Make performance the first factor in reductions-in-force
What the document says“A determined President should insist that performance be first and be wary of costly types of reductions-in-force.”
The chapter states that retention in a layoff currently turns on tenure, veterans' preference, seniority and performance in that order, notes that bills to weight performance more heavily failed in the House during the Trump years, and says a determined President should insist that performance come first.
What the document actually says“A determined President should insist that performance be first and be wary of costly types of reductions-in-force.”
A firm president should demand that how well people work counts first. He should also watch out for job cuts that cost a lot.
When the government cuts jobs, four things decide who stays. How well a person works is last on that list. The book says a president should put how well they work first.
Implementing the President's "Department of Government Efficiency" Workforce Optimization Initiative
2025-02-11 · 90 FR 9669
Directs reductions in force, which is the subject of the chapter's proposal. The chapter's specific ask was to change the order of retention so that performance outranks tenure, veterans' preference and seniority, a change it noted had repeatedly failed as legislation. This order directs reductions; it is not established here that it reorders retention factors.
The order calls for job cuts across agencies, which is the subject here. The chapter wanted the cuts ranked by how well a person works. That would put work record ahead of years served. Whether the order changes that ranking is not shown.
2 agency rules
- Changes to Geographical Jurisdictions and in Case Handling ProceduresFederal Labor Relations Authority · August 29, 2025
- Transfer of the Functions of the Tax Division to the Civil Division and the Criminal DivisionJustice Department · December 10, 2025
Each of these names the order above in its own summary, preamble or filing. That is a fact about the document, not a finding that it carries out this proposal: it is one step further away than the order is, and what it does about the proposal is a reading nobody has made here.