Trump’s plans for reshaping the federal workforce will allow him to fire large numbers of career employees, and replace them with appointees from his political party. This is a decision that comes at a time when he demands loyalty across all levels of government.

Trump said that he would reissue the order he issued in the last days of his first presidency that ended merit-based hiring of a number federal jobs working on policy. Instead, a new federal employee class — Schedule F — could be hired and terminated just like political appointees.

This is alarming federal workers who believe it’s a way of introducing politics into government action, which could reward Trump supporters and politicize decision-making.

“I believe there would be an exodus because federal employees simply want to do their job.” “They want to follow the law and regulations,” Jacqueline Simon is the policy director of the American Federation of Government Employees.

They do not want to become political appointees. They do not want politics to affect any part of their work.

The president appoints political appointees to lead agencies across the government, but most of the work is done by nonpartisan employees hired for their expertise. Trump’s allies envision a huge expansion of political positions. They want to go from the current 4,000 to about 50,000.

Ronald Sanders, Trump’s appointed chair of the Federal Salary Council in his first administration, quit over the issue when Trump moved to introduce Schedule F for 2020.

He said that when he spoke to people in the first Trump Administration, he realized they were more interested in political loyalty than “ensuring greater accountability”, as stated by the original order.

You’ve got a bunch of suckers if you hire them because they are loyal and will tell you exactly what you want to know. This is not good. You want civil servants who can speak the truth without fear of losing their job.

Simon outlined a series of examples in which politics could influence important government decisions. These ranged from the way environmental regulations are written to who’s taxes are reviewed by the IRS to what businesses are cited as violating regulations.

“We have regulations that are aimed at keeping the air clean and the water drinkable, as well as the air we breathe, safe. She asked: “Is your goal clean air and clean water or to please your political patrons that want to pollute?”

You want accurate, objective data? Do you want a politicized version of the data?

Trump’s order from October 2020 found that “conditions for good administration require an exception to competitive hiring rules.” Departments needed to be able “to hire people without the limitations imposed on competitive service selection procedures.”

Project 2025 claimed that Schedule F was a result of the government’s “career first” policy. It cited “frustration” among top career executives with these activities as the main reason for this.

The order will blind the government of vital information and sideline the career staff, according to a current Biden Administration appointee in charge of federal personnel issues.

Even if you do not think that a professional civil servant is necessary, there are still some basic principles to follow when making decisions. Harvard Business Review will tell you that decision makers need to consider all angles and have unbiased information.

If you want to make intelligent decisions, then this is the wrong way to go. You want others to challenge your way of thinking. You want them to conduct research to get the most current information possible on a particular topic. To dismiss that with a stroke of the pen to make your life easier is just incredibly wrongheaded.”

Trump said that he wanted to close the Department of Education. He would also likely use Schedule F at many key agencies in health and environment.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has suggested that the Food and Drug Administration should be reorganized.

Project 2025 lists the U.S. Agency for International Development, which oversees most of the country’s foreign aid as the ideal department to “pilot test a reinstated Schedule F.”

Project 2025 noted that it could also remove employees without changing their classification. It referred to the requirement for “mobilization” of those in Senior Executive Service (SES), which is the highest-ranking civil servants.

Sanders explained: “It is possible to resign anywhere under the penalty of removal. Not just geographically, but also organizationally.”

They can be reassigned to another department tomorrow. You don’t have to fire them. “You can reassign the person and fill in the vacancy with whoever you like.”

The Project 2025 proposes this exact action at USAID, “to encourage regular rotation of senior leaders in their careers including through detailed assignments to other departments or agencies”. This could lead to people being pushed into roles that are completely unrelated.

The idea is repeated elsewhere in the almost 1,000-page document. It’s even mentioned at the Environmental Protection Agency, where the agency would “benefit greatly” from relocating SES employees from headquarters to regional offices and to other programs.