ReportWire

Tag: federal employee

  • Nonprofits, credit unions help impacted federal workers from government shutdown

    [ad_1]

    Nonprofits, credit unions help impacted federal workers from government shutdown

    Updated: 2:41 PM PDT Oct 16, 2025

    Editorial Standards

    From nonprofits to credit unions, organizations across the country are stepping up to help military families and federal workers as the government shutdown continues. Many are reporting an alarming surge in demand.Since the shutdown, military spouse Alicia Blevins has faced a mountain of stress. Her family’s savings are depleted, stress-related health issues are emerging, and her job search has been put on hold 16 days into the shutdown. “It’s the stress that’s really gotten to us,” Blevins said. “Right now, I’ve got my resume out to every customer service job, entry level or not. I’ve got it out everywhere.”The desperation is being felt at nonprofits like the Military Family Advisory Network (MFAN). This week, the organization launched its emergency grocery support program in response to the shutdown, noting that more than 6,000 verified military families applied for its 1,600 grocery packages in the first 24 hours alone.”This moment really puts families at a very fragile place,” MFAN’s Chief Advancement Officer Kara Pappas said. “The need has so quickly eclipsed the demand that we need support from Americans.”Financial institutions are also escalating aid to military members and federal workers who qualify. The Navy Federal Credit Union, for example, is offering 0% interest loans through its paycheck assistance program.The USAA is offering the same and reports that it’s issued nearly $270 million in loans to more than 71,000 of its members so far.The Federal Employee Education and Assistance Fund (FEEA) is giving those eligible up to $150 in micro-grants to support federal employees impacted by the shutdown.Patrick Malone, Director at the Key Executive Leadership Program at American University, emphasizes prioritizing mental health during the shutdown. Malone advises those impacted to reach out and tap into resources immediately and scheduling time for self-care.Watch the latest coverage on the federal government shutdown:

    From nonprofits to credit unions, organizations across the country are stepping up to help military families and federal workers as the government shutdown continues. Many are reporting an alarming surge in demand.

    Since the shutdown, military spouse Alicia Blevins has faced a mountain of stress. Her family’s savings are depleted, stress-related health issues are emerging, and her job search has been put on hold 16 days into the shutdown.

    “It’s the stress that’s really gotten to us,” Blevins said. “Right now, I’ve got my resume out to every customer service job, entry level or not. I’ve got it out everywhere.”

    The desperation is being felt at nonprofits like the Military Family Advisory Network (MFAN). This week, the organization launched its emergency grocery support program in response to the shutdown, noting that more than 6,000 verified military families applied for its 1,600 grocery packages in the first 24 hours alone.

    “This moment really puts families at a very fragile place,” MFAN’s Chief Advancement Officer Kara Pappas said. “The need has so quickly eclipsed the demand that we need support from Americans.”

    Financial institutions are also escalating aid to military members and federal workers who qualify.

    The Navy Federal Credit Union, for example, is offering 0% interest loans through its paycheck assistance program.

    The USAA is offering the same and reports that it’s issued nearly $270 million in loans to more than 71,000 of its members so far.

    The Federal Employee Education and Assistance Fund (FEEA) is giving those eligible up to $150 in micro-grants to support federal employees impacted by the shutdown.

    Patrick Malone, Director at the Key Executive Leadership Program at American University, emphasizes prioritizing mental health during the shutdown. Malone advises those impacted to reach out and tap into resources immediately and scheduling time for self-care.

    Watch the latest coverage on the federal government shutdown:

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • California judge halts Trump federal job cuts amid government shutdown

    [ad_1]

    A federal judge blocked the Trump administration Wednesday from firing thousands of government workers based on the ongoing federal shutdown, granting a request from employee unions in California.

    U.S. District Judge Susan Illston issued the temporary restraining order after concluding that the unions “will demonstrate ultimately that what’s being done here is both illegal and is in excess of authority and is arbitrary and capricious.”

    Illston slammed the Trump administration for failing to provide her with clear information about what cuts are actually occurring, for repeatedly changing its description and estimates of job cuts in filings before the court, and for failing — including during Wednesday’s hearing in San Francisco — to articulate an argument for why such cuts are not in violation of federal law.

    “The evidence suggests that the Office of Management and Budget, OMB, and the Office of Personnel Management, OPM, have taken advantage of the lapse in government spending and government functioning to assume that all bets are off, that the laws don’t apply to them anymore,” Illston said — which she said was not the case.

    She said the government justified providing inaccurate figures for the number of jobs being eliminated under its “reduction in force” orders by calling it a “fluid situation” — which she did not find convincing.

    “What it is is a situation where things are being done before they are being thought through. It’s very much ready, fire, aim on most of these programs,” she said. “And it has a human cost, which is really why we’re here today. It’s a human cost that cannot be tolerated.”

