A federal government career does not preclude an individual from having an outside job, but secondary employment is subject to rigorous ethical oversight. Taking on a second job requires careful consideration of the government’s strict standards, which ensure public trust and prevent conflicts of interest. While outside activities are permissible, the rules vary based on an employee’s specific agency, position, and the nature of the proposed work.
The Foundation: Can Federal Employees Hold a Second Job?
Outside employment is permitted for federal employees provided it does not conflict with their official duties or violate established ethical standards. The primary regulatory framework is the Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the Executive Branch (5 C.F.R. Part 2635). This framework allows employees to pursue outside work, compensated or uncompensated, as long as it maintains the integrity of the public service. Employees must avoid any activity that creates a conflict of interest or could be perceived as undermining their ability to perform government duties impartially. Agencies often impose supplemental regulations with specific restrictions based on their unique missions.
Identifying Conflicts of Interest
Federal law strictly prohibits employees from participating personally and substantially in a government matter that directly affects their own financial interests or the financial interests of certain associated parties. This prohibition, rooted in the criminal conflict of interest statute (18 U.S.C. § 208), ensures official decisions are made solely in the public’s interest. A “particular matter” includes contracts, claims, controversies, or requests for rulings involving specific parties. The prohibition extends to financial interests held by a spouse, minor child, general partner, an organization where the employee serves as an officer, or any person with whom the employee is negotiating for future employment.
A conflict of interest exists even when an activity creates the appearance that the employee’s impartiality could be questioned by a reasonable person. For instance, a regulator working for a company overseen by their agency could create a problematic appearance. Outside employment is also prohibited if it requires the employee to be disqualified from matters so central to their official duties that it materially impairs their ability to carry out their government job. Many agencies require prior written approval for any outside work with a “prohibited source.” A prohibited source is defined as any person or organization that seeks official action from, does business with, or is regulated by the employee’s agency.
Restrictions on Using Government Resources and Title
Federal ethics rules prohibit using a public office for private gain, including the improper use of government resources and one’s official title. Employees may not use their official position or authority to coerce others, endorse any product or service, or create the appearance of governmental sanction for personal activities. Using one’s federal title in connection with outside employment or fundraising is generally prohibited, as it implies government endorsement.
Employees must protect and conserve federal property; government-owned resources cannot be used for a second job. Prohibited resources include official time, government computers, phones, copiers, and office supplies. While minimal personal use of government equipment is sometimes allowed on personal time, this does not extend to conducting outside business. Furthermore, employees cannot use nonpublic government information—data not available to the public—to further their own private interests or the interests of any outside employer.
The Required Ethics Review and Approval Process
Seeking approval before accepting outside employment is a mandatory procedural step for many federal employees, particularly those who file financial disclosure reports. Employees required to file either the public (SF 278) or confidential (OGE Form 450) report must obtain written approval prior to engaging in outside employment. This requirement is often established through agency-specific supplemental regulations.
The process begins with the employee submitting a written request to their supervisor within a reasonable time before the proposed start date. The request must include specific details: the employee’s official position, the name and address of the outside employer, and a full description of the duties to be performed. The supervisor reviews the request and forwards it through internal channels to the Designated Agency Ethics Official (DAEO) or their designee.
The DAEO reviews the proposed outside employment against all applicable statutes and regulations, including the Standards of Ethical Conduct, to ensure no prohibited conduct is anticipated. If the nature of the outside employment or the employee’s official duties change significantly after approval, the employee must submit a revised request. Failure to seek or obtain the required written pre-approval is itself an ethics violation, regardless of whether the activity ultimately posed a conflict.
Specific Employment Situations Requiring Extra Caution
Certain types of outside activities carry inherent risks and frequently face specific limitations or prohibitions. Serving on a corporate board of directors often requires special approval and intense scrutiny, particularly if the entity is a prohibited source or has interests affected by the employee’s agency. Engaging in compensated teaching, speaking, or writing related to one’s official duties is also highly restricted. This often requires prior notification and approval, and sometimes a disclaimer stating the views are personal and not those of the government.
Political activity is governed by the Hatch Act, which restricts federal employees’ involvement in partisan politics. Most employees are “less restricted” and may engage in partisan political campaigns off-duty and outside the federal workplace. However, they can never use their official authority to influence an election or solicit political contributions. Employees in sensitive positions, such as the Senior Executive Service or specific law enforcement divisions, are “further restricted” and cannot actively manage or participate in partisan political campaigns, even on personal time.
Consequences of Failing to Disclose or Comply
Violating federal ethics laws and regulations can lead to serious disciplinary and criminal consequences. Administrative actions include reprimand, suspension without pay, demotion, or termination from federal service. Cases involving criminal conflict of interest statutes (18 U.S.C. § 208) may result in severe penalties, including fines of up to $100,000 and imprisonment for up to one year.
The seriousness of the consequences underscores the need for proactive disclosure and adherence to the approval process. For instance, violating the Hatch Act can result in removal from federal employment. Civil penalties, which do not always require a finding of willful intent, can also be assessed for certain violations of the Ethics in Government Act, sometimes reaching $10,000 or more per violation.