The US government is facing what could become the largest workforce reduction in history, as more than 2 million federal employees are offered voluntary buyouts under an ambitious plan by the Trump administration. If widely accepted, the proposal could result in a dramatic loss of up to 200,000 federal jobs, surpassing even the biggest corporate layoffs in US history. This sweeping move is part of a broader effort to streamline government operations and reduce federal spending at an unprecedented scale.
A bold government downsizing plan
President Donald Trump’s administration has rolled out an unprecedented offer to federal workers, inviting them to voluntarily leave their positions in exchange for a buyout. The offer, which has been extended to over 2 million employees, excludes certain military, postal, and national security personnel. Those who accept the offer would receive eight months of salary and benefits while being relieved of their duties until September 30, 2025. This move is part of Trump’s broader strategy to reduce federal spending by streamlining government operations and shrinking the federal workforce.
As of last year, the federal government employed more than 3 million individuals, excluding active-duty military personnel. With a target of potentially cutting up to 200,000 jobs, this would represent the largest federal workforce reduction in US history, surpassing the biggest corporate layoffs.
Surpassing the biggest corporate job cuts
This historic downsizing would eclipse the largest corporate job cuts in US history. According to Forbes, the top corporate layoffs include:
• IBM: In 1993, IBM laid off 60,000 employees after posting an $8 billion loss, setting the record for the largest corporate layoff.
• Sears: In the same year, Sears cut 50,000 jobs and closed 113 stores.
• Citigroup: During the 2008 financial crisis, Citigroup eliminated 50,000 positions.
• General Motors: In 2009, GM cut 47,000 jobs after closing five factories.
• AT&T: In 1996, AT&T laid off 40,000 people, approximately 14% of its workforce.
• Kmart: In 2003, Kmart announced the closure of 326 stores, eliminating 35,000 jobs.
• Ford: In 2002, Ford laid off 35,000 employees, followed by another 30,000 in 2006.
• Circuit City: In 2009, the electronics chain shut down 567 stores, resulting in 34,000 layoffs.
• Boeing: After the September 11 attacks, Boeing axed 31,000 jobs, or 15% of its workforce.
These corporate layoffs, although massive, would pale in comparison to the potential scale of the federal workforce reduction if even just 10% of employees accept the buyout offer, as estimated by advisors to the Department of Government Efficiency.
The largest US government job cuts
The US government is no stranger to mass layoffs, but the scale of the proposed cuts far surpasses anything seen before. According to the Forbes, in 2011, the US Army eliminated 50,000 jobs as part of budget cuts. In 2005, the US Air Force reduced its workforce by 40,000 positions. Additionally, the US Postal Service made cuts of around 30,000 jobs each year in 2002, 2009, and 2010, all significant reductions at the time. However, even these large job cuts would be overshadowed by the proposed reduction under Trump’s plan, which could potentially reach 200,000 job losses.
Massive impact on government services
While the proposed downsizing aims to save up to $100 billion, the move has faced significant opposition from critics who fear the disruption of essential public services. The American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) warned that the cuts would “cause chaos” for Americans relying on government functions. Democratic lawmakers, including Senator Tim Kaine (D-Va.), have cautioned workers against accepting the offer, arguing that the administration might not follow through on its promises of pay and benefits.
A major shift in federal spending and efficiency
Trump’s push to reduce the size of the federal government is part of his broader vision of cutting wasteful spending and increasing government efficiency. With Elon Musk overseeing the newly created Department of Government Efficiency, the administration is seeking ways to eliminate inefficiencies and reduce unnecessary expenditures. However, questions remain about the legality of such sweeping cuts, particularly when Congress has already appropriated funds for these positions.
As the federal government prepares for the possibility of historic downsizing, the full impact of these changes remains uncertain, with critics warning of the potential long-term consequences on public services and the federal workforce.
