A federal judge in Boston is set to decide whether to block former President Donald Trump and billionaire Elon Musk from carrying out a controversial plan to offer buyouts to thousands of federal employees.
Three major unions representing government workers, supported by 20 Democratic attorneys general, have challenged the plan. They argue that the Office of Personnel Management’s (OPM) offer, known as the “Fork Directive,” is an unfair and unlawful attempt to force federal employees to resign under the threat of being fired.
In their legal filing, the unions stated that the directive was rushed and arbitrary. “There was no rational or well-thought-out decision-making behind this move,” they claimed.
The buyout offer is part of Trump’s effort to reduce the size of the government through Musk’s newly formed Department of Government Efficiency. OPM sent out an email with the subject line “Fork in the Road,” the same phrase Musk used when he cut jobs at Twitter in 2022.
The Trump administration argues that the buyout is necessary to “transform the federal workforce” and claims that delaying it will create unnecessary disruptions. The email offered federal workers full pay and benefits until September if they agreed to resign by February 6.
However, U.S. District Judge George O’Toole Jr., who was appointed by former President Bill Clinton, temporarily blocked the offer just hours before the deadline. He said he needed more time to review the case and decide whether to pause the program further.
Meanwhile, the administration extended the deadline, and over 65,000 federal employees have already accepted the offer. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt defended the plan, saying, “We are thankful the judge extended the deadline so more workers who don’t want to return to the office can take advantage of this generous, once-in-a-lifetime offer.”
The unions argue that Trump overstepped his authority and that the offer is illegal. They claim it violates federal law, lacks proper funding from Congress, and does not guarantee that employees who accept the deal will actually receive the promised pay.
Legal experts point to the 1946 Administrative Procedure Act, which ensures that federal agencies follow careful procedures when making major decisions. Professor Justin Leavitt from Loyola Marymount University explained, “In the tech world, you can ‘move fast and break things,’ but government agencies must take a more careful approach.”
Additionally, the unions argue that the buyout violates the Antideficiency Act, which prevents the government from spending money that has not been approved by Congress.
Federal lawyers, however, insist that Trump has the authority to offer buyouts to government employees and that blocking the program would cause further confusion and uncertainty. Justice Department attorney Joshua Gardner wrote, “Delaying the deadline will disrupt expectations and harm the administration’s efforts to reform the federal workforce.”
Judge O’Toole will now decide whether to extend the block on the buyout offer for up to two more weeks while the case is reviewed.
