Civil servants across the United States federal government are bracing for a profound transformation should Donald Trump secure a second term in the White House. Plans drawn from his previous administration and recent policy proposals indicate a systematic effort to reclassify tens of thousands of federal employees, potentially stripping them of long-standing job protections.
The Return of Schedule F and a New Hiring Blueprint
Central to this potential overhaul is the revival of Executive Order 13957, known as Schedule F. Originally signed by Trump in October 2020, this order sought to reclassify policy-making roles across government agencies, moving them out of the competitive civil service. This change would have made it easier to hire and fire employees in these positions based on performance—and, critics argue, political allegiance.
Although President Joe Biden rescinded the order upon taking office, its framework remains a ready-made blueprint. Analysis suggests a second Trump administration could implement it more swiftly and extensively. The plan is part of a broader initiative called Project 2025, spearheaded by conservative think-tanks, which aims to place politically aligned staff throughout the executive branch.
Targeting the Deep State: A Workforce Under Scrutiny
The intended scope of these changes is vast. Proposals target employees in roles connected to policy, budgeting, regulation, and media relations. The objective, as stated by supporters, is to ensure the federal workforce is responsive to the President's agenda, dismantling what some term the "administrative state" or "deep state."
This approach marks a significant departure from the traditional US civil service model, established by the Pendleton Act of 1883, which was designed to create a professional, non-partisan bureaucracy. Implementing Schedule F could affect an estimated 50,000 workers or more, creating an environment where loyalty could be prized over expertise.
Implications for Governance and Whitehall Parallels
The potential consequences extend beyond US borders, offering a stark case study for observers in the UK and elsewhere. A politicised federal workforce could lead to higher turnover with each change of administration, disrupting policy continuity and institutional knowledge. Experts warn it could also erode public trust in government institutions and deter skilled professionals from public service careers.
For British policymakers and civil servants in Whitehall, the situation presents a cautionary tale. While the UK system operates differently, the fundamental tension between political direction and independent civil service advice is universal. The US experiment could test the resilience of principles that underpin professional public administration in democracies.
As the next US election approaches, these plans move from theoretical to probable. The outcome will determine not just the direction of American policy, but the very structure of its government, setting a precedent that will be watched closely by allies and analysts worldwide.
