Trump's hardball moves leave fired federal workers few paths to fight for their jobs back
After firing tens of thousands of federal workers this year, President Donald Trump has also made it much harder for them to get their jobs back as he imposes his will over the labor agencies that are supposed to protect their rights.
He has hobbled independent labor boards, installed a loyalist at a key agency that protects civil servants, and signed an executive order to end collective bargaining for many federal workers. This has left government employees with dwindling options to contest their firings through channels normally available to civil servants, with many turning to the courts for relief or giving up altogether.
'It is significantly more difficult for a federal employee to have their case heard by an independent body,' said former Merit Systems Protection Board member Ray Limon. 'What we're seeing here is a complete elimination of traditional employee due process and investigation of complaints, which is unparalleled in the history of our government.'
In an effort to ensure a stable, professional and merit-based workforce across administrations, Congress has long mandated certain due-process protections from arbitrary firings for the more than 2 million federal employees.
But as federal employees – ranging from newer 'probationary' workers who were fired en masse, to career civil servants who believe they were dismissed for partisan purposes – seek to challenge their terminations in the second Trump administration, they are finding it harder than ever to push back.
Amid sweeping layoffs and resignations, civic groups have stepped in to connect some of these disillusioned workers with new jobs in state and local government. Meanwhile, the Trump administration is fighting in court to defend his mass firings and executive orders.
'President Trump is the chief executive of the executive branch and reserves the right to fire anyone he wants,' White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement.
The reversal of fortunes for fired employees has been most glaring at the Office of Special Counsel (OSC), which was created by Congress in the post-Watergate era to safeguard merit systems in the federal government. The agency often advocates on behalf of employees at the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB), which reviews workers' complaints.
Hampton Dellinger was one year into his five-year term at OSC when Trump was sworn in. It didn't take long for the Senate-confirmed Biden appointee to break ranks with Trump on a major priority for the new administration: shrinking the size of the federal workforce.
Dellinger concluded that Trump's mass firings of probationary workers were unlawful, and successfully urged the MSPB to reinstate 6,000 employees. Advocacy groups hailed the outcome as a landmark moment that could pave the way for additional reinstatements.
Then, Trump fired Dellinger. After Dellinger lost a brief court battle over his own termination, Trump turned to two loyalists to fill his role. He tapped Veterans Affairs Secretary Doug Collins in February to temporarily lead OSC, and by late March, US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer was slotted into the acting role.
Under Greer's watch, OSC dropped its support for reinstating any probationary employees.
OSC notified some federal employees in late April that it conducted a 'review' and determined that the firings were proper and were 'in accordance with the new administration's priorities,' according to legal filings and records reviewed by CNN. This was a 180-degree turn from OSC's position under Dellinger.
'We're now seeing OSC not actually do the kinds of things it's supposed to be doing,' said Skye Perryman, president of Democracy Forward, which represented the 6,000 reinstated workers. 'The administration… is seeking to undermine accountability structures that were put in place to ensure federal employees have redress and civil service protections.'
An OSC spokesman declined to comment.
The Trump administration has also defanged, at least for the time being, two federal labor boards – which serve as bulwarks against partisan abuses and workplace discrimination by independently reviewing complaints.
MSPB and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) are currently without a quorum after Trump fired several members, leaving them operational but unable to function at full strength. The people Trump fired were appointed by President Joe Biden and confirmed by the Senate.
For instance, the MSPB can't issue final rulings on workers' complaints without a quorum. And the EEOC isn't able to initiate major litigation or vote on policy rulemaking.
One MSPB member that Trump fired has filed a lawsuit to get her job back, which would restore a quorum. But she faces an uphill fight at the conservative-leaning Supreme Court, which has already rebuffed her bid to get back on the job while her legal case plays out.
MSPB spokesman Zachary Kurz said the agency 'remains open for business and its work continues,' adding that its 'ability to adjudicate cases is fully functional across its regional offices, and it will continue to process petitions for review.' EEOC spokesman James Ryan said the commission 'is still open for business and taking all charges.'
In December, during the presidential transition, the EEOC voted on a bipartisan basis to delegate some of its powers to commission staff, which they could use if a quorum is lost.
There are signs that the Trump administration may be slow-walking some MSPB cases.
