Federal employees are facing new communications that may encourage them to accept the Trump administration’s “Fork in the Road” resignation offer, despite ongoing legal ambiguities surrounding the offer’s legitimacy.
The initial resignation proposal, which requires federal workers to resign by February 6 while retaining their pay and benefits until September 30, originated from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM). However, subsequent communications from agency leaders are creating confusion regarding the offer’s validity.
Legal experts and union representatives warn that OPM does not possess the authority to guarantee paid leave for federal employees outside its own jurisdiction. OPM acknowledges this limitation in a fact sheet on its website, stating that “OPM does not regulate the use of administrative leave. This authority rests with each agency head.”
Federal Funding Concerns
Further complicating matters, agency budgets are controlled by Congress. Without new budget approval or a continuing resolution, many agencies may find their funds exhausted by March 14. Professor Donald Kettl from the University of Maryland emphasizes the legal constraints regarding federal spending, noting, “The power of the executive to spend money is limited by the appropriations approved by Congress and signed by the president.” Kettl highlighted the relevance of the Anti-Deficiency Act, which prohibits creating obligations that exceed available funds.
In a public commentary, former Labor Secretary Robert Reich advised federal employees to reject the resignation offer, citing its legal flaws and linking it to billionaire Elon Musk, identified as a key figure behind the “Fork in the Road” strategy. “Don’t accept Elon’s offer,” Reich cautioned, warning that Congress could potentially invalidate it.
Despite the legal uncertainties, some agency leaders continue to assure employees of the offer’s legality. For example, Wonzie L. Gardner, chief human capital officer for the National Science Foundation, expressed confidence in the offer’s validity in an email to staff. This message promised employees that those accepting the offer would not be dismissed before September 30, contradicting previous communications.
Ethics Violations Loom
Additionally, recent communications indicate that employees who resign may find employment outside the government during the “deferred resignation period,” a stance contradicted by existing ethics rules that necessitate prior approval for any outside employment. Kettl raised concerns over the legal sufficiency of OPM’s guidance in circumventing these ethics requirements.
As the deadline approaches, OPM has refrained from disclosing how many employees have opted to resign under the “Fork in the Road” offer, which personnel are encouraged to respond to by February 6.
