Protect Your Federal Career—and the Record That Follows It

You may have received a proposed removal, been placed on a PIP, learned that you are under investigation, experienced discrimination or retaliation, or discovered that your agency is questioning your judgment, performance, suitability, or clearance.

Whatever brought you here, the problem may affect far more than your current position. The response you make now can influence your pay, benefits, retirement, professional record, security clearance, and ability to continue serving in government.

National Security Law Firm represents federal employees nationwide in disciplinary, performance, discrimination, whistleblower, investigative, suitability, and related security-clearance matters.

Our attorneys bring experience from government, agency, military, litigation, and defense roles. When one federal problem creates consequences in another system, NSLF can draw on lawyers across related practices to evaluate the complete risk—not only the issue named in the first notice.

We help clients understand what is happening, identify the immediate deadline, decide what record needs to be created, and prepare for the officials who may evaluate that record next.

★★★★★ 4.9 Stars From 300+ Google Reviews

Nationwide Representation · Former Agency and Government Attorneys · Flat-Fee Services Available

Federal Employment Deadlines Can Be Short

Do not assume that an internal discussion, grievance, investigation, or request for reconsideration pauses another filing deadline.

Depending on the matter:

  • a federal employee generally must contact an agency EEO counselor within 45 days of the alleged discriminatory event or the effective date of a challenged personnel action;
  • most MSPB appeals must be filed within 30 calendar days of the action’s effective date or receipt of the agency decision, whichever is later; and
  • a proposed action, investigative request, grievance, accommodation matter, OSC complaint, or other proceeding may follow a different deadline.

The notice, governing procedure, employment status, bargaining agreement, agency, and type of claim may change the analysis. Exceptions may exist, but you should not plan around receiving one.

The exact notice and facts control. If you received a document containing a deadline, preserve it and obtain advice promptly.

Schedule a Consultation and Upload Your Notice

Before You Respond

Until you understand the process and deadline:

  • preserve the complete notice, attachments, emails, policies, and relevant records;
  • identify the exact response or filing date stated in the notice;
  • avoid deleting, modifying, or forwarding restricted government information improperly;
  • do not assume that an informal conversation or internal complaint pauses another deadline;
  • avoid submitting a rushed narrative merely to “get your side on the record”; and
  • do not resign or waive rights before understanding the possible consequences.

These are general precautions, not instructions for every case. The appropriate response depends on the facts, governing process, and lawful handling requirements for the information involved.

★★★★★ “After trying to deal with the matter myself, I was advised by a colleague to reach out to someone who specializes in the field, and boy, am I glad that I did.”

— J.Y., Federal Civilian Employment Client · Google Review

What Are You Facing?

Proposed Removal, Suspension, or Demotion

Your written and oral replies may influence the deciding official, the penalty imposed, the record created, settlement leverage, and any later appeal.

Learn about federal adverse actions

Performance Improvement Plan or Performance Dispute

A PIP, negative appraisal, or performance-based action can create a record that shapes both the immediate decision and later efforts to remove, reassign, or deny advancement.

Learn about federal-employee PIPs

EEO Discrimination, Harassment, or Retaliation

Federal-sector EEO claims have their own administrative process, issue-framing rules, evidentiary requirements, and deadlines.

Learn about federal employment discrimination

Whistleblower Retaliation

The route may involve the Office of Special Counsel, an Inspector General, the MSPB, a negotiated grievance process, or another forum. Choosing and sequencing the available options can matter.

Learn about federal whistleblower strategy

Agency, OIG, OPR, or Management Investigation

An interview, written request for information, or management inquiry may generate evidence later used in discipline, a clearance review, a suitability action, or another proceeding.

Learn about internal agency investigations

Suitability or Security-Clearance Concern

Employment, suitability, and clearance systems may evaluate the same conduct under different standards and through different procedures. A response prepared for one system may later appear in another.

Learn about suitability determinations

Reasonable Accommodation, Medical Documentation, or Leave

Accommodation, leave, attendance, performance, and medical-information disputes frequently overlap. The immediate request should be evaluated with the broader employment record in mind.

Learn about reasonable-accommodation requests

MSPB Appeal or Other Post-Decision Review

After a final decision, the available forum, jurisdiction, claims, and filing deadline require immediate attention. Not every employee or action falls within MSPB jurisdiction.

