Flaw in Musk’s Plan to Layoff Federal Workers
The Flaw in Musk’s Plan which a Military Veteran Exposed
Tech billionaire Elon Musk’s ploy to strong-arm large sections of the federal workforce into taking “deferred resignations” is not going to work, wrote Michael Embrich for Rolling Stone.
Federal workers were given this offer by a bizarre email titled “Fork in the Road.” An ultimatum eerily similar to that given to employees at Twitter when Musk took over that business. Already the proposal has run into complications and criticism. A federal judge paused the deadline on that offer, which was supposed to be today.
A veteran and former Veterans Affairs adviser Embrich wrote . . .
“Despite repeated emails, misleading promises, and thinly veiled threats, the so-called ‘deferred resignation’ program is flopping. Instead of persuading career civil servants to abandon their posts, Musk’s latest scheme is exposing the administration’s desperation and legal recklessness. Less than 1 percent of federal workers have taken the offer. The recent legal filing by the American Federation of Government Employees and two federal employees seeking a restraining order against Musk’s DOGE further hampers Musk’s plans. In the end, this debacle will likely cost the federal government more in legal fees, settlements, and billable legal hours than ever.”
Musk meant to send a clear message with this ultimatum. Embrich wrote. Either take a buyout now, or risk being fired later anyway and getting nothing. But there’s a simple reason civil servants are calling his bluff.
Michael Embrich . . .
“The tens of thousands of veterans who transitioned to government service after their military careers know the law. The government cannot pay a federal worker for work they did not perform unless Congress specifically authorizes it. That would most likely take years. In any case, there is no guarantee Congress would ever approve such funding, especially given the ongoing dysfunction. Republicans are struggling to fund their own government, draft a reconciliation bill, or elect a leader.
Federal employees know their rights, and they recognize this scheme for what it is: an illegal power play riddled with political gamesmanship and destined for legal challenges.”
“‘Holding the line’: Federal worker hits back at Musk’s intimidation tactics.” Raw Story
I think there is a lot of work that needs to be done prior to having a significant percentage of civil servants perceiving a fork in the road. These kinds of “forks” are easier to perceive when there isn’t a defined benefit pension as part of the compensation. Not sure what the status of that is for federal civil servants. The firm I worked at used a two-step process. First, no pension for new hires. People in the plan saw no change. Then years later that plan was “frozen”. I believed it was timed so that the last employees hired with a pension plan had enough time to vest if they remained employed. So you now have people retiring with 34 years service and like 31 years of pension. If the defined pensions stop being a part of compensation, likely that legitimately funded incentives would get more positive consideration. Getting out of pensions though is usually neither quick nor inexpensive.
No perception. It is a decision they are being told to make by someone who has no authority in which to enforce it. He is not the president and neither is he legitimate.
For the individual employee though, Musk’s authority or lack thereof, is not very important. Unless Musk’s “fork in the road” offer is explicitly endorsed by a department’s HR manager do not accept it, but immediately inform HR in writing you want the deal but it needs to come from their function, not DOGE. There is no way that at the end of this the authorized HR manager is not the party the employee has the agreement with. If HR managers are already explicitly behind this offer, take it seriously. There is a way to structure these payments in conjunction with the Department of Labor so that the employee can still get unemployment while they look for work, although it is no longer a lump sum settlement. Not sure if the federal government itself can use this option. I’d say there is 0% chance that you can accept this, quit and then find out there is no money for you. Don’t worry about DOGE, but just work with HR.
Eric:
You have a lot of ifs in your comment. If the Pres says so (Trump endorses Musk), there is not one Personal Manager who will not go along with the process. That is unless they wish to be a part of the forced exit.
What is pointed out here is . . . it appears to be illegal and people who are familiar with the rules or laws our making the point of Musk’s BS.
By the way, I am all for revoking Musk’s citizenship.
I found a copy of the offer and it’s not great. The news accounts say you’ll get 8 months of pay, but that’s not that informative. It’s more that if you agree not to work past September 30, 2025, they agree to keep you employed through that date. Way better is if you agree to leave by February 28, we give you +8 months pay on your departure. Yes it suggests that maybe they won’t ask you to do any work, but no guarantee of that. It’s not a severance offer really. Studying it, I would not be surprised if the bulk of acceptances comes from people planning to retire by September 30. Giving soon-to-be retirees a nice vacation first will do nothing to save costs and reduce headcount that can’t be gotten with just the hiring freeze. It’s such an unexciting offer that I suspect that Musk is thinking about “shock and awe” layoffs….a weak buyout followed by big layoffs that don’t cost much. Not sure they can pull it off. But I do now feel comfortable that if employees ask HR if it’s real, they’ll say it is, so thinking about Musk’s authority here isn’t germane. What’s germane is that it’s not great. They only thing that can sell this is real fears of layoffs. If civil servants think that 25% layoffs will be happening, the uptake will increase. Employees don’t think it’s going to happen is my read. They could be right.