Donald Trump’s recent ruckus creates the opportunity to talk about this. He asked if the federal government has a moral or legal obligation to reimburse these furloughed employees. During a press conference, he indicated that the decision regarding back pay might depend on the specific individuals affected, raising concerns among the approximately 750,000 federal workers currently on furlough. The federal government shutdown started on October 1 and is already on its tenth day. Unfortunately, as of now there remains no immediate clear resolution in sight.
The Government Employee Fair Treatment Act (GEFTA) signed into law in 2019. It requires that furloughed workers get their back pay issued as quickly as they can. This statute admits almost no wiggle room for the federal government to escape its imperative duties. The most concerning part of Trump’s comments is his apparent intent to attempt to deny back pay for certain furloughed workers. This change would contradict recently established legal standards.
Legal Obligations Under GEFTA
In January of 2019, the Trump administration declared its intent to provide back pay. This form of assistance would be extended to furloughed employees under specified conditions. Recent claims by Trump would seem to indicate otherwise. “It depends who we’re talking about,” he said when pressed on back pay for government workers. This infuriating ambiguity has confused legal experts and lawmakers, as well.
Donald Kettl, professor emeritus at the University of Maryland School of Public Policy, expressed skepticism about Trump’s potential legal avenues. He doesn’t think they’ll work. He stated, “It’s hard to imagine there would be a majority on the court that would come down in the president’s favor.” Kettl has been critical of the law’s vagueness. As for denying back pay, he said such a move would likely face significant legal challenges.
Everett Kelley, president of the American Federation of Government Employees, called Trump’s comments “dangerously irresponsible.” He dismissed their claims as a “frivolous argument” that distorts GEFTA. Kelley pointed out, “It is also inconsistent with the Trump administration’s own guidance from mere days ago, which clearly and correctly states that furloughed employees will receive retroactive pay for the time they were out of work as quickly as possible once the shutdown is over.”
Implications of Trump’s Statements
As workers currently face a third week of an unprecedented shutdown of the federal government, Trump’s comments are alarmingly careless. Members of Congress from both parties have shown strong support for making sure back pay is guaranteed. Beyond the economic costs, the shutdown has taken a personal toll on the lives of federal employees. They will get one last paycheck including two weeks worth of wages, but they will not be paid for the work done after the shutdown begins.
This uncertainty about back pay has caused a lot of stress and anxiety for workers who depend on their next paycheck to survive. As federal workers prepare for what could be long-term unemployment, Trump’s statement adds a new layer of uncertainty to an already combustible situation.
“There are some people that don’t deserve to be taken care of, and we’ll take care of them in a different way,” – Donald Trump
Yet Kettl stressed that GEFTA isn’t without its loophole for the current administration to evade its responsibilities. This much-needed clarity strengthens the accountability demanded of the administration. He noted, “There really doesn’t seem to be any loophole in it that would allow the administration to duck that.” Legal analysts are in near unanimous agreement that any attempt to diverge from GEFTA’s requirements would most assuredly trigger swift judicial rebuke. Their concern is echoed across the legal community.
The Path Ahead
With each day, week, and month the shutdown persists with no resolution expected, the prospects for furloughed workers hang in the balance. Trump’s vow to abide by relevant law contrasts sharply with his previous comments that could undermine workers’ rights to back pay. The continuing situation casts doubt on the administration’s willingness to comply with the law and implement GEFTA as it was intended.
Kevin Owen, a legal analyst, expressed concern over what these statements from Trump mean. He stated, “These courts would have to completely neutralize the plain text of this statute in order for it to mean what the White House says it means.” This points to the great legal challenges Trump would face if he tried to refuse back pay.
