After the deployment at random Tuesday of a plan, the White House claimed to offer “takeovers” to almost all of the federal workforce, but ultimately resembled a prolonged paid leave before leaving the government, groups of Federal employees, Democratic legislators and good government experts warning the federal workers not to respond to the email of the “deferred resignation” of the Trump administration.
Under the terms of the offer, if a federal employee decides to resign by February 6, he can keep his salary and his current benefits until September 30. Although federal regulations have the redemptions by the buyouts through the payment program for voluntary separation at $ 25,000, the administration seems to be bypassing this by asking agencies to place employees resigning on administrative leave paid for the rest of the financial year .
Tuesday morning, a consensus emerged among the unions and other federal associations for employees: do not conclude the agreement. Between the questionable legal authority to grant deferred resignations, the lack of guarantee that the resignation of an employee will be accepted and that their salary and their advantages will really continue, and the participation of Elon Musk and the history with efforts From mass resignation, the federals should have come, they say.
“At the moment, we have more questions than answers on this email and the” Delayed resignation program “, reads an email from Matt Biggs, president of the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers at the premises . “We do not know any underlying policy or any authority under which OPM offers a” deferred resignation “. We ask you. . . To say (negotiating the employees of the unit) not to “resign” and to accept the terms of the “deferred resignation program”. »»
In a compiled FAQ for members, the American Federation of Government employees warned of the potential gaps that the administration could exploit to avoid paying the employees who accepted the resignation offer.
“Nothing in the documentation of the program pretends to prohibit the termination or separation of an employee who accepts the resignation of resignation,” wrote the union. “Although the OPM email suggests that the employees will maintain their compensation and their benefits until the date of entry into force of their date of resignation, it does not explicitly stipulate that the employees are protected from Releases or other unfavorable shares before September 30, 2025. There is no guarantee that employees who opt for the program will not be targeted for such actions. »»
The Democrats of Capitol Hill also noted that Trump and Musk’s trends for having allegedly destroyed sellers and employees. When Musk acquired Twitter in 2022, he sent a mass email similar to the employees – entitled “Fork in the road” – soliciting resignations. Last year, the former employees continued the several billion dollars to have allegedly rené for starting allowances, although the case was rejected for legal grounds.
“I just say to people:” Do not fall for what so many entrepreneurs have fallen with this type, “said senator Tim Kaine, D-VA.,” Come work on my casino, come and work on my hotel ” , then they end up stiffening.
Kaine added that he did not think that Trump had the legal power to make the quasi-severrance offers and that the only guarantee is that the administration would not fulfill for those who leave.
“It looked like another scam in Trump precipitated for me,” said senator Chris Van Hollen, D-MD. “I do not know if it is legal, but I would advise (federal employees) to make sure that it is even if they think about it because … Donald Trump has a story of not following.”
Several Democrats have warned that if Trump fell back on his offer or if he is deemed illegal, those who have registered at the dry would then have targets on their backs as unfair workers. Senator Patty Murray, D-Wash., The best democrat of the Senate credit committee, said federal workers could face consequences if the offers were canceled.
“We have not been able to see any authority for that, and we don’t have the credits to do so either,” said Murray. “I think it could leave employees in a difficult situation.”
Republican legislators, for their part, adopted Trump’s push.
“To support him completely,” said senator Ron Johnson, R-Wis., Adding that he was in favor of “weaning people from the federal government”. He noted that he had not “traveled federal laws” to determine if the offers were legal, but he assumed that they were “probably”.
Senator Rand Paul, R-Ky., Which chairs the Senate Committee for Internal Security and Government Affairs, said any effort to reduce the government was “a good idea”.
“I think we have to try all the possible legal means to make the government smaller and to bring the government to life under its means,” said Paul, adding, in his opinion, the president has large authorities to hire and the dismissal of federal employees.
Max Stier, president of the Partnership for the Public Service, published Tuesday the measure Tuesday which, in the event of success, could create critical gaps in agencies and harm the delivery of mission.
“The recent efforts of the Trump administration to encourage most of the federal workforce to resign are perplexed, of questionable and dangerous legality,” he said. “Americans are counting on federal workers to fly safely, help veterans and the elderly to access their advantages, protect our food and water, protect public health, respond to natural disasters and to maintain the rule of law. The deactivation of expert talents through such a non -strategic approach endorses us all in a deep way. »»
And Doreen Greenwald, national president of the National Union of Treasury Employees, described the offer of resignation, coupled with the continuous efforts of the new administration to strip federal workers from their public service protections and effectively end a telework ” , as “coercive”.
“The so-called” agreement “is a hostile effort to denigrate federal employees, weaken agencies and disrupt the precious services that these employees provide to the public daily,” she said. “The OPM documents lack clarity on the exact terms of the offer, which makes it unreliable. We also wonder if OPM has the legal power to use a “deferred resignation” to put people on prolonged administrative leave in these circumstances. »»
