The Alarming Future for Federal Employees Under a Trump Administration
The Alarming Future for Federal Employees Under a Trump Administration
The federal workforce faces a storm of radical reforms under a Trump Administration. "Project 2025: Mandate for Leadership" and Agenda 47, two policy platforms that provide directional indications for Trump’s approach to workforce management, threaten to dismantle long-standing protections, reduce benefits, and politicize the federal government’s operational backbone. At the center of these changes lies the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), an agency under siege by ideas that could destabilize the very structure of federal employment. As Project 2025 emphasizes, 'nothing is more important than deconstructing the centralized administrative state,' a sentiment that underscores how deeply these reforms will resonate with Trump and his advisors, in his return to office.
Market- and Merit-Based Pay: Cutting Costs at Workers' Expense
Under Project 2025, aligning federal pay with private-sector standards is a cornerstone reform. The authors claim, "The federal workforce must reflect the realities of the broader labor market to attract and retain top talent while avoiding unnecessary taxpayer costs." They point to data from a 2016 study (funded and executed by the Heritage Foundation, the organization that authored Project 2025), that found that “federal employees received wages that were 22 percent higher than wages for similar private sector workers.” However, the Federal Salary Council’s 2024 report found that federal wages are trailing the private sector nearly 25%.
Project 2025 also advocates for performance-based pay. While this might sound appealing on the surface, the details reveal a dangerous path forward. The report insists, "Federal employees should be rewarded for excellence through clear, measurable performance appraisals," but such systems have repeatedly failed in the past. Merit pay opens the door to favoritism, discrimination, and arbitrary punishments. The Project 2025 proposals to amend federal pay are not efforts to attract and retain top talent for the federal workforce, but to cut costs and ensure that federal employees align to the president’s political agenda.
Retirement Benefits: Shifting Risk to Workers
Project 2025 also proposes "modernizing" federal retirement plans by further reducing government contributions. This follows a long history of cutting spending at the expense of federal workers, beginning with the transition from the generous Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS) to the leaner Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS) system in the late 1980s. This erosion of retirement security risks driving talent away from federal service, leaving behind a less experienced and less motivated workforce.
Centralization: Dismantling OPM
OPM’s role as the steward of federal personnel management has faced significant challenges under past proposals to consolidate its functions with the General Services Administration (GSA) and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). While Project 2025 acknowledges the failure of these efforts, it leaves open the question of whether a future Trump administration might revive such plans. The more concerning aspect is the potential merger of OPM’s policy functions with OMB - a move that would significantly increase political influence over hiring, benefits, and workforce management. Far from a simple bureaucratic reorganization, such changes would erode OPM’s autonomy and its historical role as a bulwark against political interference, centralizing control in the hands of politically motivated appointees and compromising the principles of federal employment, weakening protections for federal workers.
One of the most alarming aspects of Project 2025 is its call for closer integration between OPM and the Presidential Personnel Office (PPO). "Effective governance requires seamless collaboration," the report claims, but what it truly suggests is a politicization of federal workforce management. By embedding political operatives into the hiring and management processes, the independence of civil service could be irrevocably compromised. This concern is further amplified by Trump’s proposal to require every federal employee to pass a new Civil Service test, purportedly to demonstrate an understanding of Constitutional principles like due process, equal protection, Free Speech, and Fourth Amendment protections. While framed as a commitment to limited government, such a test risks being wielded as a political litmus test, deepening the dissolution of an impartial federal workforce.
Hiring Freezes and Workforce Reductions
The proposals also dust off familiar playbooks like hiring freezes and buyouts, aiming to achieve a leaner, more cost-effective federal workforce. Additionally, Agenda 47 makes clear that Trump will make every effort to end telework arrangements, a move that will likely cause attrition. But these are blunt instruments that ignore the real costs of hollowing out the public sector. Agencies already struggling with understaffing would face even more strain, creating bottlenecks in critical services relied upon by Americans and international partners. Meanwhile, remaining employees would shoulder heavier workloads, further eroding morale and effectiveness.
Adding to these concerns, the recently proposed Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) introduces a more sweeping vision for federal workforce reductions. Spearheaded by Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, DOGE would leverage legal tools and advanced technologies, including artificial intelligence, to identify and eliminate regulations deemed unnecessary. Their approach ties the size of the federal workforce directly to the number of regulations nullified, advocating for 'mass headcount reductions' across agencies. These efforts might destabilize federal operations while failing to meaningfully address budget concerns. Moreover, eliminating regulations wholesale, as DOGE envisions, raises legal and practical challenges, compounded by a reliance on Supreme Court decisions that restrict agency policymaking authority.
The consequences of these changes would be devastating:
Talent Exodus: Eroding pay, benefits, and protections will drive skilled professionals away from federal service, leaving agencies understaffed and ill-equipped to meet public needs.
Reduced Efficiency: Workforce reductions and hiring freezes will create operational chaos, undermining the very efficiency Project 2025 and Trump’s proposed Department of Government Efficiency claim to prioritize.
Politicization: The push to consolidate OPM and tighten PPO control threatens the impartiality of federal agencies, potentially turning them into instruments of political will rather than public good.
Threats to Health Benefits:
Potential changes to the Federal Employee Health Benefits (FEHB) program under Trump’s administration could jeopardize the affordability and quality of healthcare coverage for federal employees and retirees. Proposals to shift costs to employees or limit plan options would undermine one of the key incentives for public service, further exacerbating workforce challenges and impacting the private insurance companies that provide FEHB coverage. Additionally, the Postal Service Health Benefits (PSHB) program, which operates under the FEHB umbrella, could face heightened risks given Trump's longstanding criticism of the Postal Service. Any efforts to dismantle or privatize aspects of the Postal Service could ripple through to PSHB, endangering the health coverage of postal employees and retirees. Such actions could deepen mistrust in the administration's handling of federal benefits and push critical talent away from government service.
Viability of Trump’s Proposed Initiatives
The implementation of Trump’s Project 2025 and Agenda 47 initiatives, including DOGE, faces significant hurdles despite the administration’s ambitions. Yes, mass headcount reductions and the elimination of regulations could proceed administratively in some areas, leveraging executive authority and existing legislation. For instance, the Trump administration previously identified up to 15 reorganization proposals that could advance without congressional approval, including consolidating certain agency functions, streamlining federal operations, and digitizing processes.
However, broader reforms, such as significantly altering federal benefits systems, will likely require legislative support, a challenge given congressional gridlock and active efforts to block unilateral reorganization. Biden has also focused on reinforcing the federal workforce through initiatives that promote diversity, equity, and inclusion, potentially creating structural barriers to DOGE's goals. Although some regulatory rollbacks might advance under Supreme Court rulings, like the recent revocation of the Chevron doctrine, its broader goals - such as implementing Schedule F reclassifications - are almost certain to encounter significant resistance. These challenges underscore the uncertainty and complexity surrounding the execution of Trump’s vision for transforming the federal workforce.
Conclusion
Trump’s proposals represent a thinly-veiled assault on the federal workforce, prioritizing cost-cutting and political power over fairness, efficiency, and stability. The proposed dismantling of OPM and breakdown of worker protections risk long-term harm to federal agencies and the public they serve. The stakes are not just about dollars and cents - they are about the integrity and future of America’s civil service.