Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Along with the final rule for schedule policy/career positions, consider the impending changes to the RIF process:

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2026/03/05/2026-04377/reduction-in-force

They are gearing up for further cuts.

I don’t know why anyone would want to work for the federal government at this point if they have other options.

What is the timing here, seems like pieces are in place with unions gone, new RIF priority, schedule f rule.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you environmental woke science or pesticide approving biddness science?

lol but this. I do think the days of mass layoffs are over but I also think you are safer if you are in a less policy focused area. I don’t think EPA will be eliminated but some programs could be.

I’m in an operations role where I coordinate sample collection and monitoring. I think there is a push to privatize and AI do the work (like every job). How much time do I have?

I honestly believe you're fine. They may not like your mission but they have a lot of fish to fry and are finding out right now how hard it is to create solutions to the things they've enjoyed complaining about.

But, the smart move is to use this time to develop a parallel skill set that would let you more easily move to another agency - maybe coordinating drug tests for human employees, or something in supply chain management; I don't know your skills but my point is to start building a landing pad that isn't EPA-specific while still staying in your EPA job.

They have already told all our support technicians that they will be gone.

I don't know what you want from this thread. You know more about your own job situation than anybody on DCUM. People have told you what they're seeing generally (which is hiring, or at least not firing) but if you think you're in specific danger then we are not equipped to tell you otherwise.

Just worried that I’m sitting complacent while larger forces work to unravel my life when I should be switching to an ageny that is hiring.

don't worry, the larger forces working to unravel lives are also at agencies that are hiring or about to hire. remember, switching agencies frequently means a new probationary period where they can just fire you. doge may be nominally gone but there are plenty of folks still working to burn things down from the inside.

basically, keep working, keep upskilling, keep looking for and applying to outside jobs —and be thankful if you are still eligible for a severance in the event of a RIF (i am not.)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you environmental woke science or pesticide approving biddness science?

lol but this. I do think the days of mass layoffs are over but I also think you are safer if you are in a less policy focused area. I don’t think EPA will be eliminated but some programs could be.

I’m in an operations role where I coordinate sample collection and monitoring. I think there is a push to privatize and AI do the work (like every job). How much time do I have?

I honestly believe you're fine. They may not like your mission but they have a lot of fish to fry and are finding out right now how hard it is to create solutions to the things they've enjoyed complaining about.

But, the smart move is to use this time to develop a parallel skill set that would let you more easily move to another agency - maybe coordinating drug tests for human employees, or something in supply chain management; I don't know your skills but my point is to start building a landing pad that isn't EPA-specific while still staying in your EPA job.

They have already told all our support technicians that they will be gone.

I don't know what you want from this thread. You know more about your own job situation than anybody on DCUM. People have told you what they're seeing generally (which is hiring, or at least not firing) but if you think you're in specific danger then we are not equipped to tell you otherwise.

Just worried that I’m sitting complacent while larger forces work to unravel my life when I should be switching to an ageny that is hiring.

Anonymous wrote:Along with the final rule for schedule policy/career positions, consider the impending changes to the RIF process:

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2026/03/05/2026-04377/reduction-in-force

They are gearing up for further cuts.

I don’t know why anyone would want to work for the federal government at this point if they have other options.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You might want to look at this article from today's WaPo: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2026/03/09/trump-hiring-federal-workers/

Among other things, it says that the current Administration is looking for younger workers who might only stay a few years. I don't know how this would fit into positions that would require scientific expertise, but you should at least consider whether the workplace being described in this article sounds like somewhere you'd like to work.

Sounds like what the Administration is looking to create is the churn and burn culture I experienced at small private sector employers years ago-- bring in recent college grads, work them to the bone and treat them like shit for two years, lie about promotion opportunities and shrug when they find a new job.

Anonymous wrote:Along with the final rule for schedule policy/career positions, consider the impending changes to the RIF process:

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2026/03/05/2026-04377/reduction-in-force

They are gearing up for further cuts.

I don’t know why anyone would want to work for the federal government at this point if they have other options.

Anonymous wrote:You might want to look at this article from today's WaPo: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2026/03/09/trump-hiring-federal-workers/

Among other things, it says that the current Administration is looking for younger workers who might only stay a few years. I don't know how this would fit into positions that would require scientific expertise, but you should at least consider whether the workplace being described in this article sounds like somewhere you'd like to work.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Along with the final rule for schedule policy/career positions, consider the impending changes to the RIF process:

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2026/03/05/2026-04377/reduction-in-force

They are gearing up for further cuts.

I don’t know why anyone would want to work for the federal government at this point if they have other options.

Middle age Feds done have an option. But are there better parts of govt than others?

Anonymous wrote:Along with the final rule for schedule policy/career positions, consider the impending changes to the RIF process:

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2026/03/05/2026-04377/reduction-in-force

They are gearing up for further cuts.

I don’t know why anyone would want to work for the federal government at this point if they have other options.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like another round of govt-wide RIFs is on the horizon soon. There may be pockets of agencies that are hiring due to the chaos of separations last year, but I think this administration wants more cuts overall.

There is a document at OPM detailing the next round of reductions. Unions were eliminated for a reason.

Anonymous wrote:I feel like another round of govt-wide RIFs is on the horizon soon. There may be pockets of agencies that are hiring due to the chaos of separations last year, but I think this administration wants more cuts overall.