A federal judge is set to evaluate the Trump administration's contentious offer of mass buyouts for U.S. government employees on Monday. The proposal, which affects over two million federal workers, has sparked legal challenges and opposition from unions and Democratic leaders. The deadline for employees to decide on the offer was recently extended, allowing more time for legal proceedings.
The "deferred resignation" program provides eight months of severance pay and benefits to those who opt to leave their positions. However, employees who choose to remain face new job conditions, including a mandatory five-day office workweek. This program, which has been offered to nearly all civilian federal workers, has already seen 65,000 acceptances since its announcement on January 29.
Concerns over the program's legality have arisen, leading to a lawsuit spearheaded by federal workers' unions. The case, which will be heard by U.S. District Judge George O'Toole in Boston, argues that the buyout initiative is unlawful as it lacks Congressional approval. Democratic attorneys general, led by New York Attorney General Letitia James, have urged federal employees to reject the offer, labeling it "misleading."
"President Trump’s so-called buyout offers are nothing more than the latest attack on federal workers and the services they provide," stated Letitia James.
In response to the legal challenges, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) announced an extension of the deadline for accepting the program. This move was made following a judge's order, temporarily pausing the initial deadline to allow for further legal briefings.
Everett Kelley, president of the American Federation of Government Employees, has been outspoken in his criticism of the program.
"It’s a scam and not a buyout," he asserted.
Despite the controversy, the OPM maintains that the program remains active.
"The program is NOT being blocked or canceled," assured an OPM spokesperson.
The lawsuit has prompted Democrats and union leaders to advise caution among federal workers, raising doubts about the administration's ability to honor its commitments under the program. As the legal battle unfolds, the judge's decision will be pivotal in determining the future of this significant workforce initiative.