Overview

Title

To reduce the size of the Federal workforce through attrition, and for other purposes.

ELI5 AI

The bill wants to make the team of people working for the government smaller by only hiring one new person for every three who leave, aiming to have fewer people by 2028. They also need to make sure they don’t spend more on outside helpers unless it saves money.

Summary AI

S. 295 proposes to reduce the number of Federal employees in the United States government to 90% of the total workforce by 2028. The plan includes limiting new hires to one for every three employees who leave and asks each agency to report its workforce numbers so caps can be set. The bill also restricts an agency's hiring and remote work approvals if it exceeds its employee cap, although waivers can be granted in cases of war or other emergencies. Additionally, the bill aims to prevent an increase in service contracts due to workforce reductions, unless cost savings are demonstrated.

Published

2025-01-29
Congress: 119
Session: 1
Chamber: SENATE
Status: Introduced in Senate
Date: 2025-01-29
Package ID: BILLS-119s295is

Bill Statistics

Size

Sections:
2
Words:
1,370
Pages:
7
Sentences:
25

Language

Nouns: 403
Verbs: 98
Adjectives: 72
Adverbs: 16
Numbers: 53
Entities: 73

Complexity

Average Token Length:
4.38
Average Sentence Length:
54.80
Token Entropy:
4.92
Readability (ARI):
30.36

AnalysisAI

The proposed legislation, titled the "Reducing the Federal Workforce Through Attrition Act," aims to reduce the size of the federal workforce. Introduced in the Senate, the bill seeks to cut the number of federal employees by 10% from 2025 to 2028. The proposed reduction is to be achieved through a controlled hiring process, where agencies can hire only one new employee for every three who leave the government.

General Summary

This bill is designed to implement a reduction in the federal workforce through natural attrition rather than forced layoffs. Specifically, the bill intends to cap the total number of federal employees at 90% of the 2025 levels by the fiscal year 2028. The strategy relies on setting agency-specific employee limits and requires close monitoring to ensure compliance.

Summary of Significant Issues

Several important issues arise from the bill that warrant close scrutiny. Firstly, there is concern over the broad definition of an "Executive agency," which might lead to ambiguities in application across different government bodies. Furthermore, the method for calculating the "maximum allowable number of Federal employees" per agency lacks transparency, risking inconsistent implementation.

The provision allowing presidential waivers during emergencies for specific positions introduces potential for preferential treatment. The lack of clear guidelines surrounding these waivers raises concerns about possible misuse. Another issue pertains to the regulation requiring no increase in service contracts procurement due to the workforce reduction; specific standardized guidelines for cost comparisons are not specified, which could lead to financial misjudgments.

Moreover, the bill does not set precise consequences if agencies fail to meet the workforce reduction targets after receiving compliance notifications, possibly undermining accountability.

Public Impact

For the general public, the implications of this bill could vary. On one hand, a smaller federal workforce might lead to potential savings in taxpayer money, assuming no associated decrease in government efficiency or service quality. On the other hand, reduced personnel could impact the speed and quality of public services, especially in agencies that are understaffed due to the new constraints.

Impact on Stakeholders

For federal employees, the bill introduces uncertainty in job stability and career progression due to the restricted hiring practices. Agencies might face challenges in retaining talent if restrictive hiring policies make it difficult to replace critical skills lost through attrition.

The potential impact on government contractors is less clear-cut. The restriction on increasing service contracts may limit opportunities for contractors expecting increased demand due to workforce shortages. However, the condition allowing service contracts if shown to be financially advantageous might maintain or even boost contracting opportunities, providing the financial compare measurements are appropriately structured.

The bill may also affect agency leadership, who will need to navigate the complexities of maintaining operational capacities with restricted staffing levels. They will have to be judicious in deciding which positions to fill under the new hiring ratio to continue meeting their service mandates effectively.

In summary, while the proposed legislative changes aim for a leaner federal workforce through controlled attrition, it prompts several clarifications and anticipations on its implementation, encompassing natural consequences and tactical decisions required by both the federal government and its employees.

Issues

  • The broad definition of 'Executive agency' as per section 105 of title 5 U.S. Code in Section 2(a) might be too inclusive, potentially leading to ambiguity regarding which specific agencies are covered by this bill.

  • The methodology for determining the 'maximum allowable number of Federal employees' in Section 2(c)(2) is not detailed, which could result in a lack of transparency or inconsistent application across agencies.

  • The waiver provisions in Section 2(g), allowing the President discretion to override workforce limits during emergencies, could lead to preferential treatment or misuse if not clearly defined.

  • The limitation on appointing individuals during the compliance phase in Section 2(d) lacks clarity on what constitutes 'retiring or otherwise separating from Government service', potentially leading to misinterpretation.

  • Section 2(i) prohibits increases in service contract procurement but lacks specific guidelines for conducting cost comparisons, introducing the risk of inconsistent financial advantage determinations.

  • The bill lacks defined consequences if an agency fails to meet workforce reduction targets post notification in Section 2(f), potentially undermining accountability.

  • Section 2(j) mentions that nothing in the section prohibits employee transfers to compliant agencies, but does not specify how compliance is monitored or assessed in real-time.

Sections

Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.

1. Short title Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The first section of the act provides its official name, which is the “Reducing the Federal Workforce Through Attrition Act.”

2. Reduction in Federal workforce Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section outlines a plan to reduce the number of federal employees by 10% from 2025 to 2028, setting specific limits on hiring to encourage this reduction and monitoring agencies to ensure compliance. Exceptions can be made in cases of national emergencies, but agencies exceeding their employee limits face restrictions on hiring and remote work approvals until they are back in compliance.