Learn about MSPB appeals

The First Response May Shape the Rest of the Case

Federal employment cases are built through documents: notices, emails, investigative summaries, performance records, medical submissions, affidavits, written replies, sworn testimony, and agency decisions.

An early response may later be examined by:

  • a supervisor or proposing official;
  • a deciding official;
  • agency counsel;
  • an EEO investigator or administrative judge;
  • the Office of Special Counsel;
  • the Merit Systems Protection Board;
  • a union representative or arbitrator;
  • personnel-security or suitability officials; or
  • another reviewing authority considering the existing record.

That does not mean every matter must become litigation. It means the immediate response should be accurate, strategic, and prepared with the next possible stage in mind.

The objective is not simply to produce the longest submission or make every conceivable allegation. It is to understand the governing process, preserve viable options, develop the evidence, address the agency’s stated rationale, and avoid creating unnecessary problems elsewhere.

Federal Problems Rarely Stay in One Lane

NSLF was structured around the way federal institutions actually operate: several officials may investigate, recommend, advocate, decide, and later review the same record from different perspectives. Effective representation should account for those perspectives and for the possibility that today’s employment response may be reused in another federal process tomorrow.

1. Experience From Inside Government

Members of NSLF’s team have served as government and agency attorneys responsible for advising officials, evaluating evidence, litigating federal matters, and assessing institutional risk.

For example, Aaron Matthes served as a labor and employment attorney in the Defense Health Agency’s Office of General Counsel. In that role, he advised agency leadership and litigated federal employment matters for the agency. He also served as an Army Judge Advocate, military prosecutor, and military defense counsel.

That experience does not create influence over an agency or guarantee a result. Its value is perspective: understanding how agency officials and counsel may analyze the record, identify weaknesses, evaluate risk, and defend a personnel decision.

2. Several Perspectives on One Federal Record

NSLF’s broader team includes former government decision-makers, agency attorneys, prosecutors, defense counsel, military lawyers, intelligence-law attorneys, and experienced federal litigators.

Depending on the matter and scope of representation, those perspectives can help the legal team ask:

  • What evidence would agency counsel use to defend this action?
  • What would a deciding official need in the record to change or mitigate the proposed outcome?
  • Which statements may later be challenged as inconsistent?
  • Could the response create a separate clearance, suitability, military, or investigative concern?
  • What will a judge, board, arbitrator, or appellate reviewer be permitted to consider later?

3. Coordination Across Related Federal Systems

The same facts can migrate across proceedings.

A misconduct response may later be reviewed in a security-clearance investigation. A medical-documentation dispute may develop into an accommodation, leave, performance, or removal case. A whistleblower disclosure may be followed by a PIP, investigation, access decision, or suitability concern. An off-duty allegation may affect employment, clearance eligibility, professional credentials, or military status.

NSLF’s federal employment, security-clearance, military, and related federal practices allow the firm to identify those intersections and coordinate advice when the engagement requires it.

4. Collaboration Without an Hourly Disincentive

Traditional hourly billing can make clients reluctant to ask necessary questions and can make multi-attorney collaboration expensive. NSLF offers flat or otherwise defined fees for many services so the scope and cost are explained in advance.

Appropriate significant issues may also receive collaborative consideration through the federal-employment team or NSLF’s Attorney Review Board, depending on the matter and written scope of representation.

Not every matter requires several attorneys, and Review Board consideration is not promised in every engagement. The advantage is structural: when another informed perspective is warranted and included, the firm has attorneys across relevant federal practices who can contribute without treating collaboration as an afterthought.

5. Serious Advocacy With a Human Approach

A federal employment case can affect a client’s income, identity, health, family, and future. Clients need more than technical filings. They need lawyers who listen, explain what is happening, give honest advice, and remain focused on the client’s priorities while the case moves through an unfamiliar system.

NSLF’s client reviews repeatedly identify responsiveness, clarity, preparation, and compassion—not only legal knowledge. Those qualities matter because a client who understands the strategy can make better decisions, gather better evidence, and participate more effectively in the representation.

