Federal Workers React to Trump Federal Worker Buyout: ‘The Bridge Is Burned’
For Shane Poole, an Air Force veteran who converted to a civilian trainer, leaving the way of military life was never even an idea—until recently. Poole, working as an instructional systems specialist at Hill Air Force Base in Utah, said he lost his faith in the government because of the Trump federal worker buyout, a sweeping offer that has left many employees facing difficult choices about their future.
Poole had been with his unit of 77 and his military branch since he was 18 years old. But the aggressive downsizing of federal jobs by the current administration made him take this offer. He is one of an estimated 60,000 federal employees who have accepted the unprecedented buyout currently being put on hold pending a court hearing.
What’s frustrating is that this administration has portrayed federal workers like me as lazy and incompetent,” said Poole, 41. “It’s hurtful to see people cheering this on.
Many employees continue to be leery of talking publicly, not wanting to be outed from a buyout or retaliated against. The risk of mortgages, healthcare, and tuition in their balance scale weighs against taking the chance that they will have nothing if they remain and experience furloughs or firings.
The buyout program is part of an effort led by billionaire Elon Musk through the Department of Government Efficiency, a task force created by Trump after his 2024 re-election. The administration has warned that federal employees who decline the offer could face furloughs, as most agencies, except the Department of Defense, are set to downsize.
Over two million federal employees nationwide were given until Thursday to decide whether or not to accept the buyout or stick it out in their position. However, less than three hours before this Thursday deadline, a federal judge issued an injunction that effectively put the program on hold as labor unions had time to challenge its legality.
Beyond Washington, D.C., the majority of federal workers are spread across various agencies, including veterans’ hospitals, postal services, national parks, and regulatory offices. They serve administrations regardless of political party and now face uncertain futures.
Tony Yang, 51, who works as an IT specialist for the U.S. Department of Agriculture in Minnesota, opted to retire early because of a new 125-mile daily commute due to Trump’s edict ordering all employees to return to work in offices. While he originally had intended to stay on and fully retire, Yang opted for the buyout that would provide eight months’ pay and benefits even though that would cost him around $1,000 in monthly pension.
“At first, my wife was against it, worried about our mortgage and other bills,” Yang said. “But after long conversations, we decided this was the best move.”
Poole faced a similar dilemma. Still on probation from a recent promotion, he feared his job was at risk. He ultimately decided it was smarter to leave with something rather than risk being left empty-handed.
“Some think this offer is a scam, but I’m calling their bluff,” he said. “Even if they don’t follow through, it’s better than nothing.”
Despite his disappointment, Poole considers himself fortunate. With two postgraduate degrees, no debt, and substantial savings, he has already secured two job interviews within a week.
Even if his resignation is blocked, he intends to leave.
“I can’t trust them anymore. The bridge is burned,” he said. “It’s tough to say after serving my country for so long, but I’m done. I’m tired of being threatened every day.”
Federal employees across the country are agonizing over their decisions as their agencies are bombarding them with urgent guidance. A memo issued just before the judge’s ruling said there “will NOT be an extension of this program.
The tight deadline and ambiguity of the policy have frustrated many workers. Agencies, such as the Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, only sent employees an email a day before the deadline announcing that they would be eligible for the buyout.
“This is a deeply personal decision, and whichever choice you make, we support you,” one agency email said.
An anonymous Health and Human Services employee expressed her concerns over mass unemployment, considering the fact that thousands of former federal employees are entering the job market at a time when private sector layoffs are increasing.
“I believe this will result in widespread job losses, lower salaries, and economic struggles,” she said.
Others are concerned about legal ambiguities. The buyout program requires employees to give up their right to pursue legal or administrative action. Some agencies are said to be refusing to answer employees’ questions in writing, which raises further suspicion.
Protests have erupted outside federal offices, including the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), which Musk has proposed shutting down. Federal labor unions have warned employees against taking the offer, arguing that Congress has only approved government funding through mid-March, adding more uncertainty to the situation.
Many employees remain doubtful of the downsizing’s legitimacy and fairness in light of such a move being forced through, despite the insistence of the administration. Some people, like Poole, move on, but others stay there, hoping for the courts to intervene.
With the federal employees facing this reality, they will have to weigh the decision whether to accept this uncertain buyout or risk everything if the administration follows through on its threats.
“I can tell you it’s almost a taboo topic,” said an EPA employee. “People are afraid to say if they took it because they don’t want to feel like they’ve been tricked.”
For thousands of workers, the uncertainty continues.
