Over 2 million federal employees are confronted with a difficult choice by Thursday’s midnight deadline. The Trump administration has presented a “deferred resignation” offer that would allow workers to continue receiving pay through September without reporting to work. However, if they decline the offer, they risk being fired. This decision carries significant professional and financial implications for employees across the country, raising concerns from employment attorneys and government watchdogs about the risks involved.
The deferred resignation offer, proposed by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), has drawn legal challenges from several federal employee unions. A lawsuit filed on February 4 claims that the Trump administration may not have the authority to extend such an offer. The unions argue that the deal violates the Administrative Procedure Act, a 1946 law governing federal regulations, and they are seeking a court order to block the offer. The plaintiffs believe that the proposal is “arbitrary” and could potentially breach other legal standards.
The Trump Administration’s Vision
This offer is part of the second Trump administration’s broader strategy to reduce federal government costs. The administration has also mandated that federal employees return to the office five days a week, ending remote work arrangements. The White House hopes to encourage 10% of the federal workforce to resign voluntarily, which is expected to save approximately $100 billion annually. To date, about 40,000 federal workers—around 2% of the workforce—have accepted the offer, with more decisions likely as the deadline approaches.
Experts have raised concerns about the vagueness of the terms outlined in the OPM’s offer. The email sent to workers includes ambiguous language about job responsibilities, particularly in cases where an employee’s duties might be required even after they accept the resignation offer. This uncertainty creates confusion among federal workers, who are unsure of the long-term consequences, such as whether they would still receive their pay if their position were eliminated due to a reduction in force.
Donald TrumpThe OPM’s email to federal workers shares similarities with a controversial message sent by Elon Musk to Twitter employees in 2022. Musk, who now leads the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) under President Trump, presented a stark choice to Twitter employees: either accept a “hardcore” work environment or quit with severance pay. The OPM’s offer is framed in a similar “fork in the road” manner, requiring federal employees to make a swift decision. While Musk has publicly praised the offer, legal challenges continue to question its legitimacy.
Legal and Financial Concerns with Funding
The deferred resignation offer faces additional scrutiny due to potential violations of federal spending laws. The offer promises to pay workers through September, but most federal agencies’ funding expires on March 14. Critics argue that this could violate the Antideficiency Act, which prohibits government agencies from spending beyond their allocated funds. Moreover, if the court rules that the offer is illegal, it could create further complications for employees who have already accepted the deal.
The long-term effects of widespread federal worker resignations could disrupt critical government services. Unions argue that losing a substantial portion of the workforce could lead to delays and inefficiencies in services like tax processing, Social Security verification, and healthcare services for programs like Medicaid and Medicare.
Critics suggest that such a significant workforce reduction would have a far-reaching impact on the American public, much like the issues experienced by Twitter after Musk’s workforce cuts. Additionally, the limited time window to accept the offer has been criticized for applying undue pressure on workers, a stark contrast to previous voluntary resignation offers in past administrations.