Already a subscriber? Make sure to log into your account before viewing this content. You can access your account by hitting the “login” button on the top right corner. Still unable to see the content after signing in? Make sure your card on file is up-to-date.
The Pentagon is moving forward with plans to reduce its civilian workforce by 5-8%, potentially affecting up to 76,000 employees.
Some shit you should know before you read: The Trump administration has consistently advocated for reducing the size of the federal government, arguing that it is oversaturated with workers and requires more efficiency. This has led to significant budget cuts and workforce reductions across multiple agencies, notably the US Agency for International Development (USAID), where funding was reduced to streamline foreign aid and focus on domestic priorities. Similar cuts were implemented at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of Education.
What’s going on now: Next week, the Pentagon will move forward with plans to reduce its civilian workforce by 5-8%, potentially impacting up to 76,000 employees. The initial phase targets approximately 5,400 probationary workers—those hired within the past year—who are deemed non-mission-critical. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth defended the move, stating, “It is simply not in the public interest to retain individuals whose contributions are not mission-critical.” He emphasized the need for a performance-based approach, adding, “Taxpayers deserve to have us take a really thorough look at our workforce top to bottom… to see where we can find and eliminate redundancy.”
Hegseth also highlighted that the focus would be on terminating lower-performing employees first, ensuring that critical roles in cybersecurity, intelligence, and national security operations remain unaffected
This all comes as lawsuits are anticipated to be filed against the Pentagon’s planned workforce reductions, with plaintiffs expected to argue that the mass terminations violate federal law. Specifically, critics cite Title 10 section 129a of the US Code, which requires the Secretary of Defense to conduct “an appropriate analysis” of how workforce cuts could impact military lethality and readiness before implementing such layoffs. Legal challenges are likely to argue that no such analysis was conducted before ordering the dismissals, making the decision legally questionable.
Additionally, opponents may argue that the firings are politically motivated and disproportionately target employees perceived as non-aligned with the administration’s ideological stance, potentially leading to claims of wrongful termination and discrimination.
