The Trump administration is aggressively pushing to overhaul the federal bureaucracy by demanding significant workforce cuts, including closing offices and relocating employees from Washington. Agencies must submit consolidation plans by March 13 and relocation proposals by April 14. Experts warn the short timeline for strategic planning is unrealistic and could lead to chaos, while employees express uncertainty about job security. Labor unions are pushing back against potential violations of reduction rules. Despite the chaos, Trump claims success in cutting government costs, though details are often unclear, raising concerns over the impact on essential services.
The Trump administration has initiated a new, more intense effort to reform the federal bureaucracy, insisting that agencies devise plans for significant workforce reductions, which include shutting down offices and relocating employees from the Washington area.
Agencies are required to submit a comprehensive list of divisions earmarked for consolidation or elimination by March 13, as stated in a recent memo from the Office of Personnel Management and the Office of Management and Budget. This directive is part of a “reduction in force” process mandated by President Trump and largely driven by Elon Musk, a billionaire now serving as a key adviser.
By April 14, agencies are expected to provide updated organizational charts and all proposals for moving offices in the Washington area to regions with a lower cost of living, according to the memo. Agencies should be ready to implement this segment of the plan by the end of September.
Executing these directives would be a monumental task for government agencies under any conditions. However, experts caution that achieving this legally within such a tight timeframe is likely unattainable.
“No agency can create a legitimate strategic plan in the next two weeks,” remarked Donald F. Kettl, a professor emeritus and former dean at the University of Maryland’s School of Public Policy. “They need to determine their objectives and the best methods to achieve them before recklessly slashing jobs.”
The government is anticipated to adhere to specific guidelines during these reductions in workforce. For instance, employees are entitled to a 60-day notice, according to Kevin Owen, an employment lawyer with Gilbert Employment Law. (The recent White House guidance indicated that agencies could request an exception to provide only 30 days’ notice.)
Moreover, each division implementing these cuts is required to establish an “RIF” registry, ranking employees based on service, performance evaluations, and veteran status, Mr. Owen stated. Additionally, the government is expected to seek alternative employment within the agency for the highest-ranking employees.
“The primary aim of the RIF process is to retain the most qualified employees while reducing job numbers,” Mr. Owen explained.
Mr. Trump outlined this aggressive timeline for federal workforce downsizing in an executive order earlier this month, resulting in thousands of terminations. Most of those dismissed were in probationary roles or held positions created for diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives that were subsequently abolished.
No administration has attempted to diminish the federal workforce on such a vast scale and within such a brief timeframe. Since Mr. Trump took office, federal employees have been enveloped in confusion, shock, and apprehension, with the latest memo increasing the dread associated with checking emails.
A nurse at a Veterans Affairs hospital expressed the pervasive uncertainty among staff. They and their colleagues are unsure whether they should seek new employment, and their supervisors are unable to provide guidance. Patients at the facility are inquiring about the potential closure of the hospital, said the nurse, who requested anonymity for fear of retribution.
A mother employed at the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation—who is her family’s primary provider—is unsure how much longer she can maintain her job and, by extension, health insurance. She, too, opted for anonymity due to fear of government retaliation, interpreting the administration’s objectives as inflicting trauma.
“If it weren’t so tragic, it would be laughable,” said Alma Aliaj, a former employee of the U.S. Agency for International Development, who was recently terminated twice.
On Sunday, Ms. Aliaj received notification that she was considered an essential employee and expected to continue working. However, by Monday morning, she received an email stating her position would be eliminated as part of a reduction in force, citing an inaccurate salary. A few hours later, she was informed that her termination was due to her probationary status.
“The level of disarray and lack of planning cannot be overstated,” she stated.
Prior to the new guidelines for reductions in force that were sent on Wednesday, some agencies had already begun disseminating their plans to employees. Other departments seemed to be taking preliminary steps to comply with the Trump administration’s mandates, including evaluating office closures and ending leases.
The new FBI director, Kash Patel, has devised plans to transfer 1,000 agents from the Washington area to various regions across the country. He also aims to relocate another 500 support staff members, the majority of whom are currently located in Washington, to an FBI campus in Huntsville, Alabama.
Labor unions representing federal employees have strongly opposed several of the proposed changes, arguing that the Trump administration is disregarding the established rules governing workforce reductions.
On Monday, officials from the Department of Housing and Urban Development notified employees of impending cuts—144 in the first round, all originating from the Office of Field Policy and Management, which acts as the primary liaison for local communities.
“HUD has adhered to virtually none of the contractual or legal obligations associated with a RIF,” stated Ashaki Robinson, a regional president at the Washington locale of the American Federation of Government Employees union. “They provided us solely with a list of names, the offices where they work, and referenced the executive order as justification for the RIF.”
For Mr. Trump, the contraction of the federal government is proceeding smoothly.
“We have saved billions and billions and billions of dollars,” Mr. Trump asserted during his initial cabinet meeting on Wednesday. “We aim to potentially reach a trillion dollars.”
Mr. Trump did not present evidence to support the “billions of dollars” he mentioned. The efforts undertaken by Mr. Musk’s so-called Department of Government Efficiency, which is also responsible for cutting various programs and government contracts in what his administration has termed a cost-saving initiative, have been largely opaque. Its only public ledger, which claims millions in savings thus far, contains numerous inaccuracies. Moreover, there have been several instances where the apparent urgency with which the Trump administration has aimed to terminate contracts and grants has led to the elimination of vital programs, including critical funding intended to curb Ebola outbreaks.
Mr. Musk acknowledged this as an oversight.