Skip to main content

Sign up for our newsletter.

Quality journalism. Progressive values. Direct to your inbox.

Members and supporters of the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) participate in a "Stand Up, Stand In" protest in the Hart Senate Office Building Atrium as part of the 2020 Legislative and Grassroots Mobilization Conference on February 11, 2020 in Washington, D.C. AFGE members protested to raise awareness on how the Trump administration is hurting federal employees through various policies.

Members and supporters of the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) participate in a "Stand Up, Stand In" protest in the Hart Senate Office Building Atrium as part of the 2020 Legislative and Grassroots Mobilization Conference on February 11, 2020 in Washington, D.C. AFGE members protested to raise awareness on how the Trump administration is hurting federal employees through various policies. (Photo: Sarah Silbiger/Getty Images)

Leading House Dems Demand 'Full Accounting' on Trump Order Allowing Purge of Federal Workforce

"The creation of this schedule would be a dramatic change in the composition of the civil service and expose it to undue political influence and intimidation," the lawmakers wrote.

Andrea Germanos

The chairs of 23 House committee and subcommittee on Wednesday demanded information from dozens of federal agencies on the impacts of an executive order from President Donald Trump that critics warned could lead to a purge of career federal employees and let the outgoing administration "replace talent and acumen with fealty and self-dealing."

At issue is an Oct. 21 order in which the White House asserted a need for "an exception to the competitive hiring rules and examinations for career positions in the federal service of a confidential, policy-determining, policy-making, or policy-advocating character." The order created a new schedule of federal employees within the excepted service, Schedule F.

In their letter to 61 federal agencies, the Democratic lawmakers, led by House Oversight Committee chair Carolyn B. Maloney, asked for "a full accounting of any positions converted, or being considered for conversion, under the new Schedule F recently created though Executive Order 13957. The creation of this schedule would be a dramatic change in the composition of the civil service and expose it to undue political influence and intimidation."

Citing their "legislative and oversight authorities," the committee heads demanded by December 9—with biweekly updates through Inauguration Day—information including a list of positions that have been converted to Schedule F and a list of those "who held positions as political appointees since January 20, 2017, who are now employed in permanent competitive positions, nonpolitical excepted service positions, or career Senior Executive Service (SES) positions."

Tim Stretton, a policy analyst with the Project on Government Oversight (POGO), last month summed up Trump's order and its potential impacts, writing that it "is designed to give federal agencies more flexibility to quickly hire policy staff to meet their needs, and to quickly fire underperforming employees without having to show cause." Stretton continued:

It does this by essentially making them an at-will employee, eliminating the thorough hiring selection process and the protections that prevent agencies from firing personnel without cause. The new authority to quickly fire staff is particularly concerning because it essentially strips the employees of their civil service protections, including the ability to appeal adverse personnel actions. [...]

Under the president's new executive order, agency heads must review all positions in the competitive and excepted services and determine which positions would be categorized under the newly created Schedule F. Employees who are reclassified would not be able to appeal the decision. The administration could not release how many positions it estimates might be subject to the newly created schedule because it has left the reclassification up to the discretion of each individual agency head. It's worth noting that the executive order specifically states the senior executive service—which had just over 8,000 employees as of 2016—will not be affected. With only 8,000 employees exempted from reclassification, there could [be] hundreds of thousands of employees subject to this executive order.

Most concerning is that the new Schedule F could be used to target specific employees. Given that agency heads have nearly complete control over which positions get reclassified within their agency, an agency head could reclassify a specific position based on who currently holds it. Agency heads actually have an incentive to do this as they work at the pleasure of the president and in theory would make decisions that meant getting on the president's good side or that would mitigate the risk of being fired themselves.

The order also drew swift and sharp criticism from the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE).

Everett Kelley, national president of the union, framed the order as "the most profound undermining of the civil service in our lifetimes."

"The president has doubled down on his effort to politicize and corrupt the professional service," Kelley said in a statement. "This executive order strips due process rights and protections from perhaps hundreds of thousands of federal employees and will enable political appointees and other officials to hire and fire these workers at will."

The lawmakers' letter was sent a day after a separate letter led by Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.), chair of the House Subcommittee on Government Operations, and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), in which they urged the leaders of the House and Senate Appropriations Committees to block the executive order in the next spending bill.

"This executive order, which the Trump administration is rushing to implement without adequate analysis just weeks before the president leaves office, could precipitate an exodus from the federal government, leaving agencies without deep institutional knowledge, expertise, experience, and the ability to develop and implement long-term policy strategies," the 13 member of Congress wrote Tuesday. 

"We ask that you join us in reversing this harmful executive order," they added.


Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.

We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.

70% of Americans Support Deciding State Abortion Rights by Ballot Measure: Poll

After an "enormous victory" in Kansas, some progressives argue that ballot measures "are the next frontier" for protecting access to reproductive healthcare.

Jessica Corbett ·


Judge Rules Walgreens 'Substantially Contributed' to San Francisco Opioid Crisis

"Walgreens knew its system to detect and stop suspicious orders was nonexistent but continued to ship opioids at an alarming pace to increase profits," said an attorney for the California city.

Brett Wilkins ·


Historic Climate Bill, Say Clear-Eyed Critics, Still 'Pours Gasoline on the Flames'

"This was a backdoor take-it-or-leave-it deal between a coal baron and Democratic leaders in which any opposition from lawmakers or frontline communities was quashed," said one activist.

Jessica Corbett ·


Doctors Against Oz Launch Campaign Denouncing GOP Candidate as 'Quack'

"ShamWow guy + stethoscope = Dr. Oz," said John Fetterman, the Democratic U.S. Senate candidate in Pennsylvania.

Julia Conley ·


70+ Economists Say US Must Return $7 Billion Stolen From Afghan People

"The people of Afghanistan have been made to suffer doubly for a government they did not choose," says a new letter.

Kenny Stancil ·

Common Dreams Logo