Talk:U.S. federal deferred resignation program

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the U.S. federal deferred resignation program article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Conservatism Low‑importance

	Conservatism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Organized Labour Low‑importance

	Organized Labour portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organized Labour, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Organized Labour on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Organized LabourWikipedia:WikiProject Organized LabourTemplate:WikiProject Organized Labourorganized labour
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics: American Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Low-importance).

United States: Government Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government (assessed as Low-importance).

United States Presidents: Donald Trump Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States Presidents, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of United States Presidents on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United States PresidentsWikipedia:WikiProject Presidents of the United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United States PresidentsUnited States Presidents
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Donald Trump task force.

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

It is requested that an image or photograph of U.S. federal deferred resignation program be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

Did you know nomination

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

~~... that the first-ever mass message to the U.S. government's two million employees was a request for them to resign?~~

Source: For claim of "first-ever" see CBS News: "'This is a new effort under this administration,' one of the officials said". For claim of "two million" see The New York Times: "The Trump administration on Tuesday offered roughly two million federal workers the option to resign"

Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/KVLY-TV

Moved to mainspace by Dan Leonard (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 5 past nominations.

Dan Leonard (talk • contribs) 06:07, 3 February 2025 (UTC).[reply]

@Dan Leonard: Article new and long enough. Referencing is adequate, and no copyvio detected. I am reasonably sure that the entire contents of the email, if available, would be in the public domain; might be worth adding to the article. I cannot find the claim for the "first ever mass message" in the article - it's in the CBS News article, but not in the article body. Once that's added, this would be good to go. Juxlos (talk) 10:30, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Juxlos: the "first ever" claim is the second sentence of lead, The memo, the first ever mass message to all roughly two million federal employees, offered a deferred resignation scheme for those unwilling to work under the second presidency of Donald Trump. Since the letter is public domain it’s hosted at Wikisource and included in the article via {{Wikisource}}. Dan Leonard (talk • contribs) 16:12, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Needs an inline citation there then. Added it to save time. Juxlos (talk) 02:23, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There's no part of the memo that "requests" recipients to resign; it presents an offer, but allows either choice. Antony–22 (^talk⁄_contribs) 04:50, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Something like "sought to induce" would be better than "was a request for". There are definitely inducements offered for those who resign. Antony–22 (^talk⁄_contribs) 19:11, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe an ALT1: * ... that the first-ever mass message to the U.S. government's two million employees was an offer for them to resign? could work? Pinging @Dan Leonard:. Juxlos (talk) 05:59, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That works, although given the tone of the letter I think ALT2: * ... that the first-ever mass message to the U.S. government's two million employees was an enticement for them to resign? might be the more interesting and precise hook. Dan Leonard (talk • contribs) 07:11, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ALT1 and ALT2 are both fine with me. Antony–22 (^talk⁄_contribs) 00:36, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Does "you will retain your pay and benefits" constitute a "promise" of salary payments?

In section #Concerns it is stated in Wiki voice that The government only has funding through March 15, 2025, as it is currently funded by a continuing resolution, despite the offer promising salary payments through September 30. I'm challenging this as a fair reading. It could be implied that the memo's wording, you will retain your pay and benefits, means the pay and benefits the employee would have otherwise gotten. In other words, if the CR runs out and nobody gets paid, neither do you, the person who accepted this offer. I'd be OK with attributing this statement to Senator Patty Murray who, maybe in an odd turn concerning her position in Congress involving responsibility for funding federal employees, pointed out this out as a flaw in the offer. ☆ Bri (talk) 18:41, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

From the WAPO article:

The email, for instance, says workers who accept the offer will be paid through Sept. 30, the end of the federal fiscal year. But the OPM’s authority to make that offer is unclear, the experts said: Federal employees’ salaries are funded by federal agencies, not by the OPM. The administration has some limited tools to offer early retirements, but they are minimal and involve only small sums of money.

In addition, the agencies are funded only through March 14, when the government will shut down unless Congress acts to approve new spending. Promising workers payment through September is a “flat-out violation” of a 19th-century law that prevents the administration from agreeing to spend money it does not have, said David Super, an administrative law professor at Georgetown University.

What about all this from the article? That seems to support that sentence you quote:

The government only has funding through March 15, 2025, as it is currently funded by a continuing resolution, despite the offer promising salary payments through September 30.

In a plain reading? -- Very Polite Person (talk) 19:07, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That sentence was originally embedded in § Response in the paragraph beginning Others questioned the legality of the offer before it was refactored into its own section by Leaky.Solar. I think it was more logically-placed in that paragraph and don't see why we need both § Concerns and § Response. The lawsuit about the APA could also fit in the existing § Response paragraph about the unions. Dan Leonard (talk • contribs) 19:21, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well at any rate, I removed "promise" for it to read despite the offer to pay salaries. I'm not totally happy with this but perhaps it will work. ☆ Bri (talk) 22:53, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]