Typically, the agency facing a worker's complaint will defend itself at MSPB. But the lead HR agency overseeing federal civil servants, the Office of Personnel Management, is intervening in more than 40 pending cases involving Justice Department officials that were fired in March, according to filings reviewed by CNN.
OPM has asked an administrative judge to pause all of the 40-plus cases, according to the filings. CNN has reached out to OPM for comment about its intervention in these MSPB cases.
Limon, the former Democratic-appointed MSPB member, said it is 'very unusual' for OPM to intervene in pending cases like these. It never happened during his three years as vice chairman, he said, but it could be warranted if there is an apparent conflict of interest.
One of the cases was filed by Liz Oyer, the former Justice Department pardon attorney who was part of a large group of firings approved by Todd Blanche, the former Trump lawyer who is now deputy attorney general. Oyer claims she was terminated because she refused to bow to pressure from Trump appointees who wanted her to restore the gun rights of actor Mel Gibson, which he lost after a 2011 state domestic violence conviction.
'It does not seem like the MSPB proceeding will be resolved anytime soon,' Oyer told CNN. 'The Justice Department is doing everything they can to delay and avoid providing any information about the reasons for my firing and others. This is frustrating and unfortunate for everyone who lost their jobs and who have no other recourse.'
Blanche previously told CNN in a statement that Oyer's 'version of events is false' and 'erroneous.'
CNN has reported that some fired workers are struggling to navigate overlapping agencies that handle complaints and to decipher the 'legalese' on government websites.
Union stewards often help members through this process but those efforts have been undermined by Trump's recent executive order attempting to end collective bargaining rights for a large share of the federal workforce.
Alex Berman, an Internal Revenue Service employee who is a union leader in Philadelphia, said some of his colleagues aren't sure if they are even allowed to talk to their union representatives after Trump's executive order. And in some IRS offices, he said union leaders have been banned from using official time to answer questions from union members, as was permitted under their existing contract when Trump took office.
The IRS didn't respond to CNN's request for comment.
'Most employees know what they're supposed to do for their jobs, but don't know what recourse there may be in any given situation, up to and including a firing,' Berman said. 'Without the unions, people are in the dark as to what their rights and responsibilities are.'
His group, the National Treasury Employees Union, has repeatedly sued the Trump administration and convinced a judge to block his collective-bargaining ban. It's one of more than a dozen labor unions, anti-Trump groups, and advocacy organizations that launched a legal defense fund to help people 'who have been fired illegally' under Trump.
Some terminated employees – like the probationary hires, and the former top OSC and MSPB officials – saw initial success in court, where judges ruled that their firings were unlawful. But the Trump administration has prevailed in reversing some of those decisions, some on a temporary basis, as they are heard by more conservative federal appellate courts.
'The courts will be increasingly important as the administration seeks to close other avenues for redress,' said Perryman, whose group is involved in the legal defense fund.
She said more than 1,000 lawyers signed up in the first week to volunteer their time.
As morale falls with each round of mass firings, some groups see an opportunity.
Caitlin Lewis, the executive director at Work For America, launched a service that is trying to match up thousands of federal employees with jobs in state or local government.
'Oversight authorities and regulatory authorities are being stripped of their powers,' Lewis said. 'The overwhelming sentiment is exhaustion and frustration. They don't feel equipped to take on the system as individuals. As they've been left in this state of purgatory and confusion, their faith is diminishing that the system is going to protect their legal rights.'
Her CivicMatch platform has seen a 15-fold increase in activity since Trump took office, with more than 8,000 federal workers expressing interest in new public sector jobs. Many worked at hard-hit agencies like the IRS and the US Agency for International Development.
While some workers are mobile, plenty of others are unable to uproot their families in search of new opportunities, especially in an uncertain economic climate. For those who are willing to make the move, however, some states and cities recently stepped up recruitment efforts, to fill their own ranks with veterans of the public service sector – and to stand up to Trump.
