Education Department staff warned that Trump buyout offers could be canceled at any time
The Office of Personnel Management sent notices last week to federal employees that if they resign by Feb. 6, they could continue receiving pay and benefits until the end of September. The Trump administration is hoping to get as many as 10% of the workforce to quit as part of a plan to shrink the federal bureaucracy.
But three Education Department officials told NBC News that Rachel Oglesby, the department's new chief of staff, and Jacqueline Clay, chief human capital officer, described significant caveats to the so-called Fork in the Road offer in an all-staff meeting held over Zoom on Wednesday. The officials did not want to be named for fear of retaliation.
The Education Secretary would be allowed to rescind the agreement, or the government could stop paying, and employees who took the deferred resignation package would waive all legal claims, the three officials said they were told in the meeting. The three employees say they have only seen sample resignation agreements so far, and would need to agree to resign by Thursday evening before they see the actual terms of their separation.
'It sounded like a commercial for a used car dealership, like, 'Act now, one day only,'' said one department official who attended the meeting.
The Education Department did not respond to a request for comment Wednesday.
A spokesperson for the Office of Personnel Management said that this was false, and pointed to a memo that states the resignation offer's 'assurances are binding on the government. Were the government to backtrack on its commitments, an employee would be entitled to request a rescission of his or her resignation.' However, the memo includes a sample agreement that includes a clause that agency heads retain the sole discretion to rescind the deal, and employees waive the right to challenge it before the Merit Systems Protection Board, "or any other forum.'
A sample deferred resignation agreement specific for Education Department employees includes similar language, according to a copy obtained by NBC News.
Across the federal government, pressure has been mounting from the Trump administration to take the buyout offer. In an email to federal employees Tuesday following up on the original buyout proposal, OPM wrote, 'Please note the Deferred Resignation program ('Fork in the Road') expires at 11:59 p.m. ET on Thursday February 6th. There will not be an extension of this program.'
More than 40,000 people have taken the buyout offer so far, according to a White House official, out of a federal workforce composed of over two million individuals.
There is deep concern among federal workers that the Trump administration's buyout offer could turn out to be a bait-and-switch, with the government potentially failing to hold up its end of the bargain. The comments from Education Department management only worsened those concerns, the three employees said.
'The morale is pretty bad,' a second official said. 'One of the managers I work with just said he hasn't seen any emails in the last four hours since the meeting ended, because everybody just kind of had the life sucked out of them.'
A third employee described the tone of the call as angry, as workers put questions in Zoom's chat box but then did not receive responses.
The unusual buyout offer has upended Washington, D.C., amid a flurry of executive orders and maneuvers by Trump and tech billionaire Elon Musk, who is head of Trump's Department of Government Efficiency, an office within the White House. In the span of two weeks, Trump and Musk have launched a sweeping effort to remake the federal government, slash spending and even eliminate some agencies.
Many Democrats and some Republicans say that Trump and Musk are violating constitutional limits on the presidency in ways that are unlawful and that are precipitating a constitutional crisis.
Some labor unions for federal workers have sued to stop the deferred resignation program, arguing that the Trump administration does not have legal authority to offer such buyouts. Federal government labor unions and Democratic attorneys general have warned federal workers that they may never receive the promised resignation benefits, and characterized the offers as an attempt to intimidate them into quitting.
Trump has nominated Linda McMahon, the former World Wrestling Entertainment CEO and head of the Small Business Administration in his first administration, to be Education Secretary. No confirmation hearing is scheduled yet.
There are other staffing changes coming to the Education Department that may arrive before McMahon does. The department expects to conduct layoffs, known as Reduction in Force, the three department officials said they were told during Wednesday's meeting. Oglesby, the chief of staff, and Clay, the human capital officer, did not share when those will take place or which offices will be hit hardest by them during the meeting.
Education Department staff will also need to come into the office daily by Feb. 24. Clay told staff that department leadership is working to find another federal building for remote employees to work from within 50 miles of their home.
