Judge reverses mass-firings of Federal workers

Horace

I'm sure this is by the letter of the law, but it will do nothing to disabuse the public of their notion that federal workers have it easy as compared to their private sector counterparts.

Jolly

@89th said in Judge reverses mass-firings of Federal workers:

Pretty clear ruling, agencies can reduce staff but need to follow the law. They can't make up "performance" reasons. It's also a little ironic the Trump administration is refusing to allow witnesses to be cross-examined after all the January 6th whining.

Also despite the name, "probationary employees" are not "on probation" for performance reasons. It's the term used when an employee is within the first 1-2 years of service. I honestly am not sure if Trump and Elon know that, since they often conflate "performance reasons" and "probationary employees."

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/03/13/fired-federal-probationary-employees-court-ruling-00228721

In the government, any probationary employee is subject to termination without cause.

Period.

jon-nyc

I don’t know the relevant law but this is a better result for Doge honestly. They’re better off doing targeted layoffs rather than get rid of whole classes of employees just because they’re easier to get rid of.

89th

@Jolly said in Judge reverses mass-firings of Federal workers:

@89th said in Judge reverses mass-firings of Federal workers:

Pretty clear ruling, agencies can reduce staff but need to follow the law. They can't make up "performance" reasons. It's also a little ironic the Trump administration is refusing to allow witnesses to be cross-examined after all the January 6th whining.

Also despite the name, "probationary employees" are not "on probation" for performance reasons. It's the term used when an employee is within the first 1-2 years of service. I honestly am not sure if Trump and Elon know that, since they often conflate "performance reasons" and "probationary employees."

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/03/13/fired-federal-probationary-employees-court-ruling-00228721

In the government, any probationary employee is subject to termination without cause.

Period.

Not period. See CFR 3.15.804-805. Cause must be found.

https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-5/chapter-I/subchapter-B/part-315/subpart-H?toc=1

Jolly · Not period. See CFR 3.15.804-805. Cause must be found.

@89th said in Judge reverses mass-firings of Federal workers:

@Jolly said in Judge reverses mass-firings of Federal workers:

@89th said in Judge reverses mass-firings of Federal workers:

Pretty clear ruling, agencies can reduce staff but need to follow the law. They can't make up "performance" reasons. It's also a little ironic the Trump administration is refusing to allow witnesses to be cross-examined after all the January 6th whining.

Also despite the name, "probationary employees" are not "on probation" for performance reasons. It's the term used when an employee is within the first 1-2 years of service. I honestly am not sure if Trump and Elon know that, since they often conflate "performance reasons" and "probationary employees."

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/03/13/fired-federal-probationary-employees-court-ruling-00228721

In the government, any probationary employee is subject to termination without cause.

Period.

Not period. See CFR 3.15.804-805. Cause must be found.

https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-5/chapter-I/subchapter-B/part-315/subpart-H?toc=1

We have hereby determined that the United States was operating under a deficit when you were hired and sadly, you are hereby terminated in an effort to save money.

Under CFR 3.15.804-805, conditions existed before employee hire which necessitated his termination.

Jolly

@89th said in Judge reverses mass-firings of Federal workers:

Pretty clear ruling, agencies can reduce staff but need to follow the law. They can't make up "performance" reasons. It's also a little ironic the Trump administration is refusing to allow witnesses to be cross-examined after all the January 6th whining.

Also despite the name, "probationary employees" are not "on probation" for performance reasons. It's the term used when an employee is within the first 1-2 years of service. I honestly am not sure if Trump and Elon know that, since they often conflate "performance reasons" and "probationary employees."

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/03/13/fired-federal-probationary-employees-court-ruling-00228721

A couple of other things...

This is a San Francisco judge and Clinton appointee. Consider the source.
The next push will be in 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, I'm guessing.

The Dems are court shopping and this will all wind up at SCOTUS. Again.

Jolly

Lastly, when UpChuck shuts the government down, the poor little lambs aren't going to get paid, anyway.

89th · Not period. See CFR 3.15.804-805. Cause must be found.

@Jolly said in Judge reverses mass-firings of Federal workers:

@89th said in Judge reverses mass-firings of Federal workers:

@Jolly said in Judge reverses mass-firings of Federal workers:

@89th said in Judge reverses mass-firings of Federal workers:

Pretty clear ruling, agencies can reduce staff but need to follow the law. They can't make up "performance" reasons. It's also a little ironic the Trump administration is refusing to allow witnesses to be cross-examined after all the January 6th whining.

Also despite the name, "probationary employees" are not "on probation" for performance reasons. It's the term used when an employee is within the first 1-2 years of service. I honestly am not sure if Trump and Elon know that, since they often conflate "performance reasons" and "probationary employees."

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/03/13/fired-federal-probationary-employees-court-ruling-00228721

In the government, any probationary employee is subject to termination without cause.

Period.

Not period. See CFR 3.15.804-805. Cause must be found.

https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-5/chapter-I/subchapter-B/part-315/subpart-H?toc=1

We have hereby determined that the United States was operating under a deficit when you were hired and sadly, you are hereby terminated in an effort to save money.

Under CFR 3.15.804-805, conditions existed before employee hire which necessitated his termination.

Agree. And the judge says it can happen as you state, but that’s not what occurred… it cannot be on the mass scale with an umbrella performance reasoning. That’s against the law.

As a Republican, I’m with the party of law and order!

Jolly

Distinction without a difference. End result is that we spend a ton of taxpayer money and everybody stays or is eventually, fired.

89th

So about 25,000 employees are currently on "paid leave", which is costing the taxpayer $8,000,000 per day. Lovely. If only the administration had thought this through...

https://wtop.com/government/2025/03/getting-paid-not-to-work-federal-probationary-workers-are-being-reinstated-but-put-on-paid-leave/

Jolly

I guess Trump will now have to get the ruling overturned or just wait until they're RIF'ed.

Copper

I once had an assignment at AID to get the AID GS employees to stop using punch cards (it was 1979) for their computer code. The bosses wanted them to use terminals, but the government programmers wouldn't trust them. They trusted cards they could hold in their hands. Really.

The solution? Take away all the furniture they used to store the cards. That made the programmers give up and start using terminals to write code.

Maybe Mr. Trump could take away all the employees desks and chairs. Eventually they'll get tired and go away.

The New Coffee Room

Judge reverses mass-firings of Federal workers