OPM issues Final Rule creating easy-to-fire civil servant category

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm sorry but why would you ever want to replace a fed with a political appointee?? Maybe the very top political appointees/senate confirmed ones know what they're doing, have industry experience. The lower level GS 13/14/15 political appointees have zero clue what they're doing and can barely make it to meetings on time. They all have fed "handlers" (chief of staff, executive assistant, program managers) who help them understand our mission and everything about our programs. This is not unique to this administration either.

Because big businesses want a government that has no regulations and doesn't tax?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Today, OPM posted for public inspection (will be in tomorrow's Federal Register) a final rule to pave the way to remove (many?) civil service protections from a new category of the civil service. Document at https://public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2026-02375.pdf

Of particular note:
* will apply to folks on the GS scale, not SES (p. 53)
* will apply to current workers, not just new hires (p. 226)
* VERA/VSIP won't be offered to those in reclassified positions (p. 226)

everyday more progress against the swamp.

Weird how young people want good jobs??

Best thing is if they offered VERA to everyone 40 and above. 99% of people would leave and then there would be space for all the "young people who want good jobs." Although whether these jobs are any good any more remains to be seen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if I am eligible to retire and I get fired for whatever, I just retire right. I do not lose my pension?

Correct

But say you are 52 with 25 years and got RIFd, you would still get early retirement, to include healthcare as you would qualify for VSIP. But if they say you are being fired because they do not think you meet the administration priorities, then does that mean you are fired for cause and is that why it says not VSIP eligible? An I reading that right?

I thought that the VERA/VSIP discussion in the reg preamble related only to the proposal that folks whose jobs are being reclassified as "Policy/Career" [Schedule F] be given the option to VERA or be offered a VSIP. OPM declared no, they don't want to incentivize reclassified folks to leave.

(pp. 227-228, https://public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2026-02375.pdf)

This was the most disappointing bit in the whole thing. Wasn't eligible for VERA last year so was really hoping I'd get VERA through reclassification. I guess resigning is what I need to do now. Too bad.

+1! Can't believe I missed VERA by 6 months!!! Why couldn't my parents have had me sooner??

So sorry, PPs. That really s*cks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if I am eligible to retire and I get fired for whatever, I just retire right. I do not lose my pension?

Correct

But say you are 52 with 25 years and got RIFd, you would still get early retirement, to include healthcare as you would qualify for VSIP. But if they say you are being fired because they do not think you meet the administration priorities, then does that mean you are fired for cause and is that why it says not VSIP eligible? An I reading that right?

I thought that the VERA/VSIP discussion in the reg preamble related only to the proposal that folks whose jobs are being reclassified as "Policy/Career" [Schedule F] be given the option to VERA or be offered a VSIP. OPM declared no, they don't want to incentivize reclassified folks to leave.

(pp. 227-228, https://public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2026-02375.pdf)

Why not? Wouldn't it make it easier to fill these positions with the politicals they want?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if I am eligible to retire and I get fired for whatever, I just retire right. I do not lose my pension?

Correct

But say you are 52 with 25 years and got RIFd, you would still get early retirement, to include healthcare as you would qualify for VSIP. But if they say you are being fired because they do not think you meet the administration priorities, then does that mean you are fired for cause and is that why it says not VSIP eligible? An I reading that right?

I thought that the VERA/VSIP discussion in the reg preamble related only to the proposal that folks whose jobs are being reclassified as "Policy/Career" [Schedule F] be given the option to VERA or be offered a VSIP. OPM declared no, they don't want to incentivize reclassified folks to leave.

(pp. 227-228, https://public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2026-02375.pdf)

This was the most disappointing bit in the whole thing. Wasn't eligible for VERA last year so was really hoping I'd get VERA through reclassification. I guess resigning is what I need to do now. Too bad.

+1! Can't believe I missed VERA by 6 months!!! Why couldn't my parents have had me sooner??

So sorry, PPs. That really s*cks.

Yeah, it does. I've been hanging around since Dec just to see if they might offer VERA again, but it seems more and more unlikely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if I am eligible to retire and I get fired for whatever, I just retire right. I do not lose my pension?

Correct

But say you are 52 with 25 years and got RIFd, you would still get early retirement, to include healthcare as you would qualify for VSIP. But if they say you are being fired because they do not think you meet the administration priorities, then does that mean you are fired for cause and is that why it says not VSIP eligible? An I reading that right?

I thought that the VERA/VSIP discussion in the reg preamble related only to the proposal that folks whose jobs are being reclassified as "Policy/Career" [Schedule F] be given the option to VERA or be offered a VSIP. OPM declared no, they don't want to incentivize reclassified folks to leave.

(pp. 227-228, https://public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2026-02375.pdf)

Why not? Wouldn't it make it easier to fill these positions with the politicals they want?

I doubt there are enough MAGA professional class people to fill these jobs. It is probably much easier to exert control over the existing people through threat of firing than to replace all of them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if I am eligible to retire and I get fired for whatever, I just retire right. I do not lose my pension?

Correct

But say you are 52 with 25 years and got RIFd, you would still get early retirement, to include healthcare as you would qualify for VSIP. But if they say you are being fired because they do not think you meet the administration priorities, then does that mean you are fired for cause and is that why it says not VSIP eligible? An I reading that right?

I thought that the VERA/VSIP discussion in the reg preamble related only to the proposal that folks whose jobs are being reclassified as "Policy/Career" [Schedule F] be given the option to VERA or be offered a VSIP. OPM declared no, they don't want to incentivize reclassified folks to leave.