Trump has said he wants to eliminate the Education Department, which would fulfill a longtime dream of the Republican base, but is supposed to take an act of Congress to achieve. The Wall Street Journal reported Monday that the White House is weighing executive action that could dismantle the department in a piecemeal fashion, citing unnamed people familiar with the matter.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
an hour ago
- Spectator
How a history festival became a forum of fear
'Defence needs to be our number one priority.' This sounds like the sort of thing you'd hear at a Nato summit, or a Chatham House conference, but it was the plea of Colin Bell, a 104-year-old second world war RAF veteran, as he was interviewed at Chalke Valley History Festival last weekend. The Wiltshire festival was the brainchild of historian James Holland (second world war specialist; brother of Tom). Originally designed as a fundraiser for his local cricket club, the weeklong event is now in its tenth year. Speakers at last weekend's event ranged from Max Hastings and Alice Loxton to Al Murray and Peter Frankopan, and were complemented by live re-enactments and activities. I attended the festival on the penultimate day, saw a guillotine and battle tanks and heard about everything from the origins of the name 'Charing Cross' to the five partitions of the British Raj. But despite the fun, I noticed a darker tone running through many of the talks. Discussion of Donald Trump dominated. Talks by the historian Niall Ferguson and the peer and former Supreme Court judge Jonathan Sumption drew the biggest audiences of the day, and both focused on the American president. Sumption focused on the challenges facing American democracy, while Ferguson put the present-day concerns over Taiwan into historical perspective. This was Glastonbury for history nerds. The music festival was taking place only an hour west away the same weekend, but this crowd was more red corduroy and linen suits than vest tops and baggy shorts. Though judging by the queue for Ferguson to sign his books, he was the festival's rockstar. Ferguson's talk was stark. He said he put the chance of a US-China conflict over Taiwan at 50 per cent over the next three years, and that Trump's presidency raises the likelihood of such a conflict happening sooner. President Xi (potentially ill or on his way out), could seek to secure a legacy, Ferguson argued, and exploit a Trump administration that looks increasingly disinterested in Taiwan. Ferguson imagined a scenario where a blockade of Taiwan begins and Trump is presented with two options: attack the Chinese fleet and defend the island, with consequences that could escalate to a third world war, or concede. Which would he pick? We are already living through Cold War Two, Ferguson continued, and it probably started in the early 2010s. The West's dependency on semi-conductors from Taiwan could see a crisis akin to the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, he said, except this time the island is off the coast of the other superpower. 'Do we really want Trump in Khrushchev's position?' Ferguson asked. Sumption – promoting his new book The Challenges of Democracy – took an even more pessimistic view of Trump than Ferguson, arguing that the President had all the hallmarks of an authoritarian leader. Democracy is a fragile thing, he told us. Much of Sumption's talk focused on the merits and pitfalls of the American constitution versus its European counterparts. Britain's unwritten constitution somehow survived the tests of the Johnson and Truss premierships, he said. We should consider ourselves lucky: the American system is more easily dismantled. For a day, Chalke was no longer a history festival, but a forum of fear. Leaving Ferguson's talk, I couldn't help but think again of the RAF veteran, Colin Bell. Throughout his talk, the TV screens in the tent displayed the phrase 'We Will Remember', over the backdrop of a poppy. Surrounded by his interviewers, young historians and broadcasters in their twenties and thirties, he declared that 'to avoid a third world war, we must focus on defence'. War, warned Ferguson and Sumption and Bell, is not just a thing from history.
Reuters
an hour ago
- Reuters
Trump says Iran has not agreed to inspections, give up enrichment
July 4 (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump said on Friday that Iran had not agreed to inspections of its nuclear program or to give up enriching uranium. He told reporters aboard Air Force One that he believed Tehran's nuclear program had been set back permanently although Iran could restart it at a different location. Trump said he would discuss Iran with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu when he visits the White House on Monday. "I would say it's set back permanently," Trump said as he traveled to New Jersey after an Independence Day celebration at the White House. "I would think they'd have to start at a different location. And if they did start, it would be a problem." Trump said he would not allow Tehran to resume its nuclear program, adding that Iran did want to meet with him. The U.N. nuclear watchdog said on Friday it had pulled its last remaining inspectors from Iran as a standoff deepens over their return to the country's nuclear facilities bombed by the United States and Israel. The U.S. and Israel say Iran was enriching uranium to build nuclear weapons. Tehran insists its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes. Israel launched its first military strikes on Iran's nuclear sites in a 12-day war with the Islamic Republic three weeks ago. The International Atomic Energy Agency's inspectors have not been able to inspect Iran's facilities since then, even though IAEA chief Rafael Grossi has said that is his top priority. Iran's parliament has passed a law suspending cooperation with the IAEA until the safety of its nuclear facilities can be guaranteed. While the IAEA says Iran has not yet formally informed it of any suspension, it is unclear when the agency's inspectors will be able to return to Iran. Iran has accused the agency of effectively paving the way for the bombings by issuing a damning report on May 31 that led to a resolution by the IAEA's 35-nation Board of Governors declaring Iran in breach of its non-proliferation obligations. The U.S. and Israeli military strikes either destroyed or badly damaged Iran's three uranium enrichment sites. But it was less clear what has happened to much of Iran's nine tons of enriched uranium, especially the more than 400 kg (880 pounds) enriched to up to 60% purity, a short step from weapons grade.
