Government Employees

More stories

  • 125 Shares199 Views

    in Economy

    Who Are the Probationary Federal Workers Being Cut Under Trump?

    by

    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

  • 125 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    Trump Moves to Invalidate Recent Labor Agreements With Federal Workers

    by

    In the latest effort to put his stamp on the federal work force, President Trump on Friday issued a memorandum invalidating government labor contracts finalized in the last 30 days before a presidential inauguration.The policy applies to certain contracts negotiated toward the end of the Biden administration, the memo says. Such “last-minute, lame-duck” agreements, it states, “are purposefully designed to circumvent the will of the people” and “inhibit the President’s authority to manage the executive branch.”Unions at several agencies rushed to negotiate collective bargaining agreements ahead of Mr. Trump’s inauguration to preserve some practices of the previous administration, like remote work, and insulate them from changes that could make it easier to fire civil servants.The memo appears to allude to such practices, which it calls “inefficient and ineffective,” and cites an agreement with the Education Department that attempts to preserve remote work arrangements. The memo says the agreements could be undone if they have not yet been approved by an “applicable” agency head.Other agencies, like the Social Security Administration, approved new collective bargaining agreements outside the 30-day window, presumably leaving them unaffected by the memo.It was unclear if the memo would survive legal pushback initiated by federal employee unions, though it appeared to anticipate legal challenges, noting that it should remain in force if a portion alluding to prohibited bargaining agreements from the Biden administration is found to be invalid.“Federal employees should know that approved union contracts are enforceable by law, and the president does not have the authority to make unilateral changes to those agreements,” Everett Kelley, the president of the American Federation of Government Employees, said in a statement. “Members will not be intimidated. If our contracts are violated, we will aggressively defend them.” More

  • 150 Shares109 Views

    in Economy

    The Federal Work Force Grew Briskly Under Biden. It’s Still Historically Low.

    by

    Government agencies that shrank in President-elect Trump’s first term have mostly bounced back, and some have become even larger.When it comes to the federal payroll, two seemingly contradictory things are true.One, the Biden administration went on a hiring spree that expanded the government work force at the fastest pace since the 1980s. And two, it remains near a record low as a share of overall employment.In the four years separating President-elect Donald J. Trump’s two terms, the federal civilian head count has risen by about 4.4 percent, according to the Labor Department, to just over three million, including the Postal Service.But that’s a much slower pace than private payrolls have grown over the past four years. And it leaves the federal government at 1.9 percent of total employment, down from more than 3 percent in the 1980s.The incoming administration promises to erase whole sections of the federal bureaucracy: Vivek Ramaswamy, co-chair of what Mr. Trump is calling the Department of Government Efficiency, has said 75 percent of the work force could go, in pursuit of $2 trillion in cuts. But it will be a challenge to find cuts without depleting services.“When we’re looking at the numbers of the federal work force, it’s still about the same size as it was in the 1960s,” said Max Stier, president of the Partnership for Public Service, a think tank. “The narrative out there is the federal government work force is growing topsy-turvy, and the reality is that it’s actually shrinking,”Compared with the overall work force, the federal employee base has been shrinking for decadesNot including the armed forces, federal government employees as a share of all nonfarm workers are near an all-time low.

    Federal employment includes the Postal Service.Source: Bureau of Labor StatisticsBy The New York TimesHow Big Are Agencies, and Have They Grown or Shrunk? The number of people who work in the federal government’s largest departments, and how they’ve changed in size since 2020.

    Note: Total work force numbers are as of March 2024.Source: Office of Personnel ManagementBy 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

  • 125 Shares179 Views

    in Economy

    Remote Work for Civil Servants Faces a Challenge Under Trump

    by

    Federal employees and others in the capital have grown attached to work-from-home arrangements. But hybrid work may disappear in the second Trump era.When the Social Security Administration agreed to a five-year extension of work-from-home arrangements for tens of thousands of employees in early December, many at the agency expressed relief.But the reprieve may be short-lived. At a news conference two weeks later, President-elect Donald J. Trump railed against the deal and said he would go to court to undo it. “If people don’t come back to work, come back into the office,” he said, “they’re going to be dismissed.”The back-and-forth previewed what is likely to be one of the earliest points of contention of Mr. Trump’s second administration. Over the past few years, many federal workers have organized their lives around hybrid arrangements that help them juggle work and family responsibilities, and have gone so far as to demand that the Biden administration preserve the status quo. Some have rushed to join the roughly one-quarter to one-third of federal workers who are unionized, so that telework policies will be negotiable.But to the president-elect and his allies, the work-from-home arrangements are not only a glaring example of liberal permissiveness run amok — “a gift to a union,” Mr. Trump said — but also a tantalizing opportunity to clear the federal government of obstructionist workers and to vastly shrink its reach.In a Wall Street Journal column in November, Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, the businessmen tapped to lead Mr. Trump’s government efficiency commission, said they would welcome “a wave of voluntary terminations” triggered by forcing federal employees to work from an office five days a week.Many private-sector employers have recently announced such policies, arguing that in-person work improves communication, mentoring and collaboration.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

