OPM Accuses Federal Unions of Misleading Workers Regarding Voluntary Resignation Agreements
The U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) has responded to claims from critics spreading inaccuracies regarding an incentive program introduced by the Trump administration for federal employees considering resigning.
Federal workers contemplating the buyout offer launched by President Donald Trump shortly after his inauguration are encouraged to disregard “misinformation” spread by employees’ unions, according to a spokesperson from OPM.
“Union leaders and politicians urging federal employees to reject this offer are doing a grave disservice to them,” said McLaurine Pinover, OPM’s Director of Communications, in an interview with The Epoch Times. “This is a unique and generous opportunity; one that has been thoroughly vetted and specifically designed to assist employees during restructuring.”
“Rather than perpetuating misinformation and utilizing workers as political instruments, they should focus on ensuring federal employees receive accurate information and the freedom to make the best decisions for themselves and their families,” Pinover further stated.
The buyout offer enables federal employees who accept it to receive full pay and benefits coverage for eight months, relieves them from newly implemented directives to report to their official duty stations daily, and safeguards them from anticipated Reductions-in-Force (RIF) measures expected to be implemented shortly across numerous federal departments and agencies.
There are approximately 2.3 million civilian federal workers, the majority of whom are career employees with above-average pay and benefits, in addition to various legal job protections monitored by OPM and the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB).
Related Stories
The buyout offer must be accepted by February 6, and OPM officials have distributed a “template contract” to all agencies and departments that will serve as the basis for the voluntary resignations as part of the “Deferred Resignation Program (DRP).”
The OPM’s remarks come in response to various claims made by the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) and Democratic congressional members, asserting that the buyout offer is unlawful and that President Donald Trump lacks the authority to suggest such a proposal.
Workers at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) and their supporters protest outside JPL against a U.S. government mandate requiring all federal employees to receive the COVID-19 coronavirus vaccine, in Pasadena, Calif., on Nov. 1, 2021. Robyn Beck/Getty Images
The union and its supporters alleged that the new administration seeks to politicize the federal workforce, suggesting that Elon Musk, founder of SpaceX, instigated the buyout offer as part of efforts related to the newly formed presidential advisory commission, the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).
“We urge AFGE members to refrain from resigning or responding to this email until you have received additional information and clarification,” the union cautioned.
An OPM official, speaking off the record, informed The Epoch Times that, contrary to many media reports quoting AFGE representatives, the DRP is a legally binding agreement that “ensures they will not fall victim to future RIFs, will not be required to work, and their compensation will be safeguarded even in the event of a lapse in appropriations.”
The Epoch Times has sought a statement from the union regarding OPM’s assertions.
“Don’t be deceived. He’s duped countless individuals with that offer. If you accept that offer and resign, he’ll deny you just as he has with the contractors,” Kaine asserted.
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) at his election watch party in Richmond, Va., on Nov. 5, 2024 Terri Wu/The Epoch Times
Joseph A. Morris, former General Counsel of OPM, informed The Epoch Times today that recent decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court and other federal courts clarify that the president, as the nation’s chief executive, possesses extensive constitutional power to enact measures fostering efficiency and integrity in governmental operations, which includes discharging employees and offering resignation incentives.
“I am unaware of any legal precedent before the MSPB or, importantly, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, where an employee challenged their removal, let alone successfully, when such action was directly executed or mandated by the president,” Morris stated in a correspondence to The Epoch Times.
