Federal Workers Allege Unjust Firings Amidst Mass Probationary Employee Purge
A wave of anger and disbelief is sweeping through the ranks of former federal employees after what they describe as mass firings of probationary staff. These individuals, many with stellar performance reviews and commendations, are struggling to reconcile their dismissal with the reasons cited in their termination letters – often boilerplate language referencing poor job performance. The abrupt nature of these terminations, occurring under President Donald Trump’s administration, has sparked concerns about the legality and fairness of the process, leaving many questioning their future career prospects and deeply wounded by the perceived insinuation of incompetence.
Samantha Leach, once brimming with enthusiasm for her role at the federal Bureau of Engraving and Printing, experienced a devastating reversal of fortune. Just eight months into a job she loved, where her skills and dedication were recognized, she found herself among the tens of thousands of probationary federal government employees abruptly dismissed. The sting was particularly acute considering her recent performance review, which lauded her work with a perfect score of five out of five. The reference to poor performance in her termination letter felt like a personal attack, a betrayal of her commitment and dedication. “I was good at my job, very good at my job, and I wanted to stay being good at my job,” Leach lamented. “I did everything right. Literally. And I still got fired. So for someone like me who wants nothing more in the world than to fit somewhere and contribute, to be fired when I’m doing that is kind of soul crushing.”
Leach’s story is not an isolated incident. Numerous former federal workers echoed similar sentiments in interviews with USA TODAY, expressing deep hurt and outrage at the discrepancy between their positive performance evaluations and the accusations of inadequacy contained within their termination letters. The implications of these letters extend beyond the immediate loss of employment. Many fear that the negative portrayal of their work will haunt them in future job searches, potentially hindering their ability to secure positions in both the government and private sectors.
The article highlights seven such cases, each showcasing a dedicated employee who had received commendations, cash awards, or consistently positive reviews, only to be blindsided by termination notices citing poor performance. This apparent contradiction has fueled accusations of unfair and potentially illegal practices.
Hampton Dellinger, head of the Office of Special Counsel, a federal entity dedicated to protecting whistleblowers, has voiced concerns that the mass firings of probationary federal employees may be unlawful. He points to the lack of specific, individualized justification in the termination letters as a key violation. The Merit Systems Protection Board, tasked with safeguarding federal workers from partisan politics and illegal employment practices, has already taken action, reinstating six fired employees across various federal agencies to allow for further investigation by Dellinger’s office.
When questioned about the Board’s decision and the concerns of employees who received disparaging termination letters despite positive reviews, White House deputy press secretary Anna Kelly offered a statement asserting that "President Trump is working every day to deliver on the American people’s mandate to eliminate wasteful spending and make federal agencies more efficient, which includes removing probationary employees who are not mission critical."
However, such statements offer little comfort to those directly impacted by the terminations. Tony Ruiz, a disabled Army veteran from Orange County, California, was fired just ten days before his probation as a Veteran Service Representative for Veterans Affairs was set to end. Having dedicated 15 years to the private sector, Ruiz was recruited to help veterans navigate the complex claims process. He regularly managed up to 40 claims a day, assisting veterans in obtaining medical procedures and adding spouses to their policies. The accusation of "unacceptable performance" in his termination letter was particularly galling, given that he had recently been recognized as the first employee in his division to win an employee of the quarter award, complete with a $1,000 cash prize, presented by Veterans Affairs Undersecretary Joshua Jacobs. His performance report, reviewed by USA TODAY, reflected exceptional scores in multiple categories. “You’re telling me (that) me one of their best employees, who was awarded money, who was an employee of the quarter … I’m a bum. I’m a poor performer?” Ruiz said, expressing his disbelief and hurt. The experience has left him devastated and uncertain about his future. “As far as a federal job I think I’m screwed,” he said. “I’m heartbroken, I’m upset. I don’t think any American federal employee deserves this, especially a veteran.”
Megan Ruxton, who took a pay cut to join the Food and Drug Administration as a social scientist, also experienced a similar shock. Ruxton’s work involved screening tobacco products to protect public health, ensuring they would not worsen the harmful effects of tobacco for adults or appeal to children. She had hoped that her work, funded through tobacco industry fees and demonstrably in the public interest, would shield her from potential cuts. However, she received a termination notice filled with the same boilerplate language blaming poor performance, despite her personnel record reflecting only favorable reviews. “I am getting choked up now just talking about it. Like many of my colleagues, I’ve always been the best at anything I do. I have never been told that my performance is inadequate. Ever,” Ruxton said. “They said our employment was no longer in the public interest. Forgive my language but bull—-.” The potential long-term impact on her career prospects weighs heavily on her mind. “I hope that people understand, but this is the official record now. If I am asked if I have ever been terminated from a position, I am going to have to say yes and I may or may not be given the opportunity to explain why,” she said. “I think to some degree there are people out there who will see this and understand that this is not representative of who I am. But I can’t guarantee that.”
The wave of terminations extends to scientists and researchers. Robyn Smyth, an aquatic scientist, publicly celebrated the completion of her probationary period as a program director at the National Science Foundation just months before learning that the agency had retroactively changed the length of probation, placing her back on probationary status and ultimately leading to her firing. "They told 168 of us in a meeting we no longer have our jobs ‒ and that they weren’t done cutting,” she said.The claim that her "further employment was not in the interest of the American public" added insult to injury, according to Smyth.
Allie Mitchell, who dedicated five years to the National Institute on Aging, working her way up to a supervisory position focused on Alzheimer’s Disease research, was also caught in the mass purge. “I just feel a sense of emptiness. Like I feel I’ve done everything right. I studied hard, worked in a lab, worked as a contractor to get this job,” Mitchell said. "And they just fired us and said it was because of your performance and that’s not true. I have awards, great performance reviews. I exceeded expectations.” For Mitchell, whose grandmother suffers from Alzheimer’s, the work was deeply personal. She clings to a sliver of hope that she might be rehired, but acknowledges the need to prepare for an uncertain future.
These stories paint a picture of dedicated and accomplished individuals who feel betrayed by a system they believed in. The mass firings have not only left them unemployed but have also cast a shadow on their professional reputations, raising questions about the integrity and fairness of the federal employment system. The ongoing investigations by the Office of Special Counsel and the Merit Systems Protection Board offer a glimmer of hope for those seeking redress, but the emotional and professional toll of these abrupt and allegedly unjust terminations remains significant.