Federal Employment Matters NSLF Handles

Adverse Actions and Discipline

  • proposed removals;
  • proposed suspensions and indefinite suspensions;
  • demotions and reductions in grade or pay;
  • reprimands and other disciplinary actions;
  • misconduct charges, including lack of candor, insubordination, AWOL, failure to follow instructions, and conduct unbecoming;
  • Douglas-factor and penalty-mitigation arguments;
  • oral and written replies to proposed actions; and
  • settlement and resolution strategy.

Performance and Career Actions

  • Performance Improvement Plans;
  • performance-based removals under Chapter 43;
  • performance or conduct actions under Chapter 75;
  • negative or retaliatory appraisals;
  • within-grade increase denials;
  • promotion, nonselection, and preselection disputes; and
  • classification and related career issues where representation is available.

EEO and Workplace Rights

  • discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability, genetic information, pregnancy, sexual orientation, or gender identity;
  • retaliation for EEO activity;
  • hostile-work-environment and harassment allegations;
  • reasonable accommodations;
  • religious accommodations;
  • medical-documentation disputes;
  • leave-related issues connected to disability or protected activity; and
  • federal-sector EEO counseling, complaints, investigations, hearings, and appeals where representation is offered.

Whistleblower and Prohibited Personnel Practices

  • whistleblower retaliation;
  • complaints to the Office of Special Counsel;
  • Inspector General disclosures;
  • prohibited personnel practices;
  • Individual Right of Action appeals;
  • retaliation through investigations, performance actions, discipline, or nonselection; and
  • strategic evaluation of overlapping EEO, grievance, MSPB, and OSC routes.

Investigations and Administrative Inquiries

  • OIG, OPR, AIB, management, and internal investigations;
  • investigative interviews and written requests for comment;
  • Garrity, Kalkines, and representation issues;
  • evidence-preservation and response strategy;
  • allegations involving off-duty conduct, social media, misuse of government systems, or security violations; and
  • matters that may create related criminal, clearance, suitability, or professional consequences.

MSPB and Other Federal Forums

  • MSPB appeals, where the Board has jurisdiction;
  • mixed cases involving appealable personnel actions and discrimination claims;
  • petitions for review and related appellate strategy;
  • negotiated grievances and arbitration where undertaken by the firm;
  • EEO administrative proceedings; and
  • settlement negotiations and alternative dispute resolution.

Suitability, Clearance, and Related Employment Consequences

  • suitability and fitness determinations;
  • employment actions arising from suspended or revoked access;
  • coordination between employment and security-clearance responses;
  • alleged lack of candor or inconsistent government disclosures;
  • medical fitness and return-to-work disputes; and
  • disciplinary matters with collateral credentialing or clearance consequences.

Representation depends on the facts, forum, deadline, attorney availability, and the scope the firm agrees to undertake.

What Our Representation Is Designed to Accomplish

Every case has different facts, procedures, available remedies, and client priorities. No lawyer can promise a particular result.

Depending on the matter, a strategy may seek to:

  • prevent or reduce a proposed penalty;
  • preserve employment and appeal rights;
  • correct an inaccurate or incomplete record;
  • challenge unsupported charges or performance allegations;
  • obtain reasonable accommodation or other workplace relief;
  • establish discrimination, retaliation, or a prohibited personnel practice;
  • protect pay, benefits, retirement interests, or future employability;
  • reduce collateral security-clearance or suitability risk;
  • negotiate a workable resolution or strategic exit; or
  • prepare the record for a hearing, appeal, or later review.

The right objective is the one supported by the law, the evidence, the available forum, and the client’s informed priorities—not a predetermined promise made before the record is understood.

How the Representation Process Works

Step 1: Schedule a Free Consultation

Tell us what happened, identify the agency and employment status, and provide the exact deadline. If you received a notice, decision, PIP, investigative request, or other important document, upload it before the consultation when possible.

Step 2: Identify the Procedural Stage and Immediate Risk

The consultation focuses on where the matter stands, what deadlines may apply, which forum or process may govern, and whether NSLF offers an appropriate service.

A consultation does not create an attorney-client relationship or mean the firm has accepted the matter.

Step 3: Receive a Defined Scope and Fee

If NSLF offers representation, the written engagement agreement will identify the services included, the fee, important exclusions, and the responsibilities of both the firm and client.

