PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 17 · Reported to House with amendment(s) · Apr 25, 2016
Administrative Leave Reform Act
(Sec. 2) This bill prohibits placing a federal employee on administrative leave, or any other paid non-duty status without charge to leave, for more than 14 total days for reasons relating to misconduct or performance.
After an employee has been placed on administrative leave for 14 days, the employing agency: (1) shall return the employee to duty status, utilizing telework if available, and assign the employee to duties if such employee is not a threat to safety, the agency mission, or government property; or (2) may place an employee who is determined to be such a threat on extended administrative leave for additional periods of not more than 30 days each.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
For any additional period of 30 days granted to the employee after the initial 30-day extension, the agency shall submit a report containing:
the name, title, position, office or agency subcomponent, job series, pay grade, and salary of the employee;
a description of the employee's work duties;
the reason for the administrative leave;
an explanation as to why the employee is such a threat;
an explanation as to why the employee is not able to telework or be reassigned to another position within the agency;
the status of any pending related investigation and a certification that such additional time is needed; and
the results of a completed investigation and the reason that the employee remains on administrative leave.
An investigative entity must certify to the applicable agency that such additional time is needed and include an estimate of the length of such additional time.
An agency may not grant such additional period of administrative leave to an employee on or after 30 days following the completion of a related investigation.
People & committees
Rep. Chaffetz, Jason [R-UT-3] · R–UT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H1981)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H1981)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 4359.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H1981-1983)
Mr. Chaffetz moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 400.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. H. Rept. 114-520.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. H. Rept. 114-520.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.4359 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.4359 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.4359 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.4359 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.