Photo credit: www.govexec.com
Controversy Over Federal Employee Terminations During Trump Administration
This week, the Trump administration informed a federal court that it did not provide comprehensive guidance for the dismissal of newly hired federal employees. This assertion contradicts previous claims made by the administration and accounts from various agency officials.
The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) is currently defending its actions in court, aiming to uphold the mass terminations of federal employees during their probationary periods. This legal battle arose following a lawsuit filed by the American Federation of Government Employees. U.S. District Judge William Alsup, presiding over the Northern District of California, questioned the administration regarding the orders that led to the termination of predominantly new hires, which have affected at least 25,000 workers across the federal government.
In a written response to Judge Alsup, attorneys from the Justice Department stated, “OPM did not direct agencies to terminate probationary employees, based either on performance or misconduct,” referencing a declaration from acting OPM Director Charles Ezell. However, this claim seems to contradict a substantial amount of evidence suggesting otherwise.
Shortly after President Trump took office, Ezell issued a directive mandating that all federal agencies compile lists of their probationary employees and submit them to OPM. Agencies were then required to justify the roles of these employees, often within a tight deadline and limited character count.
On February 13, OPM reportedly held a call with human resources leaders from various agencies, instructing them to begin the termination of employees in their probationary periods. This communication was widely reported and highlighted the administration’s intention to streamline staffing decisions in federal departments.
The following day, OPM followed up with a formal memorandum addressed to the Chief Human Capital Officers Council, reminding them of the directive to separate non-mission-critical probationary employees by February 17. The memo included a template termination letter for use by the agencies, emphasizing that separations should happen as soon as possible in accordance with agency policies.
Termination letters issued to probationary employees explicitly cited performance as the reason for ending their employment. For instance, Ezell’s communications to his employees at OPM contained language indicating that their performance did not meet the standards required for continued employment.
During a recent hearing, Representative Mark Takano, a Democrat from California and the ranking member of the House Veterans Affairs Committee, pressed Tracey Therit, the Chief Human Capital Officer at the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), about the chain of command that led to the termination of probationary employees in her department. Therit confirmed that OPM had provided direction on these firings.
When asked if she authored the memo sent to the terminated VA employees, Therit stated, “The memo was provided for my signature,” while refraining from disclosing who provided it.
Furthermore, Therit indicated that she would clarify further details to Takano in writing; however, as of Thursday afternoon, no such information had been delivered, as noted by a committee aide.
On Thursday, the U.S. District Court held a hearing to deliberate on a request for a temporary restraining order against the terminations. The Office of Special Counsel has intervened in the matter, leading the Merit Systems Protection Board to temporarily reinstate six of the dismissed probationary employees, having found that their terminations were likely unlawful. The OSC is currently exploring options to extend its recommendations to a broader range of affected employees.
Source
www.govexec.com