Government Workers Face Job Threat Amid Controversial Email Directive

WASHINGTON, Feb. 24 — U.S. federal government employees received an unsettling email over the weekend demanding they report their accomplishments from the past week, or face potential job termination. This correspondence arrived shortly after President Donald Trump and tech mogul Elon Musk, who heads the Department of Government Efficiency (Doge), discussed aggressive efforts to downsize the federal workforce.

The email, sent by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), instructed employees to summarize their weekly work in five bullet points and submit their responses by 11:59 p.m. EST on Monday. Musk hinted at the requirement in a post on X, stating that failure to respond would equate to leaving a job voluntarily, though the email itself did not explicitly mention this threat.

The OPM’s directive has sparked considerable confusion across various federal agencies. While some departments, such as the Department of Justice and the FBI, advised their employees to disregard the OPM email, others, including the Department of Health and Human Services, initially encouraged compliance but later rescinded this guidance.

OPM clarified in a memo sent late Monday afternoon that responding to the email is voluntary and that non-compliance will not be treated as a resignation. However, agency leaders maintained discretion over how they handle responses, leading some employees to feel pressured to comply despite the conflicting messages received.

Everett Kelley, president of the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), criticized the email as “cruel and disrespectful,” highlighting the adverse impact on federal workers, many of whom serve as veterans in civilian roles. “This demand shows utter disdain for federal employees and the critical services they provide,” he stated in a press release.

Musk, responding to backlash, claimed that the email was merely a check for employee engagement and defended the directive as a necessary step in ensuring government efficiency. Trump referred to the measure as a means of evaluating whether employees are genuinely contributing to their roles, suggesting that those who do not respond either do not exist or fail to perform their duties.

In a reply on X, Musk reported that a significant number of responses had been received, contending that those who reported accomplishments should be considered for promotions. Conversely, he also raised concerns about potential fraud in government employment, stating that “non-existent people” may be collecting paychecks.

The uncertainty surrounding the email directive has reportedly left many federal employees bewildered and anxious. One employee, choosing to remain anonymous, expressed frustration, stating that they felt they were caught in a “stress-filled ball of crazy,” with no clear directive on how to proceed.

Federal contractors also received the email, raising questions about the legitimacy of the directive, as these individuals are not classified as federal employees but have been included in this unusual outreach. Meanwhile, a coalition of unions has filed a lawsuit against the administration in an attempt to halt the proposed firings of federal probationary workers, arguing that the OPM’s actions exceed its jurisdiction.

The controversy surrounding Musk’s measures and the OPM email reflects a larger trend within the Trump administration’s efforts to overhaul federal agency staffing and operations. Many agency leaders have voiced hesitance or outright opposition to Musk’s aggressive approach, exemplifying the disarray within the federal government.