'More and more people are unwilling to wait it out,' Lewis said. 'It's a moment of loss for the federal government, but it's a moment of possibility for state and local governments.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
23 minutes ago
- Axios
U.S. has "no interest" in putting troops on the ground in Iran, Vance says
Vice President Vance said Sunday that the United States doesn't plan to send ground troops into Iran and there is "no interest" in engaging in a "protracted conflict" with the nation. The big picture: Vance and other Trump administration officials appeared on Sunday shows to praise President Trump 's decision to carry out a series of airstrikes against three Iranian nuclear sites, while reassuring Americans that the mission — dubbed Operation Midnight Hammer — isn't the launching point for a wider conflict. Speaking on NBC's "Meet the Press," Vance called the mission a "precise, a very surgical strike tailored to an American national interest" — preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon — and that he had "no fear" of a drawn-out conflict. Secretary of State Marco Rubio echoed the sentiment on CBS' "Face the Nation," saying that there are no plans from the U.S. to engage in further attacks on Iran unless they "mess around" and attack Americans or U.S. military sites. What they're saying: Rubio said Sunday that the U.S. carried out the attack after efforts to negotiate with Iran stalled, but that Trump administration officials are "prepared to talk to them tomorrow." Both men also dismissed the notion that the U.S. is at war with Iran, with Vance stating that the war is with Iran's nuclear program. "We destroyed the Iranian nuclear program. I think we set that program back substantially," Vance told NBC News' Kristen Welker. Zoom out: Vance and Rubio were unable to confirm the extent of the damage done to the nuclear sites, but Iran Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmail Baghaei told CNN that the strike was a "betrayal of diplomacy." "No one knows what will happen next, but what is sure is that the responsibility of the consequences of this war must be borne by the United States and Israel," he said. Bagahei refused to say how Iran might respond to the U.S. strike, but said the nation is entitled to "exercise its right of self-defense."
CNN
24 minutes ago
- CNN
Dem. Senator Adam Schiff says 'we simply don't know' if US is safer after Iran strikes
Democratic Senator Adam Schiff speaks to Kasie Hunt about the congressional response to President Trump's order to strike Iran.
TechCrunch
24 minutes ago
- TechCrunch
Moratorium on state AI regulation clears Senate hurdle
A Republican effort to prevent states from enforcing their own AI regulations cleared a key procedural hurdle on Saturday. The rule, as reportedly rewritten by Senate Commerce Chair Ted Cruz in an attempt to comply with budgetary rules, would withhold federal broadband funding from states if they try to enforce AI regulations in the next 10 years. And the rewrite seems to have passed muster, with the Senate Parliamentarian now ruling that the provision is not subject to the so-called Byrd rule — so it can be included in Republicans' 'One Big, Beautiful Bill' and passed with a simple majority, without potentially getting blocked by a filibuster, and without requiring support from Senate Democrats. However, it's not clear how many Republicans will support the moratorium. For example, Republican Senator Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee recently said, 'We do not need a moratorium that would prohibit our states from stepping up and protecting citizens in their state.' And while the House of Representatives already passed a version of the bill that included a moratorium on AI regulation, far-right Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene subbsequently declared that she is 'adamantly OPPOSED' the provision as 'a violation of state rights' and said it needs to be 'stripped out in the Senate.' House Speaker Mike Johnson defended the provision by saying it had President Donald Trump's support and arguing, 'We have to be careful not to have 50 different states regulating AI, because it has national security implications, right?' In a recent report, Americans for Responsible Innovation (an advocacy group for AI regulation), wrote that 'the proposal's broad language could potentially sweep away a wide range of public interest state legislation regulating AI and other algorithmic-based technologies, creating a regulatory vacuum across multiple technology policy domains without offering federal alternatives to replace the eliminated state-level guardrails.' Techcrunch event Save $200+ on your TechCrunch All Stage pass Build smarter. Scale faster. Connect deeper. Join visionaries from Precursor Ventures, NEA, Index Ventures, Underscore VC, and beyond for a day packed with strategies, workshops, and meaningful connections. Save $200+ on your TechCrunch All Stage pass Build smarter. Scale faster. Connect deeper. Join visionaries from Precursor Ventures, NEA, Index Ventures, Underscore VC, and beyond for a day packed with strategies, workshops, and meaningful connections. Boston, MA | REGISTER NOW A number of states do seem to be taking steps toward AI regulation. In California, Governor Gavin Newsom vetoed a high-profile AI safety bill last year while signing a number of less controversial regulations around issues like privacy and deepfakes. In New York, an AI safety bill passed by state lawmakers is awaiting Governor Kathy Hochul's signature. And Utah has passed its own regulations around AI transparency.
