If the Trump administration doesn’t get the number of resignations it’s hoping for through its “deferred resignation” program, agencies may have to prepare for the administration’s next possible move to reduce the size of the federal workforce: conducting reductions in force (RIFs).
But conducting a RIF is a much lengthier and more complex process than what the Office of Personnel Management is so far attempting to do through its deferred resignation program. The program was initially set to expire Feb. 6, but the offer has since been put on hold by a federal judge.
In the meantime, federal employees at agencies such as the General Services Administration have been told that a nonvoluntary RIF is expected “shortly.”
Ron Sanders, a former career federal executive, views the two efforts toward reducing the size of the federal workforce differently — with one being a “blunt instrument” and the other being a “scalpel.”
“Reducing head count through separation incentives like deferred resignations — that’s the blunt instrument,” Sanders said during a webinar this week, hosted by the Partnership for Public Service. “The scalpel is reductions in force, where you literally, as an agency, take the time to identify surplus skills and surplus people and then cut them.”
Conducting a RIF is complicated, in part because of that “scalpel” method. With strict regulations and processes agencies have to follow, it takes a lot of work and time for agencies to run any RIFs. In many cases, agencies struggle to conduct RIFs well because of the complex nature of the process, according to former OPM Acting Director Rob Shriver who spoke to federal employees during a town hall this week.
For example, agencies have to follow a specific prioritization process for personnel who may be impacted during a RIF. Under current RIF regulations, agencies prioritize employees who have seniority, veterans’ preference and longer time in service when choosing who will stay at the organization during a RIF. An employee’s performance is the last priority when making those decisions. Agencies use good performance ratings as a way to supplement an employee’s length of service.
“If you don’t have a lot of seniority and you’re not going to resign, if you just passed your probationary period, I’d worry, because you may be a victim of a reduction in force,” Sanders said.
At the end of Trump’s first term, the administration took initial steps to try to change the priority order in RIFs. In December 2020, OPM proposed regulations to prioritize performance over tenure during RIFs at agencies. The regulations were never finalized, and the Biden administration withdrew the proposed rule in December 2024.
Based on the current regulations, RIFs also cannot be performed governmentwide. They are contained to a “localized” level, which means they are typically conducted by agency or by location.
“RIFs are almost exclusively local, and unless Congress changes all of the other laws involving reductions in force — and there are a lot of them — unless those laws are changed, then there’s never going to be a governmentwide layoff,” Sanders said. “Your agency may lay people off, that’s one thing, but there’s not going to be a governmentwide one.”
On top of that, agencies have to follow careful steps in RIFs, including developing a justification for the action, creating a detailed action plan, conducting a personnel data validation process, and working with federal unions and other stakeholders, as well as putting together incentive options for early retirements and separations.
Agencies also have to give at least 30 days, and usually 60 days, notice to employees and unions before beginning a RIF.
Because of all the requirements, RIFs take a much longer time than what the Trump administration has been pushing for so far through its deferred resignation program. Depending on the complexity of the RIF, it can take months for an agency to complete the process, and in some cases well over a year.
OPM offers more details on the requirements and steps of a RIF on its website.
RIFs impact workforce productivity, morale
RIFs can also have major adverse impacts on agencies, according to some federal workforce experts. Jeff Neal, a former federal human capital official, ran a RIF at a naval facility in Jacksonville, Florida, during his previous tenure at the Department of the Navy. Based on his experience, Neal described the RIF process as “incredibly disruptive.”
Out of about 3,200 personnel, “we abolished 700 jobs, and we affected 1,500 people in a combination of reassignments, downgrades and removals,” Neal said in an interview. “And that was incredibly complicated. It’s not just snap your fingers and it’s done. It’s going to be disruptive. There’s going to be a lot of uncertainty.”
The RIF process can lead to unintended consequences, such as worsening workforce morale, fear among employees, distrust in agency leadership, and declining productivity and efficiency, Neal explained in 2017 commentary for Federal News Network.
Because the RIF process is based on seniority, determining how to restructure the workforce is also a complicated and time-consuming process. Some employees who aren’t removed from an agency during a RIF may get moved into different roles — and sometimes that shifting of positions can impact two, three or even more employees with the removal just one worker.
“That kind of stuff is very common in a reduction in force,” Neal said. “It’s a chain reaction that starts when you abolish a position and run through the RIF process.”
Neal said although the process for the RIF at the naval facility went relatively smoothly, that’s unlikely to be the trend if there were more widespread RIFs coming.
“It was a very clean, regulatorily correct RIF. And it did what it was designed to do, which was to reduce our cost,” Neal said. “But most people now don’t have that kind of experience.”
At this point, most agency HR staff across government have never run a RIF before, making them underprepared for the process, Neal explained. Conducting RIFs amid a lack of experience could also lead to even messier situations and further negative ripple effects.
“If they think that you can just read the rules and then know how to run a RIF, they’re completely wrong,” Neal said. “RIFs are far more complicated than what the rules make them look like they are. People don’t even know how to how to interpret those rules anymore in most HR offices. A RIF is a very complex, messy thing.”
The complicated process for conducting RIFs can also open agencies up to legal challenges. If employees believe RIFs occurred illegally, they can make an appeal to the Merit Systems Protection Board.
“If you do things wrong, because the rules are so explicit, then you end up having to undo stuff. And it could be that having to undo one action affects three or four people, and those have to be undone, and then some of those might have affected other people, which could cause something else to have to be undone,” Neal said. “So you start losing RIF appeals, you really get into a mess, and trying to clean them up is very difficult. It’s one of the reasons people try to avoid RIFs because they know how messy and complicated they are, and what a nightmare it can be to run them, particularly if you don’t have well trained people to do it.”
Once an employee is removed during a RIF, they will get a notice saying they have a certain amount of time to appeal their removal to the MSPB. During the town hall this week, Shriver said it’s critically important for employees to pay attention to that deadline, and seek legal counsel either from a federal union or another source, if needed.
Ultimately, if MSPB determines a RIF was illegal, then a removed employee may be reinstated and receive backpay.
“So you get rid of somebody you want to get rid of, and six months later or a year later, they’re back at work with full pay and benefits. You just gave them a six month or a year-long vacation with pay,” Neal said, adding that the Trump administration is “going to find very quickly that that can bite them in the backside badly. If they want to do some of this stuff, they really need to find a way to do it legally, or it won’t stick.”
The post RIFs are a complicated, time-consuming process for agencies, experts say first appeared on Federal News Network.
