They've already issued RTO directives with timelines in place, and non-compliance will result in people losing their jobs. This letter is not about that. This is just a way to reduce headcount by the end of this FY before going to voluntary separation options like early retirement which might cost more (in total).
> this is just a way to reduce headcount by the end of this FY
It's not just a way to reduce headcount, as the next four years will make abundantly clear.
People will be hired back into these jobs under the new Schedule Policy/Career -- the replacement for Trump's Schedule F.
Basically: the people getting the offer now have protections set up by Biden in response to Trump's Schedule F, that Trump would like to buy them out of.
The people hired back into them will not. They will be asked to be loyal to Trump.
> Basically: the people getting the offer now have protections set up by Biden in response to Trump's Schedule F, that Trump would like to buy them out of.
This offer has gone out to all feds, not just those falling under Schedule F. You've not been paying attention if you believe the statements you've written.
Many, many of these jobs going up the seniority scale will reappear but be recreated as Schedule Policy/Career.
(Schedule F no longer exists, I think)
I mean, I might be wrong. But wait and see: I don't think I am going to be wrong. It is abundantly clear that Trump and the people around him are trying to create a civil service that is loyal to the President specifically.
He tried before to do this which is why Biden produced legislation to make it difficult.
Trump's stated aim in this presidency, as well as in his prior presidency, has been to radically expand the range of jobs that fall under Schedule F.
If you don't know that, then you have not been paying attention. It's safe to assume he will use every lever possible to remake roles as political appointments, and this will be one of those levers.
ETA: Speaking to CNN on Tuesday, Stephen Miller, the White House deputy chief of staff for policy, said the government's two million workers were "overwhelmingly left of centre", adding it was "essential" for Trump to "get control of government".
So it is clear -- from the mouth of Goebbels 2.0 himself -- that Trump intends to use this process to reshape the political slant of federal government.
Any "it's purely about the cost" argument is dead in the water. There will be recasting of roles as political, there will be loyalty pledges, there will be litmus tests.
The letter this submission is about went to many people who do not fall under policy/career. It went to everyone including people like admin staff and IT technicians who could not be put into Schedule Policy/Career per the OPM guidance.
There's no way that a GS-9 or GS-11 2210 network tech taking this deferred resignation option would be hired back under this schedule because they do not qualify for it (unless they happen to be part of union leadership or something, but that's a very small number compared to the whole).
And even if they could hire back a non-policy position under a policy schedule, this resignation/rehiring you've suggested is very roundabout. It's completely unnecessary so doesn't even make sense, they can convert those positions without the need for a resignation and rehiring the individual.
It would actually have made more sense to convert all these positions that wouldn't fall under Policy/Career (that you for some reason believe could) and then to dismiss the individuals without offering this deferred resignation.
> It would actually have made more sense to convert all these positions that wouldn't fall under Policy/Career (that you for some reason believe could) and then to dismiss the individuals without offering this deferred resignation.
They cannot, as I understood it, get the loyalty boost they want from converting a position to an F (Policy/Career) position because of the laws Biden introduced to protect roles from that kind of interference.
In April 2024, the Biden administration put into effect a regulation named "Upholding Civil Service Protections and Merit System Principles" (89 FR 24982) that allows employees to keep existing job protections even if their positions were reclassified, preventing most of the effects of a reinstatement of Schedule F.
So, again, getting these employees to leave of their own accord allows them to convert as many to Schedule Policy/Career as possible without the employee in the seat. Because Biden and Congress introduced protections that would have stopped them being dismissed.
And did you not read what Miller is quoted as saying? I don't know why you are arguing against the idea that the intent here is about loyalty to Trumpism, when they are saying that with their creepy little outside voices.
> They cannot, as I understood it, get the loyalty boost they want from converting a position to an F (Policy/Career) position because of the laws Biden introduced to protect roles from that kind of interference.
Read your own reference. Not a law, in the sense that it was passed by Congress, but a regulation created by the executive branch for the executive branch. It can be undone. If they want to loyalty test people, they can undo the regulation and perform the conversion later. This letter is not about getting people to resign and then rehiring them (as you strangely suggested in your first reply to me) under Schedule Career/Policy. I say that because the vast majority of the 2.5 million civil servants that it was sent to cannot be hired as Schedule Career/Policy per the OPM guidance I shared in my previous response.
