The February 6 deadline has arrived and many eligible civilian federal employees are still grappling with the Trump administration’s unprecedented deferred resignation offer. Initially communicated on January 28 via an email from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) titled “Fork in the Road,” the proposal allows employees to resign in exchange for continued pay and benefits through September 30, 2025. However, subsequent clarifications have raised more questions than answers.
New Terms and Conditions Released
In the final days before the deadline, federal agencies circulated sample contract agreements meant to “memorialize” the deal. These contracts introduce new conditions, including a requirement for employees who accept the offer to work through February 28 to ensure a smooth transition, followed by placement on paid administrative leave no later than March 1. This stipulation was absent from the original communication and contradicts OPM’s FAQ, which explicitly states, “No,” when asked if employees are expected to work during the deferred resignation period.
Adding to the confusion, agency memos summarizing the deferred resignation offer continue to describe it as allowing employees to retain their pay and benefits without any work obligations through the end date.
Funding Uncertainty After March 14
A significant update in the sample contracts is language acknowledging that continued payments are “subject to the availability of appropriations.” This reflects the reality that current federal funding is only secured through March 14, 2025. This caveat has alarmed many, including Sen. Patty Murray, who warned in an email, “There is no funding allocated to agencies to pay staff for this offer beyond March 14.”
Additional Caveats and Legal Concerns
Further complicating the offer, the new contracts include clauses restricting employees’ ability to contest the agreement. They stipulate that the agreements can be rescinded at the discretion of the agency head, with no recourse through the Merit Systems Protection Board. Employees must also waive their rights to pursue legal claims related to their employment or the resignation offer.
Moreover, while OPM encourages employees to seek private-sector jobs, new language clarifies that federal ethics rules still apply, potentially requiring prior approval for outside employment in some cases.
Criticism of the Offer
Democratic attorneys general from a dozen states have denounced the offer as “misleading.” New York Attorney General Letitia James stated, “These supposed offers are not guaranteed. Federal employees should be cautious and follow the guidance of their unions to protect their rights.”
Unfortunately, federal employees face a difficult decision, weighed down by legal uncertainties, funding ambiguities, and conflicting guidance from their agencies and representatives.
