By Cole Gee | Staff Writer
Federal jobs are notorious in the job market for their relative stability, numerous benefits and retirement plans. For many Americans, working a federal job is considered a golden ticket and not something to take for granted. When federal workers were given an offer to have their contracts bought out for eight months of pay, many were confused.
The buyout offers were emailed by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management on Jan. 28 to over 2,000,000 employees. According to the Department of Government Efficiency, which is headed by Elon Musk, the purpose of the buyout is to cut government spending and fix national debt.
Workers who accept the buyout before the Feb. 6 deadline will work until Feb. 28 and be placed on administrative leave on March 1. After that, the employees keep their full salary and benefits without having to work until Sept. 30. The administration will also give employees a lump sum as payment during the eight-month transitional period.
A major legal issue that federal unions and lawyers are addressing is the fact that the lump sum that’s being promised may not be given to the employees who accept, since only Congress has the authority to approve the budget and payments, not the executive branch.
Kayla Landeros is an assistant professor of law who specializes in contract drafting and commercial litigation. From her legal perspective, the amount the Trump administration can offer comes from a pre-existing program, and it will be difficult for the government to go over the payment cap put in place.
“Under an existing program, the Voluntary Separation Incentive Payment Authority, federal agencies may offer employees a lump-sum payment of up to $25,000 as an incentive to voluntarily separate from employment,” Landeros said via email. “When authorized by the Office of Personnel Management, an agency may offer a voluntary incentive separation payment to employees.”
Other lawmakers believe the proposed payments may violate this program and the Anti-Deficiency Act, a law that prevents the government from promising or spending money in excess of what Congress has made available. Congress has not approved funding past March, let alone to the proposed end date in September.
Andrew Cripe is a lawyer at Norton Rose Fulbright and an expert in contracts, wage compliance and workforce risk management. He said there were many holes in the offers that seemed troublesome at first glance, especially when you factor in the number of federal workers represented by unions.
“From a labor law perspective, when you make an offer like this to a group of unionized employees, that generally is something that should be negotiated in advance with the union because it would be a term or condition of employment,” Cripe said. “I don’t believe that happened; I don’t believe there was any negotiation before the offer was made.”
The American Federation of Government Employees is the largest union in the country representing federal employees. They recently released a statement warning their members against accepting the deal.
“There is not yet any evidence the administration can or will uphold its end of the bargain, that Congress will go along with this unilateral massive restructuring, or that appropriated funds can be used this way, among other issues that have been raised,” the AFGE said.
As of Tuesday, around 20,000 workers have accepted the offer — only 1% of the federal workforce. The White House is currently hoping for an acceptance rate of 5-10%.