    Illston also ran through a string of recent comments made by President Trump and other members of his administration about the firings and their intentionally targeting programs and agencies supported by Democrats, saying, “By all appearances, they’re politically motivated.”

    The Trump administration has acknowledged dismissing about 4,000 workers under the orders, while Trump and other officials have signaled that more would come Friday.

    Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought said Wednesday on “The Charlie Kirk Show” that the number of jobs cut could “probably end up being north of 10,000,” as the administration wants to be “very aggressive where we can be in shuttering the bureaucracy, not just the funding,” and the shutdown provided that opportunity.

    Attorneys for the unions, led by the American Federation of Government Employees, said that the figures were unreliable and that they feared additional reduction in force orders resulting in more layoffs, as promised by administration officials, if the court did not step in and block such actions.

    Illston, an appointee of President Clinton, did just that.

    She barred the Trump administration and its various agencies “from taking any action to issue any reduction in force notices to federal employees in any program, project or activity” involving union members “during or because of the federal shutdown.”

    She also barred the administration from “taking any further action to administer or implement” existing reduction notices involving union members.

    Illston demanded that the administration provide within two days a full accounting of all existing or “imminent” reduction in force orders that would be blocked by her order, as well as the specific number of federal jobs affected.

    Elizabeth Hedges, an attorney for the Trump administration, had argued during the hearing that the order should not be granted for several procedural reasons — including that the alleged harm to federal employees from loss of employment or benefits was not “irreparable” and could be addressed through other avenues, including civil litigation.

    Additionally, she argued that federal employment claims should be adjudicated administratively, not in district court; and that the reduction in force orders included 60-day notice periods, meaning the layoffs were not immediate and therefore the challenge to them was not yet “ripe” legally.

    However, Hedges would not discuss the case on its actual merits — which is to say, whether the cuts were actually legal or not, which did not seem to sit well with Illston.

    “You don’t have a position on whether it’s OK that they do what they’re doing?” Illston asked.

    “I am not prepared to discuss that today, your honor,” Hedges said.

    “Well — but it’s happening. This hatchet is falling on the heads of employees all across the nation, and you’re not even prepared to address whether that’s legal, even though that’s what this motion challenges?” Illston said.

    “That’s right,” Hedges said — stressing again that there were “threshold” arguments for why the case shouldn’t even be allowed to continue to the merits stage.

    Danielle Leonard, an attorney for the unions, suggested the government’s positions were indefensible and directly in conflict with public statements by the administration — including remarks by Trump on Tuesday that more cuts are coming Friday.

    “How do we know this? Because OMB and the president relentlessly are telling us, and other members of the administration,” Leonard said.

    Leonard said the harm from the administration’s actions is obvious and laid out in the union’s filings — showing how employees have at times been left in the dark as to their employment status because they don’t have access to work communication channels during the shutdown, or how others have been called in to “work without pay to fire their fellow employees” — only to then be fired themselves.

    “There are multiple types of harm that are caused exactly right now — emotional trauma. That’s not my word, your honor, that is the word of OMB Director Vought. Let’s cause ‘trauma’ to the federal workforce,” Leonard said. “And that’s exactly what they are doing. Trauma. The emotional distress of being told you are being fired after an already exceptionally difficult year for federal employees.”

    Skye Perryman, president and chief executive of Democracy Forward, which is co-counsel for the unions, praised Illston’s decision in a statement after the hearing.

    “The statements today by the court make clear that the President’s targeting of federal workers — a move straight out of Project 2025’s playbook — is unlawful,” Perryman said. “Our civil servants do the work of the people, and playing games with their livelihoods is cruel and unlawful and a threat to everyone in our nation.”

    Illston asked the two parties to confer on the best date, probably later this month, for a fuller hearing on whether she should issue a more lasting preliminary injunction in the case.

    “It would be wonderful to know what the government’s position is on the merits of this case — and my breath is bated until we find that,” Illston said.

    After the hearing, during a White House news conference, Trump said his administration was paying federal employees whom “we want paid” while Vought uses the shutdown to dismiss employees perceived as supporting Democratic initiatives.

    “Russell Vought is really terminating tremendous numbers of Democrat projects — not only jobs,” Trump said.

    [ad_2]

    Kevin Rector

    Source link

  • The Trump loyalist who picked up where Musk left off with slashing federal workforce: ‘We’re having fun’

    [ad_1]

    It has been four months since Elon Musk, President Trump’s bureaucratic demolition man, abandoned Washington in a flurry of recriminations and chaos.

    But the Trump administration’s crusade to dismantle much of the federal government never ended. It’s merely under new management: the less colorful but more methodical Russell Vought, director of Trump’s Office of Management and Budget.

    Vought has become the backroom architect of Trump’s aggressive strategy — slashing the federal workforce, freezing billions in congressionally approved spending in actions his critics often call illegal.

