The administration of former US President Donald Trump has placed dozens of career employees at the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) on paid administrative leave, a move that has sparked significant concern over the politicisation of the critical disaster response body.
Widespread Administrative Action at Disaster Agency
According to internal documents and sources, the action, which began in the weeks following the November election, has affected more than 40 FEMA workers. These individuals have been instructed to stay away from their offices and work duties while continuing to receive their salaries. The scale of this administrative leave initiative is described as highly unusual for the agency, which is tasked with coordinating the federal response to national emergencies, including hurricanes, floods, and wildfires.
The employees placed on leave are largely senior career officials and managers with extensive institutional knowledge. Many have served under multiple presidents, both Democratic and Republican, and are not political appointees. The reasons given for their removal from duty have been vague, often citing generic "administrative" concerns without detailed justification.
Concerns Over Motives and Agency Stability
Critics and watchdog groups have voiced alarm, suggesting the move appears to be a concerted effort to sideline experienced professionals. This could potentially clear the path for the installation of Trump loyalists into key positions ahead of any potential second term. The action has created an atmosphere of uncertainty and fear within FEMA's ranks, with many staff reportedly worried they could be next.
This disruption comes at a time when FEMA's operational readiness is paramount. The agency is currently managing the aftermath of several major disasters and must prepare for the upcoming Atlantic hurricane season. Experts warn that removing seasoned personnel could hamper response coordination, weaken preparedness planning, and undermine the agency's core mission of protecting American lives and property.
A spokesperson for the Trump campaign defended the actions, stating that any new administration seeks to ensure agencies are staffed by personnel aligned with its policies. However, government ethics experts argue that using administrative leave in this manner, against career civil servants rather than political appointees, risks violating long-standing norms meant to shield the professional bureaucracy from partisan interference.
Broader Implications for Federal Workforce
This situation at FEMA is seen by observers as part of a broader pattern. The reported plans for a potential second Trump term include a sweeping agenda, known as "Schedule F," which could reclassify tens of thousands of career civil servants, stripping them of traditional job protections and making them easier to fire. The events at FEMA are viewed as a potential precursor or test case for this larger ambition.
The fallout is immediate and tangible. Morale within FEMA has reportedly plummeted, and the agency's day-to-day functions are being managed by a skeleton crew of remaining staff, stretching resources thin. The long-term consequence could be a significant loss of expertise and operational memory within one of the nation's most vital emergency response organisations, potentially compromising its effectiveness during future crises.
As the situation develops, congressional Democrats have called for investigations into the legality and motivation behind the mass placement of workers on leave. They argue that the stability and non-partisan expertise of agencies like FEMA are foundational to national security and public safety, and must be preserved regardless of political leadership.
