A federal judge in San Francisco delivered a pivotal ruling on Thursday regarding the legality of the mass termination of probationary federal employees, a significant setback for the Trump administration’s campaign to drastically reduce the federal workforce. The decision comes amidst ongoing legal battles as labor unions and nonprofit organizations strive to contest the sweeping dismissals.
U.S. District Judge William Alsup laid down an order directing the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) to notify specific federal agencies that it lacked the authority to terminate probationary employees. This directive explicitly includes those working at the Department of Defense. Alsup was emphatic, stating, “OPM does not have any authority whatsoever, under any statute in the history of the universe,” to hire or fire any employees outside its organization.
The case, propelled by five labor unions in alliance with five nonprofit groups, is part of a series of lawsuits challenging the administration’s drastic reduction measures in the federal workforce. The administration has targeted both probationary staff and career officials, aiming to overhaul what it considers an inefficient and cumbersome body of employees. Thousands have already lost their positions, intensifying the legal contention at hand.
Government attorneys acknowledged that the OPM is not authorized to hire or fire personnel within other federal entities. However, they noted that the office had merely requested federal agencies to evaluate whether probationary staff merited continuation in their roles. While probationary employees lack guaranteed job security, government lawyers argued that only the most competent and indispensable staff should retain their positions.
Kelsey Helland, an assistant U.S. attorney representing the government, commented, “I think plaintiffs are conflating a request by OPM with an order by OPM.” Meanwhile, attorneys representing the coalition of labor unions expressed optimism. Though the ruling does not guarantee that terminated employees will be reinstated or prevent future dismissals, it signals to federal agencies the unlawful nature of the prior terminations.
Danielle Leonard, representing the coalition, remarked, “What it means in practical effects is the agencies of the federal government should hear the court’s warning that that order was unlawful.” Everett Kelley, president of the American Federation of Government Employees, lauded the ruling as a victory for federal workers unduly fired by an overreaching government body.
Efforts to acquire a response from the Office of Personnel Management have yet to be successful, as inquiries remained unanswered. Michelle Lo, another assistant U.S. attorney, refrained from commenting on the matter. Judge Alsup directed the acting head of the personnel office, Charles Ezell, to provide testimony in court concerning a recent phone call that instigated the terminations.
The debate centers around an email template purportedly disseminated across federal agencies upon orders from the personnel office, stating performance as the grounds for termination. Despite agencies like the National Science Foundation expressing intentions to retain staff, they felt compelled to comply with the directives, illustrating the wide-reaching impact of the initial instruction.
In separate legal proceedings, unions have faced difficulties in convincing federal courts to obstruct the layoffs. Recent judgments in Washington, D.C., and Massachusetts underscore the complexities unions and nonprofit organizations encounter as they seek judicial intervention. Nevertheless, the latter enjoys a feebler standing because the repercussions of job losses extend to community services provided by their educators.
Judge Alsup underscored the invaluable contribution of probationary employees to government operations, branding them as “the lifeblood of our government.” He conveyed distress over their abrupt dismissal, emphasizing the significant role these younger, upwardly mobile employees play. Appointed by former President Bill Clinton, Alsup is recognized for managing high-profile cases and his direct approach.
A formal written order from Alsup is expected, with an evidentiary hearing scheduled for March 13, marking a critical juncture in ongoing efforts to oppose the federal workforce reduction strategy.