  • 100 Shares129 Views

    in Economy

    How a Government Shutdown Could Affect the Economy

    by

    A federal government shutdown probably wouldn’t be enough to derail the solid U.S. economy. But it could inject more uncertainty into an already murky economic outlook.Funding for the federal government will lapse at the end of Friday if Congress doesn’t reach a deal to extend it. It is still possible that legislators will act in time to prevent a shutdown, or will restore funding quickly enough to avoid significant disruptions and minimize any economic impact.But if the standoff lasts beyond the weekend, most federal offices will not open Monday, and hundreds of thousands of government employees will be told not to work. Others will be required to work without pay until the government reopens.For those workers and their families, the consequences could be serious, especially if the impasse drags on. Federal law guarantees that government workers will eventually receive back pay, but that may not come in time for those living paycheck to paycheck. And the back-pay provisions don’t apply to consultants or contractors. During the last government shutdown — a partial lapse in funding in late 2018 and early 2019 — federal workers lined up at food pantries after going weeks without pay.For the economy as a whole, the effects of a shutdown are likely to be more modest. Many of the most important government programs, like Social Security and Medicare, would not be affected, and government services that are deemed “essential,” such as air traffic control and aviation security, can continue at least temporarily. Federal workers who put off purchases are likely to make them once their paychecks restart.Forecasters at Goldman Sachs estimate that a shutdown would exert a small but measurable drag on the economy, reducing quarterly economic growth by about 0.15 percentage points for every week the lapse in funding continues. Most of that toll, though not all, would reverse in the next quarter. Other forecasters have released similar estimates.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

  • 150 Shares189 Views

    in Economy

    BLS Data on Jobs and Consumer Prices Faces a Test of Trust

    by

    The Bureau of Labor Statistics, which tracks prices and employment, faces scrutiny after several missteps. Some questions have gone unanswered.It has been a rough year for the Bureau of Labor Statistics.The agency — which produces key numbers on inflation, unemployment and other aspects of the economy — has made a series of missteps in recent months, including a premature release of the Consumer Price Index.That has prompted questions about how the bureau, which is part of the Labor Department, shares information and whether it has been giving an unfair advantage to Wall Street insiders who can profit from it. The agency’s inspector general is looking into the incidents. So is at least one congressional committee.At the same time, the bureau — like other statistical agencies in the United States and around the world — is facing long-running challenges: shrinking budgets, declining response rates to its surveys, shifting economic patterns in the wake of the pandemic and increased public skepticism of its numbers, at times stoked by political leaders including former President Donald J. Trump.Economists and other experts say the bureau’s data remains reliable, and they praise the agency’s efforts to ensure its numbers are accurate and free of political bias. But they say the recent problems threaten to undermine confidence in the agency, and in government statistics more broadly.“A statistical agency lives or dies by trust,” said Erica Groshen, who served as commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics during the Obama administration. Once that trust is lost, she added, “it’s very hard to restore it.”The agency recognizes that threat, its current leader says, and is taking it seriously.“We are under more scrutiny because the environment around the agency has changed,” Erika McEntarfer, the commissioner of the bureau, said in an interview.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

  • 125 Shares109 Views

    in Economy

    New Questions on How a Key Agency Shared Inflation Data

    by

    A government economist had regular contact with “super users” in finance, records show, at a time when such information keenly interests investors.The Bureau of Labor Statistics shared more information about inflation with Wall Street “super users” than previously disclosed, emails from the agency show. The revelation is likely to prompt further scrutiny of the way the government shares economic data at a time when such information keenly interests investors.An economist at the agency set off a firestorm in February when he sent an email to a group of data users explaining how a methodological tweak could have contributed to an unexpected jump in housing costs in the Consumer Price Index the previous month. The email, addressed to “Super Users,” circulated rapidly around Wall Street, where every detail of inflation data can affect the bond market.At the time, the Bureau of Labor Statistics said the email had been an isolated “mistake” and denied that it maintained a list of users who received special access to information.But emails obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request show that the agency — or at least the economist who sent the original email, a longtime but relatively low-ranking employee — was in regular communication with data users in the finance industry, apparently including analysts at major hedge funds. And they suggest that there was a list of super users, contrary to the agency’s denials.“Would it be possible to be on the super user email list?” one user asked in mid-February.“Yes I can add you to the list,” the employee replied minutes later.A reporter’s efforts to reach the employee, whose identity the bureau confirmed, were unsuccessful.Emily Liddel, an associate commissioner at the Bureau of Labor Statistics, said that the agency did not maintain an official list of super users and that the employee appeared to have created the list on his own.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

  • 113 Shares189 Views

    in Economy

    President of Powerful Service Workers Union Will Step Down

    by

    Mary Kay Henry of the nearly two-million-member Service Employees International Union will not seek re-election when her term ends in May.Mary Kay Henry, the president of the Service Employees International Union, one of the nation’s largest and most politically powerful labor unions, announced Tuesday that she would step down after 14 years in her position.Ms. Henry was the first woman elected to lead the union, which represents nearly two million workers like janitors and home health aides in both the public and private sectors.Under her leadership, it launched a major initiative known as the Fight for $15, which sought to organize fast-food workers and push for a $15 minimum wage. Winning over skeptics in the ranks, Ms. Henry argued that the union could make gains through a broad-based campaign that targeted the industry as a whole rather than individual employers.Labor experts and industry officials cite the campaign as a major force behind significant minimum-wage increases in states including California and New York and cities like Seattle and Chicago. It also pushed a recent California law creating a council to set a minimum wage in the fast-food industry, which will become $20 an hour in April, and to propose new health and safety standards.But the Fight for $15 campaign has not unionized workers on a large scale and enabled them to negotiate collective bargaining agreements with their employers.Ms. Henry’s tenure has coincided with a series of legislative and legal challenges to organized labor, including state laws rolling back collective bargaining rights and allowing workers to opt out of once-mandatory union fees, as well as a landmark Supreme Court ruling allowing government employees to do the same.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