Step 4: Preserve the Record and Build the Strategy

The legal team evaluates the available notice, evidence, communications, policies, prior filings, and client objectives. The work may include identifying missing evidence, developing the response, preparing witnesses or the client, assessing forum and jurisdiction, and evaluating related consequences.

Step 5: Respond, Negotiate, or Litigate

The next step depends on the engagement. It may involve a written or oral reply, investigative preparation, EEO filing, OSC submission, grievance, settlement negotiations, MSPB appeal, hearing, or another authorized form of advocacy.

Step 6: Evaluate the Next Decision in Context

If the agency acts, settles, changes course, or issues a decision, the legal team evaluates the remaining options within the scope of representation and explains whether a separate or expanded engagement may be required.

What Federal Employment Clients Say

★★★★★ “I Finally Felt Like I Had a Fighting Chance”

“When I first got the notice from my agency questioning my suitability, I felt like my entire career was about to collapse. . . . It wasn’t until I found the National Security Law Firm that I felt truly seen and heard. Reading through their attorney bios, I realized they had deep experience with DHS and cases like mine. From the very beginning, they made me feel supported, and I finally felt like I had a fighting chance.”

“My attorney, Danielle Moora, was incredibly generous with her time and responsive at every step. She helped me navigate the process, kept me focused on the strategy, and made sure my voice was heard. Recently, I got the news: I was found suitable.”

— J.R., Google Review

Read This Review on Google →

★★★★★ “The Reply Was Extensive and Methodically Thought Out”

“Danielle and her paralegal, Alicia McCray, were essential in keeping my peace of mind and my composure during this battle. I received a complete list of everything that would be needed within the first day after I retained their services to ensure the best possible outcome.”

“The reply to my agency was extensive and methodically thought out; it was impressive. Nothing was missing. . . . I felt well prepared and at ease once the response process was completed. When my agency made their decision that was in my favor, Danielle gave me a call to deliver the good news.”

— C.M., Google Review

Read This Review on Google →

★★★★★ “Clear and Consistent at Every Stage”

“John communicated with me clearly and consistently at every stage of the case. His responsiveness and ability to explain complex legal matters in a way that was both understandable and reassuring made a significant difference in my experience.”

— A.O., Google Review

Read This Review on Google →

★★★★★ “We Were Able to Get It Overturned”

“I like to say thanks to the national security law firm they helped me through a very difficult time when i lost my suitability I thought all was lost, but thanks to them we were able to get it overturned and never been more grateful.”

— J.S., Google Review

Read This Review on Google →

★★★★★ “Professional, Thorough, and Very Kind”

“Thank you to Aaron Matthes for taking over for another attorney on a very sensitive case and achieving a favorable outcome for me. He was professional, thorough, and very kind. Mr. Matthes communicated with me every step of the way putting me at ease. I am grateful.”

— M.T., Google Review

Read This Review on Google →

★★★★★ “10/10”

“10/10 Aaron M and the rest of the team at National Security Law Firm were very helpful in resolving my situation.”

— T.B., Google Review

Read This Review on Google →

These reviews describe individual client experiences. Prior results and reviews do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Read More Client Reviews and Results

Clear Scope, Defined Fees, and Payment Options

NSLF offers flat or otherwise defined fees for many federal-employment services. The amount depends on the type of matter, procedural stage, urgency, volume of material, hearing requirements, and work the firm agrees to perform.

If representation is offered, you will receive a written engagement agreement explaining:

  • the work included;
  • important exclusions;
  • the legal fee and payment requirements;
  • the client’s responsibilities; and
  • whether later stages require a separate agreement.

Eligible clients may also apply for third-party legal-fee financing through Pay Later by Affirm, available through LawPay. Approval and financing terms are determined by Affirm and its lending partners, not by NSLF.

Learn About Payment Options and Legal Fee Financing

Frequently Asked Questions About Federal Employment Representation

When should I contact a federal employment lawyer?

Contact counsel as soon as you receive a proposed action, PIP, investigative request, final decision, accommodation denial, EEO notice, or other document that may affect your rights. Early advice may preserve options and help prevent an avoidable statement or filing error. Do not assume that a supervisor, EEO counselor, union representative, HR specialist, or agency attorney is tracking every deadline that may apply to you.