    Now Vought has proposed using the current government shutdown as an opportunity to fire thousands of bureaucrats permanently instead of merely furloughing them temporarily. If any do return to work, he has suggested that the government need not give them back pay — contrary to a law Trump signed in 2019.

    Those threats may prove merely to be pressure tactics as Trump tries to persuade Democrats to accept spending cuts on Medicaid, Obamacare and other programs.

    But the shutdown battle is the current phase of a much larger one. Vought’s long-term goals, he says, are to “bend or break the bureaucracy to the presidential will” and “deconstruct the administrative state.”

    He’s still only partway done.

    “I’d estimate that Vought has implemented maybe 10% or 15% of his program,” said Donald F. Kettl, former dean of the public policy school at the University of Maryland. “There may be as much as 90% to go. If this were a baseball game, we’d be in the top of the second inning.”

    Along the way, Vought (pronounced “vote”) has chipped relentlessly at Congress’ ability to control the use of federal funds, massively expanding the power of the president.

    “He has waged the most serious attack on separation of powers in American history,” said Elaine Kamarck, an expert on federal management at the Brookings Institution.

    He’s done that mainly by using OMB, the White House office that oversees spending, to control the day-to-day purse strings of federal agencies — and deliberately keeping Congress in the dark along the way.

    “If Congress has given us authority that is too broad, then we’re going to use that authority aggressively,” Vought said last month.

    Federal judges have ruled some of the administration’s actions illegal, but they have allowed others to stand. Vought’s proposal to use the shutdown to fire thousands of bureaucrats hasn’t been tested in court.

    Vought developed his aggressive approach during two decades as a conservative budget expert, culminating in his appointment as director of OMB in Trump’s first term.

    In 2019, he stretched the limits of presidential power by helping Trump get around a congressional ban on funding for a border wall, by declaring an emergency and transferring military funds. He froze congressionally mandated aid for Ukraine, the action that led to Trump’s first impeachment.

    Even so, Vought complained that Trump had been needlessly restrained by cautious first-term aides.

    “The lawyers come in and say, ‘It’s not legal. You can’t do that,’” he said in 2023. “I don’t want President Trump having to lose a moment of time having fights in the Oval Office over whether something is legal.”

    Vought is a proponent of the “unitary executive” theory, the argument that the president should have unfettered control over every tentacle of the executive branch, including independent agencies such as the Federal Reserve.

    When Congress designates money for federal programs, he has argued, “It’s a ceiling. It is not a floor. It’s not the notion that you have to spend every dollar.”

    Most legal experts disagree; a 1974 law prohibits the president from unilaterally withholding money Congress has appropriated.

    Vought told conservative activists in 2023 that if Trump returned to power, he would deliberately seek to inflict “trauma” on federal employees.

    “We want the bureaucrats to be traumatically affected,” he said. “When they wake up in the morning, we want them to not want to go to work.”

    When Vought returned to OMB for Trump’s second term, he appeared to be in Musk’s shadow. But once the flamboyant Tesla chief executive flamed out, the OMB director got to work to make DOGE’s work the foundation for lasting changes.

    He extended many of DOGE’s funding cuts by slowing down OMB’s approval of disbursements — turning them into de facto freezes.

    He helped persuade Republicans in Congress to cancel $9 billion in previously approved foreign aid and public broadcasting support, a process known as “rescission.”

    To cancel an additional $4.9 billion, he revived a rarely used gambit called a “pocket rescission,” freezing the funds until they expired.

    Along the way, he quietly stopped providing Congress with information on spending, leaving legislators in the dark on whether programs were being axed.

    DOGE and OMB eliminated jobs so quickly that the federal government stopped publishing its ongoing tally of federal employees. (Any number would only be approximate; some layoffs are tied up in court, and thousands of employees who opted for voluntary retirement are technically still on the payroll.)

    The result was a significant erosion of Congress’ “power of the purse,” which has historically included not only approving money but also monitoring how it was spent.

    Even some Republican members of Congress seethed. “They would like a blank check … and I don’t think that’s appropriate,” said former Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.).

    But the GOP majorities in both the House and Senate, pleased to see spending cut by any means, let Vought have his way. Even McConnell voted to approve the $9-billion rescission request.

    Vought’s newest innovation, the mid-shutdown layoffs, would be another big step toward reducing Congress’ role.

    “The result would be a dramatic, instantaneous shift in the separation of powers,” Kettl said. “The Trump team could kill programs unilaterally without the inconvenience of going to Congress.”

    Some of the consequences could be catastrophic, Kettl and other scholars warned. Kamarck calls them “time bombs.”

    “One or more of these decisions is going to blow up in Trump’s face,” she said.

    “FEMA won’t be capable of reacting to the next hurricane. The National Weather Service won’t have the forecasters it needs to analyze the data from weather balloons.”

