Take On the U.S. Federal Workforce Reductions

The Trump admin second term has started with fireworks all over the place. It is a shock of a news item everyday so much so that people have habituated to take these as normal. I can make a daily post on these fireworks or misfires everyday but that should not be the case. A prime example is Trump along with his men having UFC fight with Zelensky in white house. What did poor Ukraine do when Russia is the aggressor and started the war. This is a major American dialogue shift which has been supporting the war-ravaged Ukraine till now. The increased tariffs on trade partner countries is another controversial policy underway. While there may be questionable directives one thing which is not questionable is the high performance of the government. The election and appointment of leaders to different departments is a big lesson for anyone watching the saga. At the same time, while we cannot criticize an infant government which is 2 months old, there can be a case where damage can be done in the little time as well. One such policy is large scale layoffs of federal workers. It has been reported that there are over 1,00,000 federal employees who have been laid off or terminated as part of workforce reductions. This is a shocking move underway to lay off government employees by tens of thousands. If government job isn’t safe then which job is secure in this country. As a job worker, it concerns me when there is a mass layoff of this scale because of seemingly hard feelings for working federal employees. Coming from the same category as a job-dependent and depending on a country for my job, will I end up on the losing side in the future is a question which is haunting me. The terminations will sometime reach me, reach you and reach anyone who desperately needs a job for a salary. 

Leaving this aside, by principle, government employees are untouchables. They should not be touched under any circumstance, for they are running the nation and every vulnerable citizen in the country depends on them when they power the ruling government. If the government doesn’t protect its own employees, how can the government safeguard the private citizens and the nation at large. The inner circle should be strengthened and secured to run a well-oiled government machinery. If this inner circle is first taken care of, then we can think about doing something to those sitting on the fences and outside the circle. We cannot break the branch we are sitting upon and expect everything to run smoothly. The struggle of any head of a government should be to care for its larger family of government employees. This is the basic tenet and expectation which shouldn’t be overlooked by any strong leader. It is simply to struggle and keeping your family happy and not take them out of equation. If possible, you can increase the number of employees you care for and take pride in that but not resort to lowest form of removing them from jobs. Even the private sector struggle to keep the government, its employees and the nation afloat. The federal employees should be the last line of defense and not the first. All these principles have been violated in the first few months when over a lakh employees are laid off signaling extraordinary times. The reason for removal is known to no one but given as a namesake performance in some cases. 

 

I will go into the details of what had transpired over the past few months in the U.S. regarding the feared job cuts. In his second term, President Trump has undertaken significant measures to reduce the federal workforce, aligning with his longstanding commitment to decrease the size and scope of the federal government. These actions encompass a comprehensive hiring freeze, the reintroduction of Schedule F, substantial budget cuts to specific agencies, and the establishment of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).  

Shortly after his inauguration in January 2025, President Trump implemented a hiring freeze across all federal agencies. This immediate action was intended to curtail government expansion and assess existing personnel structures. Concurrently, the administration moved to reintroduce Schedule F, a workforce designation initially proposed during his first term. Schedule F reclassifies federal employees in policymaking positions, effectively removing certain civil service protections and making it easier to terminate or replace these individuals. The administration justified this move as a means to enhance accountability and ensure that federal employees are more closely aligned with the administration's agenda. 

In a bold move to streamline government operations, the President signed an executive order creating the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) in early 2025. Appointed to lead this initiative was a prominent entrepreneur known for his focus on efficiency and innovation. DOGE's mandate includes identifying and eliminating wasteful spending, restructuring agencies, and implementing large-scale workforce reductions. The administration set an ambitious goal of reducing federal spending by up to $2 trillion. However, these rapid changes have led to the termination of approximately 77,000 federal employees and the cancellation of numerous contracts, sparking legal challenges and public unrest. 

The job cuts have taken place across different departments. Approximately 5,200 probationary employees at HHS received termination notices. Notably, around 1,300 staff members from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and others from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) were affected. The administration also terminated dozens of researchers at a leading Alzheimer's research center under the NIH, raising concerns about potential setbacks in critical advancements in dementia treatment and ongoing clinical trials. 

The IRS initiated the termination of approximately 6,000 to 7,000 probationary employees—those with less than one to two years of service. These layoffs, occurring during the peak tax-filing season, have raised concerns about potential delays in tax return processing, reduced customer service, and diminished enforcement capabilities. Additionally, the administration plans to reassign some IRS employees to the Department of Homeland Security for immigration enforcement, further straining the agency's resources. 

The Department of Education implemented workforce reductions, including layoffs at the Office for Civil Rights, which investigates discrimination complaints in schools. These cuts have raised concerns about the department's capacity to address civil rights issues effectively. 

The administration has worked to shut down USAID, affecting nearly all of its roughly 10,000 employees. This move has raised concerns about the U.S.'s ability to provide foreign aid and support international development projects. Critics argue that these reductions undermine the United States' ability to promote democracy and provide humanitarian assistance globally. The CFPB faced mass layoffs that threatened to cut up to 95% of its workforce—approximately 1,750 employees. Reports indicated that between 70 and 100 term employees had already been dismissed as part of this purge. These reductions have sparked concerns about the bureau's ability to protect consumers in the financial sector. 

The workforce reductions have had notable economic and social impacts, particularly in Washington D.C., where a significant portion of the population is employed by the federal government. The city's unemployment rates have risen due to these cuts, leading to increased economic uncertainty among residents. Additionally, cultural institutions such as the Kennedy Center have experienced substantial changes, including leadership overhauls and reduced funding, resulting in canceled shows and decreased ticket sales. These developments have contributed to a pervasive sense of insecurity and concern among Washingtonians about the future of their city. 

The second-term agenda has brought about significant reductions in the federal workforce, driven by a philosophy of decreasing government size and increasing efficiency. While supporters argue that these measures are necessary to eliminate wasteful spending and promote accountability, critics contend that the rapid and extensive cuts undermine essential government functions and erode the stability of the civil service. The ongoing legal battles and public backlash highlight the contentious nature of these reforms and underscore the complex balance between governmental efficiency and the preservation of a competent, impartial federal workforce. We should not mess up with the government workforce and if possible, increase hiring to bolster the very functioning of the government. A worker alone knows the fears of another worker, and this isn't the time to make those fears come alive.