Trump brings back controversial Schedule F rule to make 50,000 federal workers easier to fire

Why is Trump reinstating Schedule F, and what does it mean for federal employees?

President Donald Trump has initiated a sweeping change to federal employment rules by moving to reinstate Schedule F, a controversial job classification that would convert tens of thousands of government roles into at-will positions. The directive is aligned with proposals outlined in Project 2025, a policy blueprint developed by conservative think tanks to reshape the federal government in a second Trump term. The plan specifically targets career federal employees in policy-advisory roles by removing their traditional civil service protections and subjecting them to easier dismissal. If implemented as proposed, roughly 50,000 government workers could be reclassified and made vulnerable to political influence and job termination at the discretion of the administration.

Schedule F, first introduced through an executive order by Trump in October 2020, had been revoked by President Joe Biden shortly after taking office in January 2021. The Biden administration argued that the measure would undermine the integrity and independence of the federal workforce. By reviving the order, Trump signals a renewed intent to dismantle a significant portion of the nonpartisan bureaucracy, potentially reshaping how federal policy is designed, implemented, and challenged across multiple agencies.

What is Schedule F and how does it affect civil service protections?

Schedule F refers to a special category of federal employees who occupy roles described as “policy-determining, policy-making, or policy-advocating.” Under traditional civil service classifications, these positions are subject to merit-based hiring practices and come with significant employment protections that prevent arbitrary dismissal. The creation of Schedule F effectively strips those protections away, rendering such employees as at-will staff who can be removed without the due process typically afforded under federal employment rules.

This reclassification means that civil servants who once had stable, long-term job security could now be treated as political appointees. In practical terms, this could give the executive branch unprecedented power to remove career employees who are viewed as not aligned with the administration’s priorities. Critics argue this approach risks politicizing functions that should remain neutral, such as regulatory oversight, scientific research, and national security analysis.

Trump’s 2025 campaign has made federal workforce reform a cornerstone of its governance strategy, repeatedly arguing that entrenched bureaucrats have slowed or resisted presidential directives. By reclassifying these roles, the Trump administration seeks to remove what it considers “deep state” obstacles to executive authority.

How does Project 2025 relate to Schedule F’s return?

Project 2025 is a comprehensive policy framework developed by the Heritage Foundation and other conservative institutions to guide a second Trump administration. One of its most ambitious goals is to realign the federal bureaucracy to reflect the administration’s policy priorities more directly. Reinstating Schedule F is a central recommendation of the document, viewed as essential to clearing out what proponents consider ideologically entrenched officials.

The blueprint proposes immediate action upon inauguration to reissue the Schedule F executive order, identify federal workers who fit the target profile, and terminate those deemed disloyal or obstructive. Critics of the plan, including multiple former government officials, have warned that it could dismantle decades of institutional knowledge and weaken the operational independence of agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Justice, and even the Federal Reserve.

Supporters of Project 2025 argue that the federal government has become bloated and inefficient, and that accountability is lacking due to rigid civil service rules. They claim Schedule F would allow a sitting president to install officials who are ideologically aligned and responsive to elected leadership.

What has been the response from unions and watchdog groups?

The move to reintroduce Schedule F has been met with fierce opposition from federal unions and government accountability organizations. The American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), which represents over 700,000 federal workers, has labeled the proposal a “direct attack” on public servants. In public statements, union leaders have argued that the policy would allow for the politically motivated purging of employees and reduce government efficiency by discouraging dissent and independent analysis.

Whistleblower advocates have expressed similar concerns. Removing civil service protections would likely deter employees from reporting wrongdoing, fearing retaliation without procedural safeguards. Legal analysts expect significant litigation if Schedule F is enacted again, particularly around violations of the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, which was designed to prevent patronage and promote professionalism in federal hiring and retention.

Even some former Republican officials have warned of the risks involved. They point to the potential erosion of the traditional separation between politics and administration, which has historically shielded career officials from partisan volatility. Without those protections, they argue, the U.S. risks building a government bureaucracy that mirrors the instability seen in authoritarian regimes.

How does this fit into broader efforts to overhaul the federal workforce?

The reinstatement of Schedule F is part of a larger initiative by Trump’s administration to restructure the federal government, which includes rolling back remote work options, freezing new hiring in certain departments, and launching the Department of Government Efficiency, a proposed agency aimed at eliminating bureaucratic redundancies. Elon Musk has reportedly been tapped to advise on streamlining federal operations, further highlighting the administration’s focus on public-private synergy and disruptive innovation.

The Office of Personnel Management (OPM), which oversees federal hiring practices, has signaled its alignment with the administration’s goals. According to recent communications, the agency supports “enhanced accountability measures” that would allow supervisors to take action against underperforming employees more swiftly. While not explicitly endorsing Schedule F in name, the language appears to set the stage for its reintroduction.

This focus on personnel reform has grown in prominence as other Trump policy proposals face legal and political challenges. By targeting the administrative state directly, Schedule F allows the White House to exert influence even in the absence of Congressional support.

What are the long-term implications of Schedule F for governance?

The long-term impact of Schedule F hinges on whether it withstands legal challenges and how aggressively it is implemented. If reclassification proceeds on the scale proposed—affecting up to 50,000 employees—it would amount to the largest restructuring of the federal workforce in modern U.S. history. The changes could have ripple effects across policy domains, from environmental regulation to economic oversight.

If Trump follows through on the plan, future presidents could be incentivized to use similar tools to exert partisan control over federal agencies. This would represent a fundamental shift from a nonpartisan civil service model to a spoils system model, where job security is tied more closely to political loyalty than competence or service longevity.

For voters and institutions, the question is not only one of efficiency but of accountability and checks on executive power. The civil service exists, in part, to ensure that administrations do not exceed their mandates or act in ways that contradict established laws and norms. Undermining this structure could weaken institutional resilience and public trust.

As legal battles loom and federal agencies brace for change, the revival of Schedule F may define not just Trump’s second term, but the future of governance in the United States.