15,000 IRS Workers Face Potential Termination
According to the article, Hanna Hickman, a now-terminated worker for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), told the media the last four days have been a roller coaster.
Note: This article is presented exclusively for the purposes of addressing the employment-at-will doctrine and other associated, “non-political” issues.
Note: In addition to the video, please see the following article included at the above-referenced internet address:
“Fired Federal Workers Speak Out on Terminations”
"It's scary," said Hickman, who was fired recently. "I had a real moment -- I was at CVS the other day and ... it kind of came on me all at once that I might not have health insurance in a few weeks, and that really hits you. I think it underscores the fact that we're just regular, middle-class people, just like the people we're trying to serve."
Hickman was senior litigation counsel for the Division of Enforcement at the CFPB in Washington, D.C. She is one of thousands of mostly new employees known as probationary workers laid off this week across the federal government. Those recent hires had joined the federal workforce within the last one to two years, depending on the agency, and have fewer protections.
Hickman was a probationary hire who had been at the CFPB just under two years when she saw a termination notice pop up on her phone.
"It was shocking, frankly -- not just to us but to our direct managers, who had not been told this would happen and received notice of the terminations at the same time we did because they were CC'd," Hickman said.
The mass layoffs have wreaked havoc on scores of federal employees, including at the Department of Education, the CFPB, the Department of Veterans Affairs, and other agencies. Hickman stressed that the firing was surreal because CFPB employees had already been told last weekend that they could not show up to work in person. Her belongings are still inside the bureau.
"It's really a shock," she said, "especially for a lawyer because we have professional obligations. I have a case that I'm currently litigating for the bureau, and all of a sudden, I'm cut off from our systems, and it's the equivalent of being escorted out of the building and fired. It's just, it's absolutely shocking, especially when there have been no concerns about my performance during my time at the bureau."
Hickman hasn't been inside the CFPB since Friday, February 7, when Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency descended on the CFPB headquarters. That day, Musk posted on X: "CFPB RIP."
"We're under attack by billionaires, but I'm not a billionaire, so, you know, for me, the next steps are scary. I'm trying to stay focused on working productively, but it's a scary moment," Hickman said.
Hickman said she believes Musk is attempting to "destroy" the agency started by Congress. But she and several of her former colleagues vowed to continue fighting, looking into all available legal options, because she said that's what civil servants do.
"Civil servants do this work to fight for regular Americans," she said. "That's what the job is. That's why it's intended to be insulated from partisan swings. That's why it requires expert people skills and experience, and that's why there are these protections around the jobs. I mean, we are people who go to work every day to fight for regular people."
CFPB employs the "cops on the beat for the financial market," according to Hickman. She said her job was critical to safeguarding the public from financial market crashes, loan schemes and hiked interest rates.
"Donald Trump and Elon Musk can just call their lawyers," Hickman said. "But regular people don't just have a lawyer they can call, and these agencies are intended to fill that gap and to keep people safe. … For me, this was, you know, a calling.
"It was something that I felt really passionate about doing in this next phase of my career," she added. "I've been in private practice for 15 years before this, and this is just a whole different type of practice -- and one that was incredibly fulfilling for me before I was terminated."
"Nobody Knows Anything"
Earlier this week, the media spoke to several other federal government probationary employees who had been fired by receiving notices that said: "The Agency finds, based on your performance, that you have not demonstrated that your further employment at the Agency would be in the public interest."
Chelsea Milburn, a disabled veteran, said she was recently fired from the Department of Education via a memo that "didn't give any specific reasons as to why" she was let go.
"I was definitely upset," Milburn said. "I've only ever gotten positive feedback from my team and leadership, so I was pretty surprised to get that email."
A former Federal Student Aid probationary hire at the Department of Education received an unexpected call from a supervisor who was on the other line crying. The supervisor told the former probationary employee: "I'm getting word that you've been terminated."
The person, who spoke with the media on the condition of anonymity for fear of it affecting future employment opportunities, said it is "devastating" and they do not know where, or when, their next paycheck will come from.
"It was heartbreaking," the former employee said. "When I went up to my computer, it was already locked down. I couldn't access anything. I'm still trying to reach out to HR to find out, do I get a severance package? What is my health insurance benefits? When does it end? Nobody knows anything."
Discussion Questions
1. What is the employment-at-will doctrine?
The employment-at-will doctrine is a contractual relationship between an employer and an employee in which both parties are free to terminate the agreement at any time and for any reason, provided that the reason is not considered illegal. This means that an employer can terminate an employee for almost any reason, and that an employee can decide to leave their employer whenever they want at their discretion. There are some exceptions to the employment-at-will doctrine that are recognized by state and federal law.
2. Discuss some major exceptions to the employment-at-will doctrine recognized at the state level.
The three major exceptions to the employment-at-will doctrine are (1) the public policy exception; (2) the implied contract exception; and (3) the “covenant of good faith and fair dealing” exception.
Under the public policy exception to the employment-at-will doctrine, an employee is wrongfully discharged when the termination is against an explicit, well-established public policy of the state. This exception is the most widely accepted exception to the employment-at-will doctrine, recognized in 43 of the 50 states.
The second major exception to the employment-at-will doctrine is applied when an implied contract is formed between an employer and employee, even though no express, written document regarding the employment relationship exists. Although employment is typically not governed by a contract, an employer may make oral or written representations to employees regarding job security or procedures that will be followed when adverse employment actions are taken. If so, these representations may create a contract for employment. Currently, 38 of the 50 states recognize the implied contract exception to the employment-at-will doctrine.
The third exception to the employment-at-will doctrine is the “implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing” exception. This exception represents the most significant departure from the doctrine. Rather than narrowly prohibiting terminations based on public policy or an implied contract, this exception (at its broadest) reads a covenant of good faith and fair dealing into every employment relationship. It has been interpreted to mean either that employer personnel decisions are subject to a “just cause” standard or that terminations made in bad faith or motivated by malice are prohibited. The implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing exception to the employment-at-will doctrine is recognized by only 11 states.
For an excellent article addressing the three major exceptions to the employment-at-will doctrine, please see the following internet address:
https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2001/01/art1full.pdf
3. Does the federal government recognize the employment-at-will doctrine?
Federal employees are not considered at-will workers. Unlike most private sector employees, federal workers are shielded by a vigorous set of protections that prevent arbitrary dismissal. Federal employees can only be “shown the door” for specific reasons outlined in federal law and regulations.
Although most private sector employees can be fired for any reason or no reason at all (provided that the termination is not discriminatory or against public policy), federal workers play by a different set of rules—These rules are designed to promote fairness, reward merit, and keep political influence in check.
The foundation of this protection is the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978. This act established the Merit System Principles, which serve as the bedrock of federal employment practices. These principles represent a shield that guards against unfair treatment, ensuring that federal jobs are filled through open competition, and that employees are judged based on their performance, not their political leanings.
For an excellent presentation of the job security protections afforded to federal employees, including the “due process” safety net, exceptions to the rule, legitimate reasons for termination, and recent challenges to the system, please see the following article written by Justin Schnitzer, Esq., lead attorney and founder at The Law Office of Justin Schnitzer.