    Even before the government shutdown, she noted, the FAA was grappling with a shortage of air traffic controllers. This week the FAA slowed takeoffs at several airports in response to growing shortages, including at air traffic control centers in Atlanta, Houston and Dallas-Fort Worth.

    In theory, a future Congress could undo many of Vought’s actions, especially if Democrats win control of the House or, less likely, the Senate.

    But rebuilding agencies that have been radically shrunken would take much longer than cutting them down, the scholars said.

    “Much of this will be difficult to reverse when Democrats come back into fashion,” Kamarck said.

    Indeed, that’s part of Vought’s plan.

    “We want to make sure that the bureaucracy can’t reconstitute itself later in future administrations,” he said in April in a podcast with Charlie Kirk, the conservative activist who was slain on Sept. 10.

    He’s pleased with the progress he’s made, he told reporters in July.

    “We’re having fun,” he said.

    [ad_2]

    Doyle McManus

    Source link

  • With Trump threats on back pay, another blow to public servants

    [ad_1]

    Sidelined by political appointees, targeted over deep state conspiracies and derided by the president, career public servants have grown used to life in Washington under a constant state of assault.

    But President Trump’s latest threat, to withhold back pay due to workers furloughed by an ongoing government shutdown, is adding fresh uncertainty to the beleaguered workforce.

    Whether federal workers will ultimately receive retroactive paychecks after the government reopens, Trump told reporters on Tuesday, “really depends on who you’re talking about.” The law requires federal employees receive their expected compensation in the event of a shutdown.

    “For the most part, we’re going to take care of our people,” the president said, while adding: “There are some people that really don’t deserve to be taken care of, and we’ll take care of them in a different way.”

    It is yet another peril facing public servants, who, according to Trump’s Office of Management and Budget director, Russ Vought, may also be the target of mass layoffs if the shutdown continues.

    The government has been shut since Oct. 1, when Republican and Democratic lawmakers came to an impasse over whether to extend government funding at existing levels, or account for a significant increase in healthcare premiums facing millions of Americans at the start of next year.

    White House officials say that, on the one hand, Democrats are to blame for extending a shutdown that will give the administration no other choice but to initiate firings of agency employees working on “nonessential” projects. On the other hand, the president has referred to the moment as an opportunity to root out Democrats working in career roles throughout the federal system.

    Legal scholars and public policy experts have roundly dismissed Trump’s latest efforts — both to use the shutdown as a predicate to cut the workforce, and to withhold back pay — as plainly illegal.

    And Democrats in Congress, who continue to vote against reopening the government, are counting on them being right, hoping that courts will reject the administration’s moves while they attempt to secure an extension of healthcare tax credits in the shutdown negotiations.

    If the experts are wrong, thousands of government workers could face a profound cost.

    “Senior leaders of the Trump administration promised to put federal employees in trauma, and they certainly seem intent on keeping that promise,” said Don Moynihan, a professor at the University of Michigan’s Ford School of Public Policy.

    “According to a law that Trump himself has signed, furloughed employees are entitled to back pay,” Moynihan said. “There is no real ambiguity about this, and the idea only some employees in agencies that Trump likes would receive back pay is an illegal abuse of presidential power.”

    A day after the shutdown began, Trump wrote on social media that he planned on meeting with Vought, “of Project 2025 fame,” to discuss what he called the “unprecedented opportunity” of making “permanent” cuts to agencies during the ongoing funding lapse.

    A lawsuit brought in California against Vought and the OMB, by a coalition of labor unions representing over 2 million federal workers, is challenging the premise of that claim, arguing the government is “deviating from historic practice and violating applicable laws” by using government employees “as a pawn in congressional deliberations.” But whether courts can or will stop the effort is unclear.

    Sen. John Thune, the majority leader and a Republican from South Dakota, said last week that Democrats should have known the risk they were running by “shutting down the government and handing the keys to Russ Vought.”

    “We don’t control what he’s going to do,” he told Politico.

    The White House has sent mixed messages on its willingness to negotiate with Democrats since the shutdown began. Within a matter of hours earlier this week, the president’s press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, told reporters that there was nothing to negotiate, before Trump said that dialogue had opened with Democratic leadership over a potential agreement on healthcare.

    Donald Kettl, professor emeritus and former dean at the University of Maryland School of Public Policy, taught and trained prospective public servants for 45 years.

    “What is happening is profoundly discouraging for young students seeking careers in the federal public service,” he said. “Many of the students are going to state and local governments, nonprofits, and think tanks, but increasingly don’t see the federal government as a place where they can make a difference or make a career.”

    “All of us depend on the government, and the government depends on a pipeline of skilled workers,” Kettl added. “The administration’s efforts have blown up the pipeline, and the costs will continue for years — probably decades — to come.”

    [ad_2]

    Michael Wilner

    Source link