220,000 Fewer Workers: How Trump’s Cuts Affected Every Federal Agency

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Still not as many as Clinton laid off. Funny how people ignore history.

This was done methodically, over time and through Congress! Not with a chainsaw.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Still not as many as Clinton laid off. Funny how people ignore history.

Go back to your hole MAGA this is not a thing.

For many reasons not a thing.

Clinton's layoffs were done with Congress you POS.

Because of Trump's policies the unemployment rate is rising you moron.

[Anonymous]

And at my agency, the folks who were RIF’d came back as TPCs within a month.

[Anonymous]

Trump wants to burn the country to the ground that has always been the goal.

King Don the Con does not need any civil servants.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My non-target agency has lost 17 percent of its people, mostly to early or regular retirement — really knowledgeable people who just didn’t want to come in 5 days a week for no purpose. It’s really problematic.

Same with my program. We lost more than 20% - mostly first line and second line managers with many years of experience and institutional knowledge. Even if we start hiring new workers like crazy tomorrow, it won't fix the problem. Truly stupid.

[Anonymous]

Numbers are over 300,000 but as usual the media tries to spin it like it isn’t as bad as it is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My non-target agency has lost 17 percent of its people, mostly to early or regular retirement — really knowledgeable people who just didn’t want to come in 5 days a week for no purpose. It’s really problematic.

Same with my program. We lost more than 20% - mostly first line and second line managers with many years of experience and institutional knowledge. Even if we start hiring new workers like crazy tomorrow, it won't fix the problem. Truly stupid.

Yup yup. And now they are hiring but I imagine not many people want to take on a fed job at this moment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Numbers are over 300,000 but as usual the media tries to spin it like it isn’t as bad as it is.

The NYT lists the data for each agency broken by department and the comparison in numbers of staff 2024 vs 2025.

If you have other betterdata, I’m sure the NY Times would be happy to see it.

[Anonymous]

I am a fed and sees a lot of extra baggage and wastage around in hiring employees and contractors. A lot of them should be sacked but they continue to gain employment due to seniority. This is what would happen if we continue to do regular attrition.

[Anonymous]

My small agency went from close to 700 ppl to somewhere between 400-500 ppl. We are a favored agency in this administration. It’s absurd. Our politicals have thrown all our policies and procedures out the window and nothing functions now. Such a joke.

[Anonymous]

One of our offices lost so many agents we can no longer safely serve a search warrant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Still not as many as Clinton laid off. Funny how people ignore history.

This was done over 8 years. Much less traumatic to the system than Fork in the Road approach with no planning in place.

Clinton also cut back in areas that were not necessary anymore where Trump cut cancer funding.

[Anonymous]

Our office could’ve easily cut 10% if they asked us to, but instead, they just fired really important people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They have absolute destroyed USPTO and the morale. This agency takes no appropriated funds, functioned well, and had been remote working for 30 years (and seamlessly transitioned through COVID), all of which allowed for hiring the best and brightest.

It's a former shell of itself and for no good reason.

The way it’s being run now makes me so frustrated. Work so hard for what…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These data tables are shocking. Everyone knows that USAID and Dept of Ed were slashed, but the number of agencies showing departments that are decimated from Dept of Ag, GSA, HUD and Treasury was really surprising to me. FAFO Republicans.

A lot of those were early retirements, buyouts and resignations.

That can lead to losing the best and most experienced people, leaving the ones without experience or other options.