White House May Try to Deny Back Pay to Furloughed Federal Workers

The New York Times ^ | Oct. 7, 2025Updated 12:52 p.m. ET | Tony Romm

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Hundreds of thousands of furloughed federal workers may not automatically receive back pay once the government reopens, the White House indicated in a draft memo, prompting broad fears that the Trump administration might try to circumvent federal law to maximize the pain of the shutdown.

The memo, which was shared by a White House official, could presage a radical break from a policy adopted during President Trump’s first term. It appeared to contradict some of the administration’s own guidance, which by Tuesday still indicated that furloughed employees would receive retroactive pay shortly after Congress strikes a funding deal.

Following the longest shutdown in history — a five-week closure that began under Mr. Trump at the end of 2018 — Congress adopted a law that guaranteed back pay for the millions of federal workers who often bear the financial brunt of funding lapses. That measure, known as the Government Employee Fair Treatment Act, applied not only to that closure but future fiscal lapses, ending a major source of uncertainty for federal workers caught in the political fray.

Mr. Tump signed that measure into law in 2019. But his administration six years later now appears to have interpreted its guarantees much differently. In the draft memo, the White House budget office said that only the workers who are deemed as essential — military service members, air traffic controllers and others still working while the government is closed — are entitled to pay once the stalemate ends. For those who are furloughed, the White House memo lays out the case that Congress still must explicitly approve funding for the payments.

Union officials and Democratic lawmakers quickly blasted Mr. Trump for what they described as only the latest attempt to use federal workers as bargaining chips during the shutdown. The president separately has threatened...

[lastchance]

Nope. And I don’t understand your statement.

[lastchance]

Are we still discussing the federal work force or have we moved on to Congress and the alphabet agencies?

[MtnClimber]

I would say ALL OF THE ABOVE because most are worthless. I have worked with them for 36 years.

[sauropod]

It was a trial balloon. Can’t you see that?

[IWONDR]

“ Essential has a narrow definition.” I think you meant to write : nonessential?

[Governor Dinwiddie]

Here's some job ideas for these poor souls:

• Raking leaves.
• Deck cleaning.
• Selling bouquets of flowers.
• Temp work.
• Begging.

When life hands you lemons, make lemonade!

[Jim Robinson]

And if they’re non-essential they should be let go and job slot closed.

[for-q-clinton]

They never should have paid furloughed workers for not working. If that’s the case, make them work and tell them they will eventually get paid like they do the essential employees.

Why do they get a free vacaction?

[lastchance]

If the job is just make work for my cronies so I get votes work, then both the job and the elected goon that coddled it needs to be put out to pasture.

Washington government office feng shui should include a lot of negative space.

[lastchance]

Then they should be paid what they are worth.

[MtnClimber]

Then they should be paid what they are worth.

You would need to incorporate the concept of negative pay.

[rdl6989]

This is a NEW YORK SLIMES BULL$HIT news story designed to just stir up trouble!

Exactly!

[MtnClimber]

Every Bureaucrat Destroys 138 Jobs ⋆ Brownstone Institute Every Bureaucrat Destroys 138 Jobs Astudy says every single regulator destroys fully 138 private sector jobs every year you keep him on the job. With nearly 300,000 federal regulators, the shock is that we still have any jobs at all. The Two Scariest Words in the English Language A lot of the excitement around the Department of Government Efficiency — DOGE — focuses on the dollars saved. But more important is all the things the federal government destroys with those dollars. Specifically, the millions of jobs destroyed by the two scariest words in the English language: federal regulators. A few weeks ago I mentioned how DOGE under Elon and Vivek is taking aim at the regulatory mothership that strangles the American economy and fuels the totalitarian administrative state — you may remember it from Covid. A mother ship that is oddly enough unconstitutional according to a pair of recent Supreme Court decisions — Loper Bright Enterprises v Raimondo and West Virginia v EPA. I asserted this could unleash the economy like nothing we’ve seen in the past century. REGISTER NOW! And the reason is because it’s hard to overstate just how destructive regulations are. Every Regulator Destroys 138 Jobs One 2017 study by the Phoenix Center and Auburn University found that every single full-time regulator destroys 158 jobs. GDP-adjusted to today, that translates to $16.5 million of economic output. For a hundred-thousand dollar bureaucrat. This lost output is made of jobs and businesses that were never started. Or were stunted by strangling regulations — which are generally bought by big corporations specifically to strangle small competitors. Along with mom and pops chased into bankruptcy as collateral damage to new regulations — say, a diner forced to spend $30,000 on a low-energy exhaust fan. In fact, you could fire him, keep paying him for life, and still put a hundred families in the middle class. In recent videos I’ve mentioned research saying one dollar in taxes destroys 3 dollars in GDP. A regulator blows that out of the water — each dollar in regulator salary destory 112 dollars in output. Given there’s roughly 288,000 full-time federal employees involved in regulatory activities, that implies an annual cost of regulation of around $5 trillion. One-fifth of our entire economy. This means DOGE slashing tens of thousands of regulations could spark Morning in America even if we keep every last one of them on the payroll. The Top 3 Regulatory Offenders The worst 3 regulatory offenders are the EPA, which prey especially on small businesses least able to afford their never-ending mandates. Second is securities mandates — namely Dodd-Frank and Sarbanes-Oxley — that have all but closed public markets to start-ups and shelter banks and insurers from competition....SNIP

[lastchance]

I am glad you saw what I meant.

[FoxInSocks]

That’s a very good point.

[Georgia Girl 2]

You can’t punish employees because you’re mad at the Democrats. If they are lawfully employed then they should get paid. Trump just needs to lay off as many as possible.

[Svartalfiar]

Government employees are extremely pampered and have good benefits. If they don’t want to risk not getting paid for the occasional rare shutdown, they shouldn’t work for FedGov. That’s one of the risks of that job, just like the perk that they’re near-impossible to fire.

They can use some of their well-stocked PTO if they really need to get paid during the shutdown!

[lastchance]

If either law or policy call for the furloughed workers getting back pay when they return to work then the right thing is to give what is owed.

[lastchance]

I agree. He is within his authority to restructure the administrative offices which includes lay offs.

[Hot Tabasco]

Let them apply for unemployment. That’s all I had when my company shut down. Only difference, they will get their jobs back.........