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
The real risk to Trump from his big beautiful bill won't come from Elon Musk
With the bang of a wooden gavel, the House of Representatives gave Donald Trump the stunning victory he wanted after intimidating the hell out of any Republican congressmen or women who flirted with the idea of defying the president's wishes. You can only imagine that 3,000 miles east of Washington a man in Downing Street looked on with helpless envy, because this week has really been a tale of two cities. In London, Keir Starmer has had to suffer the ignominy of his backbenchers shredding his authority by sticking two fingers up at him repeatedly as though he were some hapless supply teacher brought into an inner London comprehensive for the day. The MPs forced concession after concession over a welfare bill that has been so gutted that an extra £5bn will need to be found to stop the ballooning of our deficit. While in Washington DC, the president's 'One Big, Beautiful Bill' – the OBBB – will add a staggering, eye-popping, head-spinning, jaw-dropping, nausea-inducing three trillion dollars to the US deficit and yet lawmakers decided – without too many qualms – that keeping on Trump's right side was more important than any considerations about the massive economic risks this legislation represents. There was, it should be noted, a strong countervailing force in all this, and that was Elon Musk. The OBBB is what led to his and Trump's nuclear-tipped spat, with the tech tycoon railing against its economic incontinence. Not only that, Musk threatened any Republican lawmaker who voted for it. And has threatened to set up a new political party to – in effect – destroy the Republicans. With the passage of the bill we have at least one question resolved. In the battle of 'who do you fear the most' – the richest man in the world, or the most powerful man in the world – Trump has come out on top. The wee, timorous beasties of the GOP caucus would rather incur the ire of Musk than the wrath of Trump. It remains to be seen whether the Tesla boss will make good on his promise to run candidates against those who backed the president's bill – assuming he gets the chance, after Trump said this week he'd be looking at deporting Musk. So what is this piece of legislation that will now get signed with much fanfare? Well, for a start it is what in the US they call a compendium bill, or omnibus bill. It is not a law just dealing with one thing. It is sprawling. This is a mega piece of legislation. It will bring tax cuts to America's wealthiest; it contains provisions to funnel money towards border security and the Pentagon. And it will take away health provision and free school meals from America's poorest. Think of it as the Robin Hood principle in reverse – it steals from the poor and gives to the rich. Let's go through some of the measures. It will strip healthcare away from 17 million Americans through cuts to Medicaid, the federal government programme that gives coverage to the poorest in America. It will raise healthcare premiums for older adults who benefit from 'Obamacare'. It will take food assistance away from three million Americans and will eliminate school meal access to more than 18 million youngsters. All this to fund tax cuts where the beneficiaries will be the very wealthiest in US society. There are Maga voices who've broken ranks. The uber-Trump supporting senator from Missouri, Josh Hawley, has spoken out passionately against the cuts to Medicaid, and how it will hit people in his state hard. So what did he do when it came to actually voting on the measure? Can you guess? Do you need another clue? Or what about the 'moderate' Republican from Alaska, Lisa Murkowski? She couldn't have been more eloquent. This was a bill, she pronounced, that would not serve Americans' best interests, that it was deeply flawed and was being rushed through to meet a totally arbitrary deadline set by the president of the Fourth of July. It was not fit to be passed in its present form. And, yes, you've guessed it – she voted for it too, just like Senator Hawley. In her bizarre self-justifying statement after voting for the measure, Senator Murkowski said: 'My sincere hope is that this is not the final product. This bill needs more work across chambers and is not ready for the president's desk. We need to work together to get this right." But, of course, by voting for it, she has ensured that the bill has gone straight to the Resolute Desk in the Oval Office for signature. Though kudos to North Carolina senator Thom Tillis, who not only lambasted the bill but has announced he won't run again for office, such is his disgust. And a couple of other Republican senators also split from the president. Nevertheless, this is a massive legislative win for Trump, and a lovely win for all the billionaires who backed him and donated to his campaign and who will now enjoy even lower tax bills. But isn't that to confuse two things? The financial firepower of wealthy donors may have helped Trump get elected. But it was the votes of millions of ordinary Americans – blue-collar workers in record numbers – who elected him and put him in the White House. How are they going to feel about this? An effective Democratic Party (a phrase that feels slightly oxymoronic) would be –should be – making hay. There is one other thing, though, about timing. The tax cuts will come into effect immediately and, yes, while the wealthiest will gain most, a lot of middle-class Americans will gain too. But the politically perilous cuts to Medicaid and the like are being deferred until the beginning of 2027. In other words, just after the November midterms, where Trump's control of both houses would be at stake. This White House is not stupid.
