OPM requires federal agencies to submit RIF plans by April 14, 2025

On April 14, 2025, federal agencies faced a deadline to submit Phase 2 Agency Reduction in ForceReduction in ForceA formal federal process for eliminating government positions, governed by civil service rules that determine layoff order based on seniority and performance.Key ConceptReduction in ForceA formal federal process for eliminating government positions, governed by civil service rules that determine layoff order based on seniority and performance.Open conceptBookmark and Reorganization Plans to the Office of Personnel Management and the Office of Management and Budget. The plans required organizational charts down to the position level, competitive area designations for large-scale cuts, relocation proposals, technology deployment schedules, and implementation timelines targeting completion by Sept. 30, 2025.

OPM and OMB issued the joint guidance memorandum directing agencies to prepare RIF plans on Feb. 26, 2025, implementing a Feb. 11, 2025 executive orderExecutive OrderA written directive from the President directing federal agencies to implement or change policy without requiring congressional approval.Key ConceptExecutive OrderA written directive from the President directing federal agencies to implement or change policy without requiring congressional approval.Open conceptBookmark. The memorandum gave agencies about six weeks to develop plans affecting the entire civilian federal workforce.

More than 317,000 federal employees departed the government in 2025, surpassing OPM Director Scott Kupor's stated target. The departures came through a mix of voluntary separation incentives, early retirement buyouts, and firings before the Phase 2 RIF plans had even been formally submitted.

A Reduction in Force is a formal legal process under 5 CFR Part 351 that determines which employees are cut when positions are eliminated. RIF rules require agencies to consider veterans' preference, tenure, and performance ratings in setting the order of separations. The April 14 plans required agencies to specify competitive areas, creating legal exposure for the government if those procedures weren't followed.

Agencies had to give employees at least 60 days' notice before a RIF took effect, which meant that for the Sept. 30 fiscal-year-end target, RIF notices needed to issue by late July 2025.

OPM published a proposed rule in February 2026 in the Federal Register that would limit RIF appeals, reducing the ability of federal employees to contest terminations through the Merit Systems Protection Board. Federal employee unions challenged the proposed rule as an attempt to strip civil service protections established by the Pendleton Civil Service Act of 1883 and the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978.

The Pendleton Act created the merit-based civil service after President Garfield's assassination in 1881 by a disappointed office-seeker who had been refused a government job. Congress designed the system specifically to prevent presidents from firing career employees for political reasons. DOGE's restructuring effort was the most sweeping attempt to reduce the career civil service since the act's passage.

Cabinet agencies subject to the deepest DOGE-driven cuts included the Department of Education, which planned to eliminate roughly half its workforce, and the Department of Health and Human Services. The Defense Department and Veterans Affairs were on separate review timelines given congressional sensitivities around military readiness and veterans services.

The American Federation of Government Employees, which represents approximately 700,000 federal workers, filed legal challenges arguing that mass RIFs require congressional authorization when they involve abolishing programs created by statute. Federal judges in multiple districts issued temporary restraining orders blocking specific agency reorganizations while litigation continued.

Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) sent a letter to OPM and OMB on April 11, 2025 — three days before the deadline — demanding transparency about which positions would be eliminated and whether RIF procedures were being followed. The letter requested details on competitive area designations and asked agencies to confirm they were applying veterans' preference rules correctly.