Do I need to wait for a final agency decision?

Not necessarily. Important opportunities may arise before the agency makes a final decision, including responding to proposed discipline, preserving evidence, preparing for an interview, seeking accommodation, initiating EEO counseling, or correcting the record. The appropriate timing depends on the matter.

Can NSLF represent federal employees nationwide?

NSLF represents federal employees throughout the United States and, where permitted, overseas. Many federal administrative matters can be handled remotely. Whether the firm may accept a particular matter depends on the forum, attorney authorization, facts, deadline, and scope of representation.

Does every federal employee have MSPB appeal rights?

No. MSPB jurisdiction depends on both the personnel action and the employee’s status. Some employees, positions, agencies, and actions are excluded or governed by different procedures. A final agency notice may identify appeal rights, but jurisdiction should be evaluated rather than assumed.

How long do I have to contact an EEO counselor?

A federal employee or applicant generally must contact an agency EEO counselor within 45 days of the alleged discriminatory event. If the complaint concerns a personnel action, the period generally runs from its effective date. Exceptions may apply in limited circumstances, but prompt action is safer.

How long do I have to file an MSPB appeal?

Most MSPB appeals must be filed within 30 calendar days after the action’s effective date or receipt of the agency decision, whichever is later. Different rules may apply to certain matters, and MSPB jurisdiction is not automatic.

Can my employment response affect my security clearance?

Yes. Statements concerning conduct, finances, drug or alcohol use, foreign contacts, judgment, candor, security practices, or other matters may later be examined in a clearance or suitability process. That does not mean an employment response should be withheld. It means the response should be accurate and evaluated for foreseeable consequences across systems.

Should I resign before responding to a proposed removal or PIP?

Do not make that decision based on fear or an assumption that resignation will erase the existing record. Resignation may affect appeal rights, benefits, the personnel record, future applications, and negotiating leverage. Obtain advice about the specific notice and your objectives before deciding when possible.

Can a lawyer guarantee that I will keep my job or win an appeal?

No. Outcomes depend on the evidence, legal standards, jurisdiction, decision-maker, procedural history, available remedies, and facts that may emerge later. NSLF can evaluate the case, explain risks and options, develop the record, and advocate for the best available outcome, but it cannot guarantee a government decision.

Will my case be handled by several attorneys?

Your engagement agreement will identify the scope and responsible legal team. Some matters benefit from collaboration or review by another attorney; others are best handled primarily by one attorney and supporting staff. NSLF does not promise Review Board consideration or multiple-attorney involvement in every matter.

Is the consultation confidential?

Information provided for the purpose of seeking legal advice is handled in accordance with applicable professional obligations, but scheduling a consultation does not itself establish an attorney-client relationship. Do not send classified information through the website, ordinary email, or an unapproved system.

Federal Employment Resources

If you are still identifying the issue, begin with the category closest to your situation:

Adverse Actions and Discipline

PIPs and Performance

Investigations and Misconduct

EEO and Accommodation

Whistleblower Retaliation

Suitability and Security Clearances

Visit the Federal Employment Resource Center

Official Federal Employment Resources

Government resources provide general procedural information. They do not evaluate your individual facts, determine which claims or forum are best for you, or create an attorney-client relationship.

Protect the Record Before the Next Decision Is Made

You do not need to understand every federal employment statute, forum, or procedural route before asking for help.

Start with the document in front of you, the event that occurred, the outcome you want, and the deadline you were given. NSLF can evaluate whether the firm offers an appropriate service and explain the proposed scope and fee before you decide whether to proceed.

★★★★★ 4.9 Stars From 300+ Google Reviews

America’s Federal Law Firm.

Contacting National Security Law Firm does not create an attorney-client relationship. Do not send classified information through the website or ordinary email. The written engagement agreement controls the scope of any representation. No outcome is guaranteed.

Reviewed by Katherine O’Brien · Updated September 2026

SECURITY CLEARANCE DENIED OR REVOKED

If you are appealing a security clearance determination, it is imperative that you obtain experienced legal representation. Doing so will provide you with the best opportunity to obtain or maintain your clearance.

Click Here For a No Obligation, Always Confidential Consultation