NEW MEXICO (KRQE) – An offer from the Trump administration is raising major questions for federal workers. The offer is a chunk of change to quit their jobs in an effort to shrink the federal government. The buyout letter went to millions of employees across the country, including in New Mexico.
“That’s really one of the biggest concerns we’re hearing, is... such a short time for them to make this what could be a very life-changing experience for the employees and their families,” said Sue Parton, President of the Federation of Indian Service Employees. Parton’s union, which protects agencies under the Department of Interior, expressed confusion among its members over President Trump’s so-called “deferred resignation” offer, with employees expected to make decisions by February 6.
“They’re asking questions, well if I don’t resign but I would like to transfer to another work site is... this part of this buyout?” Parton noted. The email, sent nationwide to federal workers last week, indicates those accepting the buyout will be exempt from work until September 30, allowing them to receive almost eight months of pay."
If they choose to stay, many federal employees, who have largely been working remotely since COVID-19, will be required to return to the office. Parton remarked on the inconsistency of policies, as many were recruited for remote positions.
Over 3 million people were employed by the federal government as of November, according to Pew Research. New Mexico alone registered over 25,000 federal employees as of 2023.
The “deferred resignation” is applicable to all full-time federal employees, excluding those working for the military, the U.S. Postal Service, and immigration enforcement authorities. The American Federation of Government Employees commented on the situation, stating: "The number of civil servants hasn’t meaningfully changed since 1970, but there are more Americans than ever who rely on government services. Purging the federal government of dedicated career civil servants will have vast unintended consequences.
Similarly, after just under two weeks back at the helm, President Trump has targeted federal employees with what many view as politically motivated actions. Following the waves of firings directed at those associated with the previous administration, Trump's team has drawn criticism for targeting agencies beyond those relevant to his previous grievances.
“The most common refrain I’m hearing from people who have left but are still talking to people on the inside is: ‘I knew it was going to be bad but I didn’t think it was going to be this bad,’” remarked Mark Bergman, who has been keeping tabs on affected officials. Although some expected retaliation, such levels of pushback against civil servants have left many stunned.
Lawyers at the DOJ were axed for not being aligned with the new agenda, thrusting anxiety across departments. The purging of nearly 30 inspectors general last week without notice has also raised alarms, drawing comparisons to tactics used by authoritarian regimes, where retaliation and punishment are frequent.
Union representatives and civil servants alike have denounced the idea of unilateral enforcement, which many argue undermines the intended ethos of public service. Teresa W. Gerton, who has extensive experience throughout government agencies, firmly stated, "The creation of a fearful, dysfunctional work environment is... their goal.”
Workers have been encouraged to inform on colleagues who resist the initiatives directed by the administration, fostering an atmosphere fraught with distrust and compounding the issues already faced amid shifting procedures.
Labor organizations, led by the American Federation of Government Employees among others, have taken legal action against these executive orders. The concern extends beyond the individual to the very representational integrity of the federal workforce as the situation progresses.
“You can tell President Trump... if he needs me, I’LL BE IN MY OFFICE!!!!!” said one defiant federal worker, who echoed sentiments shared by many: their commitment to continued service amid the tumult.
If these measures culminate as suggested, the ripples of change could reverberate significantly on public services. Maintaining core functions such as Medicare, Medicaid, and diverse support programs hinges on skilled workers sustaining these missions effectively.
While union membership has surged with inquiries on representation following discontent, industry observers warn of the practical repercussions through potentially erratic disruptions across government sectors.
Randy Erwin, President of the National Federation of Federal Employees remarked, "Every federal employee we represent... is signing up now. Our headquarters phone is ringing off the hook."
Insights from the Brookings Institution indicated when former administrations attempted similar efforts, they frequently encountered operational setbacks, with skilled employees leaving due to unfavorable conditions.
Keen insights suggest Trump’s administration desires to reshuffle the structural balance within federal services, as substantial cutbacks might lead to lapses affecting service levels—bringing clarity to the intent of such strategic reconfigurations and their ramifications.
Overall, the measures undertaken appear to trigger larger stakes—a redefinition of labor interactions within federal systems, raising questions about the foundational aspects of American civil service as the political climate heats up.