San Francisco finds itself at the center of a legal battle as labor unions push for an emergency injunction against what they describe as unlawful terminations of probationary federal employees by the Trump administration. They claim that these employees were dismissed based on incorrect assessments of their job performance. Lawyers representing the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) will be arguing that no “mass termination program” exists. Instead, they insist agencies were merely instructed to review whether probationary employees met the necessary criteria for continued employment.
Charles Ezell, acting director of OPM, notes in a court declaration that the responsibility to decide on keeping or dismissing probationary employees lies with the agencies themselves. He emphasizes that assessing an employee’s fitness should factor in both the needs and interests of the government. He further points out that only probationers with high performance in key areas should continue their federal employment.
Last week, a coalition composed of five labor unions and five nonprofit organizations filed a lawsuit contesting the administration’s workforce reduction strategy, described by President Trump as addressing an inefficient and unwieldy federal system. Though thousands of probationary employees have already been terminated, the administration is now targeting career officials who have civil service protections.
Among the federal workforce, there are about 200,000 probationary workers, including roughly 15,000 in California. These employees hold roles in diverse fields ranging from fire prevention to veteran services. The lawsuit also highlights a controversial move led by Elon Musk via the Department of Government Efficiency, involving a directive for employees to justify their weekly tasks or face termination threats. Though OPM later clarified that this was voluntary, future similar requests are still possible.
Recent legal attempts by unions have failed with two federal judges. In Washington, D.C., a judge determined that such disputes should be resolved by federal labor courts, dismissing the unions’ motion. Another judge in Massachusetts found that unions lacked standing to challenge a deferred resignation offer since they weren’t directly affected by it.
In San Francisco, the coalition is fighting for an injunction to halt further dismissals and to reverse those already enacted. The lawsuit argues that Congress has designated individual agencies to manage their workforce and that OPM lacks the authority to execute employee terminations as it has done. The complaint alleges that various agencies were compelled to utilize a standard email template, communicated by OPM, to justify the dismissals based on purported performance issues.
For instance, probationary workers at the National Science Foundation received notifications stating that although the foundation opted to keep them, OPM decided otherwise. In urging for a temporary restraining order, the coalition cites the “irreparable harm” being done to their groups and members, including job loss, forfeited benefits, and the potential for disrupted essential government services.
