More stories

  • in

    Who Are the Probationary Federal Workers Being Cut Under Trump?

    Many government workers being cut are those with fewer protections. They are relatively new in their current jobs, but often have years of experience.In news about the Trump administration’s job-slashing effort, one class of federal workers comes up repeatedly: “probationary” employees.At the Internal Revenue Service, 6,700 people with that status are being let go. At the Department of Health and Human Services, reports indicated the total could be 5,200. The Pentagon announced last week that it would terminate 5,400. At the Forest Service, 3,400 may be cut.These workers, who generally have less than one or two years of service in their current positions, are particular targets among civil servants because they have the weakest protections. Here’s what else we know about the people being shown the door.What does being on ‘probation’ mean?Under the federal code, civil servants remain on probation for one year after they are hired, promoted, demoted or otherwise reassigned. Those in the “excepted” service, meaning they don’t go through normal competitive selection processes, can be on probation for two years.While on probation, a federal employee can essentially be fired at will, although the person’s superiors need to show that the employee’s “work performance or conduct fails during this period to demonstrate his fitness or his qualifications for continued employment.” (Many termination notices included language about the employee’s supposedly inadequate performance, typically without evidence.) Probationary employees may also appeal if they believe they were fired for partisan political reasons or on the basis of unlawful discrimination.After employees have completed their probation period, they gain more rights to appeal a termination to the Merit Systems Protection Board. Under those rules for due process, the agency must show that an employee wasn’t doing the job, or that the job was no longer necessary.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    FirstFT: Ukraine and US agree minerals deal

    was $409 now $99 for your first yearFT newspaper delivered Monday-Saturday, plus FT Digital Edition delivered to your device Monday-Saturday.What’s included Weekday Print EditionFT WeekendFT Digital EditionGlobal news & analysisExpert opinionSpecial featuresExclusive FT analysis More

  • in

    Americans Brace for Inflation as Trump’s Tariffs Start to Take Effect

    Fresh off the worst inflation shock in decades, Americans are once again bracing for higher prices.Expectations about future inflation have started to move up, according to metrics closely watched by officials at the Federal Reserve. So far, the data, including a consumer survey from the University of Michigan and market-based measures of investors’ expectations, does not suggest that price pressures are perceived to be on the verge of spiraling out of control.But the recent jump has been significant enough to warrant attention, stoking yet more uncertainty about an economic outlook already clouded by President Trump’s ever-evolving approach to trade, immigration, taxation and other policy areas. On Tuesday, a survey from the Conference Board showed that consumer confidence fell sharply in February and inflation expectations rose as Americans fretted about the surging price of eggs and the potential impact of tariffs.If those worries persist, it could be a political problem for Mr. Trump, whose promise to control prices was a central part of his message during last year’s campaign. It would also add to the challenge facing policymakers at the Fed, who are already concerned that progress against inflation is stalling out.“This is the kind of thing that can unnerve a policymaker,” Jonathan Pingle, who used to work at the Fed and is now chief economist at UBS, said about the overarching trend in inflation expectations. “We don’t want inflation expectations moving up so much that it makes the Fed’s job harder to get inflation back to 2 percent.”Most economists see keeping inflation expectations in check as crucial to controlling inflation itself. That’s because beliefs about where prices are headed can become a self-fulfilling prophecy: If workers expect the cost of living to rise, they will demand raises to compensate; if businesses expect the cost of materials and labor to rise, they will increase their own prices in anticipation. That can make it much harder for the Fed to bring inflation to heel.That’s what happened in the 1960s and 1970s: Years of high inflation led consumers and businesses to expect prices to keep rising rapidly. Only by raising interest rates to a punishing level and causing a severe recession was the Fed able to bring inflation fully back under control.

    .dw-chart-subhed {
    line-height: 1;
    margin-bottom: 6px;
    font-family: nyt-franklin;
    color: #121212;
    font-size: 15px;
    font-weight: 700;
    }

    Expected rate of inflation in the next five years, by political party
    Source: University of Michigan Survey of Consumer SentimentBy The New York TimesWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    LNG demand to jump 60% by 2040, Shell forecasts

    $99 for your first yearFT newspaper delivered Monday-Saturday, plus FT Digital Edition delivered to your device Monday-Saturday.What’s included Weekday Print EditionFT WeekendFT Digital EditionGlobal news & analysisExpert opinionSpecial featuresExclusive FT analysis More