(pp. 227-228, https://public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2026-02375.pdf)

Why not? Wouldn't it make it easier to fill these positions with the politicals they want?

I doubt there are enough MAGA professional class people to fill these jobs. It is probably much easier to exert control over the existing people through threat of firing than to replace all of them.

So just put anyone in. It’s not like the administration cares about doing a good job. Anyone willing to sign a loyalty oath should slot in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if I am eligible to retire and I get fired for whatever, I just retire right. I do not lose my pension?

Correct

But say you are 52 with 25 years and got RIFd, you would still get early retirement, to include healthcare as you would qualify for VSIP. But if they say you are being fired because they do not think you meet the administration priorities, then does that mean you are fired for cause and is that why it says not VSIP eligible? An I reading that right?

I thought that the VERA/VSIP discussion in the reg preamble related only to the proposal that folks whose jobs are being reclassified as "Policy/Career" [Schedule F] be given the option to VERA or be offered a VSIP. OPM declared no, they don't want to incentivize reclassified folks to leave.

(pp. 227-228, https://public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2026-02375.pdf)

This was the most disappointing bit in the whole thing. Wasn't eligible for VERA last year so was really hoping I'd get VERA through reclassification. I guess resigning is what I need to do now. Too bad.

+1! Can't believe I missed VERA by 6 months!!! Why couldn't my parents have had me sooner??

Never in my life did I ever think I’d regret not being 50 yet.

[Anonymous]

I expected this thread to have more posts, but maybe there aren’t many people on DCUM who work for the government anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I expected this thread to have more posts, but maybe there aren’t many people on DCUM who work for the government anymore.

Nobody actually knows how this will be implemented. I'm likely to be reclassified along with most of my agency, but I'm not in a particular position that will raise any flags, and they aren't going to do a clean sweep of everyone and shut down the agency because we have bipartisan support.

I think that the rule is bad, but I also think it is largely in response to people slow-walking administration priorities (immigration, etc) during Trump's first term. I don't follow the conspiracy theory that they are going to reclassify and do large-scale purges.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I expected this thread to have more posts, but maybe there aren’t many people on DCUM who work for the government anymore.

Nobody actually knows how this will be implemented. I'm likely to be reclassified along with most of my agency, but I'm not in a particular position that will raise any flags, and they aren't going to do a clean sweep of everyone and shut down the agency because we have bipartisan support.

I think that the rule is bad, but I also think it is largely in response to people slow-walking administration priorities (immigration, etc) during Trump's first term. I don't follow the conspiracy theory that they are going to reclassify and do large-scale purges.

Most of the reporting I have seen was that the people slow walking Trump's plans during his first term were his own political appointees. I just dont see the average fed as being in a position to do anything other than what they are told to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I expected this thread to have more posts, but maybe there aren’t many people on DCUM who work for the government anymore.

Nobody actually knows how this will be implemented. I'm likely to be reclassified along with most of my agency, but I'm not in a particular position that will raise any flags, and they aren't going to do a clean sweep of everyone and shut down the agency because we have bipartisan support.

I think that the rule is bad, but I also think it is largely in response to people slow-walking administration priorities (immigration, etc) during Trump's first term. I don't follow the conspiracy theory that they are going to reclassify and do large-scale purges.

I was hoping they would, with an offer of VERAs to get people out. Unfortunately, looks like they know they won’t be able to fill positions if they do large scale purges, so this will be just used for vindictive one-offs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I expected this thread to have more posts, but maybe there aren’t many people on DCUM who work for the government anymore.

Nobody actually knows how this will be implemented. I'm likely to be reclassified along with most of my agency, but I'm not in a particular position that will raise any flags, and they aren't going to do a clean sweep of everyone and shut down the agency because we have bipartisan support.

I think that the rule is bad, but I also think it is largely in response to people slow-walking administration priorities (immigration, etc) during Trump's first term. I don't follow the conspiracy theory that they are going to reclassify and do large-scale purges.

Most of the reporting I have seen was that the people slow walking Trump's plans during his first term were his own political appointees. I just dont see the average fed as being in a position to do anything other than what they are told to do.

It wasn’t actually slow-walking. It was people pointing out that the proposed actions were poorly planned and would lead to bad repercussions. Now he’s put people into place who will just say yes to anything, and you can see the result.

[Anonymous]

You better read up on the claim that you get still get a Fed pension if you get fired REGARDLESS. That is not the right answer...

Yes, it depends on whether you are vested, but that encompasses a lot of folks (those with 5 years plus service).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I expected this thread to have more posts, but maybe there aren’t many people on DCUM who work for the government anymore.

Nobody actually knows how this will be implemented. I'm likely to be reclassified along with most of my agency, but I'm not in a particular position that will raise any flags, and they aren't going to do a clean sweep of everyone and shut down the agency because we have bipartisan support.

I think that the rule is bad, but I also think it is largely in response to people slow-walking administration priorities (immigration, etc) during Trump's first term. I don't follow the conspiracy theory that they are going to reclassify and do large-scale purges.

Most of the reporting I have seen was that the people slow walking Trump's plans during his first term were his own political appointees. I just dont see the average fed as being in a position to do anything other than what they are told to do.

+1
Feds just do what they’re told, knowing this pendulum swings with each new administration. There are deadlines and deliverables that can’t be slow walked. We don’t have that kind of autonomy.