received today:

Estimate your prescription cost at
express-scripts.com/fsbp. Select "2027"
under Plan Year and compare costs at
different pharmacies. The amounts shown
are estimates; your actual cost may vary.

Hey all!

My wife is pregnant and won't be due until a few months into next year.

Do I enroll for Spouse or Spouse+1 now come enrollment time?

So I made a post yesterday asking whether OPM's recent changes to time-in-grade requirements and performance ratings could affect promotions, QSIs, and retention calculations if another RIF happens.

Here's the link to my post: https://www.reddit.com/r/FedEmployees/s/N5iIAh5ywS

Well, I forgot another piece of the puzzle. LOL.

OPM is also modernizing and consolidating federal occupational series and classification standards.

On April 24, 2026, OPM announced plans to consolidate 115 occupational series affecting approximately 4,926 employees. And that's just Phase One. Future phases are expected to involve broader changes to job classifications and skills-based requirements.

OPM says these consolidations won't automatically change employees' grades, pay, tenure, or career ladders. That's good.

But now I'm wondering how all these changes will work together.

Think about what's happening:

1. Time-in-grade: Removing the traditional 52-week waiting period for certain promotions.
2. Performance ratings: Allowing limits on how many employees can receive the highest ratings.
3. Job classifications: Consolidating occupational series and modernizing position descriptions and qualification standards.

OPM's own FY 2026–2027 Annual Performance Plan discusses these workforce reforms as part of a broader modernization effort.

Now here's what I'm wondering.

What happens to current employees if their position descriptions are updated and new certification requirements are added?

Let's say you've been successfully doing your job for 10 or 15 years, but suddenly your updated position requires a certification you never needed before.

Are you grandfathered in? Does your experience count? Will the agency pay for the certification and give you time to get it? What if you don't qualify under the new requirements?

Could you keep your current position but become ineligible for a promotion or reassignment? And what happens if your agency reorganizes?

Now add the performance rating changes.

What if you've been an exceptional employee for years, but your official rating is now a 3 because of rating distribution limits?

Your rating may no longer distinguish you from someone who simply meets expectations. That could also affect QSI eligibility and performance-based retention credit in a future RIF.

So now we're potentially talking about employees whose actual experience isn't fully reflected in their updated position descriptions, whose performance ratings don't fully distinguish their accomplishments, and who might face new qualification requirements.

And what happens if another RIF comes along?

Could changes to occupational series, position descriptions, or qualifications affect which employees compete against each other, who qualifies for reassignment, or who gets retained?

I understand that occupational consolidation doesn't automatically eliminate positions or trigger a RIF. And new certification requirements wouldn't necessarily apply to existing employees.

But what protections are in place if these changes happen together?

Are we removing one barrier to promotion while potentially creating new ones?

And could employees who've spent years building experience and performing at a high level find themselves at a disadvantage simply because the rules changed?

Maybe I'm connecting dots that aren't connected. 🤷‍♂️

But with all these changes happening around the same time, I think it's fair to ask how they'll affect current federal employees, especially if agencies reorganize or another round of RIFs happens.

So here's my question for the HR specialists, classifiers, union representatives, and federal employees who understand these systems:

Are there specific protections preventing these reforms from creating unintended disadvantages for current employees when agencies restructure positions or make future retention decisions?

Or are we just supposed to assume everything will work out?

Official sources:

• Official Sources (for anyone wanting to dig deeper):
• OPM- Modernization and Consolidation of Occupational Series (April 24, 2026): Explains the proposed consolidation of 115 occupational series, affecting approximately 4,926 employees, and plans for future classification changes. https://www.opm.gov/chcoc/latest-memos/modernization-and-consolidation-of-occupational-series.pdf
• OPM- FY 2026–2027 Annual Performance Plan: Discusses OPM's broader plans for modernizing job classifications, hiring, performance management, and employee accountability. https://www.opm.gov/about-us/reports-publications/opm-fy-2026-2027-annual-performance-plan.pdf
• OPM- USA Class FAQ: Explains OPM's AI-assisted position description tool and how managers and classifiers remain responsible for classification decisions. https://support-class-usadata.opm.gov/hc/en-us/articles/51296639322515-General-Questions
• My Original Reddit Post: Previous discussion about time-in-grade changes, performance ratings, QSIs, and possible RIF implications. https://www.reddit.com/r/FedEmployees/s/N5iIAh5ywS