The Trump administration has issued a directive calling for plans to significantly reduce the federal workforce, with officials required to submit proposals by March 13. This move reflects the administration’s ongoing efforts to streamline government operations, which have already led to funding freezes, contract cuts, and numerous firings. The Office of Special Counsel (OSC) has found some of these terminations unlawful, adding to the growing unrest among federal employees.
The federal workforce, particularly those in roles related to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), and accessibility, has faced intensified scrutiny. In recent developments, nearly 25,000 probationary employees were dismissed out of more than 220,000, further destabilizing the workforce. The Department of Defense issued a memo mandating the dismissal of transgender military personnel, affecting approximately 15,000 service members.
Federal hiring during Trump's first term typically ranged from 30,000 to 40,000 workers monthly. However, the administration's recent hiring freeze has impacted many who had already applied, interviewed, and accepted positions. The Merit Systems Protection Board has temporarily halted the dismissal of six employees as the OSC explores broader protective measures.
OMB Director Russell Vought has been instrumental in advocating for Project 2025, a plan aimed at reducing federal employment. Labor attorney Suzanne Summerlin warns that these policies could be "dangerous to Americans," emphasizing the critical role of federal agencies established by Congress in response to public harm.
“These are scary times we’re living in that this man [Trump] just willfully does whatever he wants,” Loungway stated.
The American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) President Everett Kelley expressed concern over the administration's approach.
“This administration has targeted every single federal worker and does not seem to care how much turmoil they cause for either the employees or the American public. The chaos is the point,” Kelley remarked.
Despite assertions of fiscal responsibility, experts argue these measures will not lead to significant taxpayer savings. Instead, they may increase costs as vital government functions are outsourced to private contractors.
“What it will not do is result in any discernible savings for taxpayers – in fact, taxpayers likely will end up paying more as the essential work our government does is sold off to private, for-profit contractors,” Kelley added.
Within the National Archives in Washington D.C., a current federal employee voiced concerns about potential repercussions on essential services.
“Most of these changes are not only going to harm federal employees, but also everyone else who lives in the US,” the employee stated.
The employee further highlighted possible disruptions in critical operations such as processing tax returns and healthcare services for veterans.
“It’s going to severely interrupt operations like getting tax returns, serving healthcare to veterans, receiving subsidies that often benefit people who run farms and so much more,” they explained.
Mal Loungway emphasized that existing laws already mandate federal agencies to promote diversity.
“Everything that this president has been complaining about is already codified into the law, and required agencies are supposed to be doing things to ensure that the federal government reflects the diversity of the country,” Loungway said.
Loungway also expressed concerns about the broad legal immunity claimed by the administration.
“And the fact is, he essentially gets to because the supreme court said that he could. That is where I think this is going to run into a lot of issues, because he’s just going to keep pointing back to ‘Oh well, my bad. But I have immunity,’” they noted.
“Each of these agencies exists because bad actors, whether corporations, financial institutions or government negligence, put the public at large at risk,” Summerlin emphasized.
The dismantling of these agencies could lead to repeating past problems that necessitated their creation.
“Dismantling them means repeating the same history of harm,” Summerlin concluded.