OPM directed agencies to fire 25,000+ probationary federal employees, bypassing statutory RIF procedures
On February 14, 2025, Acting OPM Director Charles Ezell sent a memorandum to the Chief Human Capital Officers Council directing all federal agencies to separate probationary employees not identified as mission-critical by end of day February 17. Agencies across government fired more than 25,000 employees using template termination letters citing employee "performance" — a rationale contradicted by the absence of any individualized performance review. Federal courts ruled the directive unlawful, finding OPM lacked statutory authority to direct other agencies to fire employees and that the mass separations required 60-day advance notice and formal RIF procedures that were never followed.
Actors
- Charles Ezell (Acting Director, Office of Personnel Management)
- Office of Personnel Management
On February 14, 2025, Acting Director Charles Ezell of the Office of Personnel Management sent a memorandum to the Chief Human Capital Officers Council directing all federal agencies to "separate probationary employees that you have not identified as mission-critical no later than end of day Monday, 2/17." The directive included a template termination letter and followed a February 13 call in which OPM had instructed agency HR officials to begin the process. More than 25,000 federal workers were fired across dozens of agencies in the days that followed — including over 1,000 at the Department of Veterans Affairs, more than 3,000 at the Forest Service, and hundreds each at the EPA and Department of Education.
No individualized performance reviews were conducted. Every template letter stated the employee was being separated "based on your performance" — language drawn from a form Ezell had sent to his own OPM staff. The VA's chief human capital officer testified before Congress that the termination memo had been "provided for my signature" and confirmed that direction came from OPM. Federal civil service law requires 60-day advance notice, competitive-area procedures, and bump-and-retreat rights for any reduction-in-force under 5 U.S.C. §§ 3501–3504; performance-based removals separately require documented deficiencies under § 4303. None of these procedures were followed. When OPM later argued in court that it had never ordered the firings, the claim was directly contradicted by the February 14 memo, agency testimony, and Ezell's own termination letters.
Updates
2025-02-27 — Judge Alsup ordered OPM directives rescinded; ruled OPM lacked statutory authority [3]
U.S. District Judge William Alsup (N.D. Cal.), presiding over a lawsuit by the American Federation of Government Employees, ordered the Trump administration to rescind both OPM's January 20 memo and the February 14 CHCO Council directive. Alsup wrote that "No statute — anywhere, ever — has granted OPM the authority to direct the termination of employees in other agencies." The Merit Systems Protection Board separately found the terminations were unlawful reductions-in-force. OPM subsequently amended its January 20 memo to disclaim that it had ordered any firings — a retroactive edit courts did not credit.
2025-09-12 — Court granted partial summary judgment; ordered agencies to correct personnel files [4]
Judge Alsup granted partial summary judgment for AFGE, making the injunction largely permanent and affirming that OPM's orders and the resulting mass terminations were unlawful. Although agencies were not required to reinstate terminated workers, the court ordered them to notify affected employees that they were not fired for poor performance or misconduct, and to correct their personnel files accordingly. The government's appeal was dismissed by the Ninth Circuit on January 2, 2026.
Why we recorded this
Congress established statutory procedures for separating federal employees — including 60-day advance notice, formal reduction-in-force procedures, and individualized documentation requirements under 5 U.S.C. §§ 4303 and 7513 — to protect the civil service from politically motivated mass terminations. OPM's February 14 directive bypassed all of these requirements, ordering 25,000+ separations within 72 hours using "performance" as a cover for what courts found were unlawful reductions-in-force. This archive records when executive agencies override Congress's statutory protections for the federal workforce, replacing civil service law with direct command authority.
Sources
- Federal judge invalidates OPM's directives to terminate federal probationary workers — Federal News Network primary accessed June 28, 2026
- Sweeping cuts hit recent federal hires as Trump administration slashes workforce — NPR secondary accessed June 28, 2026
- Judge orders Trump admin to rescind memo directing mass firing of federal workers — NBC News primary accessed June 28, 2026
- Court finds OPM unlawfully directed mass firings, tells agencies to update personnel files — Federal News Network primary accessed June 28, 2026
See also
- Trump fired Office of Special Counsel Director Hampton Dellinger without statutory cause, disabling federal whistleblower protection agency
- OPM demanded weekly work reports from 2 million federal employees under DOGE direction; Musk threatened mass resignation for non-response
- Trump signed presidential memo granting OPM authority to dismiss career civil servants based on post-appointment conduct
- Trump administration fires 4,200 federal workers via shutdown RIFs, wielding budget lapse as workforce reduction tool
- OMB Director Vought announces 10,000+ federal shutdown layoffs, vowing to use budget lapse for permanent workforce cuts