New Federal Schedule G and Court Decision on Workforce Cuts

Action: On July 8, the Supreme Court issued a stay of a preliminary injunction entered by the US District Court for the Northern District of California against an Executive Order and memorandum from the Office of Management and Budget and the Office of Personnel Management regarding restructuring and workforce reduction plans for Federal agencies. While the Court did not express a view on the legality of the Order or the Memorandum, the stay allows the Administration to proceed with its plans to reduce the Federal workforce while the litigation proceeds.

The following week, the President issued an Executive Order establishing a new category of non-career Federal employees—Schedule G—intended for new positions of a “policy-making or policy advocating character,” selected outside the competitive service. Separately, in a case before the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) dealing with the firing of a career nonpolitical Senior Executive Service employee, the Administration argued that the President had the authority to fire the employee despite protections provided by the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978.

Trusted Insights for What's Ahead^®

While the Supreme Court’s stay did not address the legality of the Administration’s workforce reduction plans, it has enabled the Administration to move forward with implementation until it issues a final ruling. Following the Court’s ruling, the Departments of State, Education, and Heath and Human Services moved forward with reductions in force (RIFS) affecting more than 12,000 employees.
The Administration has plans for RIFs across at least 19 agencies, though it has noted that plans are not finalized, and workforce reduction targets may be met through voluntary retirements and departures in many cases.
By law, Federal employees are classified into three service categories, the largest of which is the “competitive service” comprising career non-political staff. About one-third of employees are in the “excepted service,” which are not subject to the competitive hiring process and includes Presidential appointees and other specialized roles. Within the excepted service are several subcategories (“schedules”) that vary in the nature of the position, the method of appointment, and the degree to which civil service protections apply. For instance, Schedule C includes traditional “political” appointees at agencies serving in a “confidential” position or in “policy-determining” roles at agencies
Near the end of his first term, President Trump sought to establish a new Schedule F in the excepted service which would have reclassified certain career Federal employees in policy-making, policy-determining, or policy-advocating positions as at-will employees, effectively stripping them of traditional civil service protections and making them easier to hire or remove outside of the merit-based system.
President Biden revoked President Trump’s Order, which President Trump in turn restored on Inauguration Day for his second term (though renaming Schedule F as “Schedule Policy/Career,” implying that these positions remain career positions, though without traditional civil service protection).
According to the President, Schedule G is intended to fill a gap between Schedule C positions and the new Schedule Policy/Career positions, which are career roles with policy responsibilities. Effectively, the new Schedule G could permit appointment of non-career employees (who will be largely political appointees) to “policy-making” positions paid at rates above regular Civil Service pay rates and thus, in the view of some observers, expand the number of these positions above the 10% cap of political appointees in the Senior Executive Service (and paid at higher rates).
Critics argue that the new schedules risk politicizing the Federal workforce and make the system more complicated and confusing. However, the Administration has argued that the changes are needed to make the Federal workforce more accountable and responsive to the policy priorities of the President. The Administration’s position in the MSPB case similarly reflects its expansive view of Presidential authority over the Federal workforce.

New Federal Schedule G and Court Decision on Workforce Cuts

July 28, 2025

Trusted Insights for What's Ahead^®

While the Supreme Court’s stay did not address the legality of the Administration’s workforce reduction plans, it has enabled the Administration to move forward with implementation until it issues a final ruling. Following the Court’s ruling, the Departments of State, Education, and Heath and Human Services moved forward with reductions in force (RIFS) affecting more than 12,000 employees.

The Administration has plans for RIFs across at least 19 agencies, though it has noted that plans are not finalized, and workforce reduction targets may be met through voluntary retirements and departures in many cases.

By law, Federal employees are classified into three service categories, the largest of which is the “competitive service” comprising career non-political staff. About one-third of employees are in the “excepted service,” which are not subject to the competitive hiring process and includes Presidential appointees and other specialized roles. Within the excepted service are several subcategories (“schedules”) that vary in the nature of the position, the method of appointment, and the degree to which civil service protections apply. For instance, Schedule C includes traditional “political” appointees at agencies serving in a “confidential” position or in “policy-determining” roles at agencies

Near the end of his first term, President Trump sought to establish a new Schedule F in the excepted service which would have reclassified certain career Federal employees in policy-making, policy-determining, or policy-advocating positions as at-will employees, effectively stripping them of traditional civil service protections and making them easier to hire or remove outside of the merit-based system.

President Biden revoked President Trump’s Order, which President Trump in turn restored on Inauguration Day for his second term (though renaming Schedule F as “Schedule Policy/Career,” implying that these positions remain career positions, though without traditional civil service protection).

According to the President, Schedule G is intended to fill a gap between Schedule C positions and the new Schedule Policy/Career positions, which are career roles with policy responsibilities. Effectively, the new Schedule G could permit appointment of non-career employees (who will be largely political appointees) to “policy-making” positions paid at rates above regular Civil Service pay rates and thus, in the view of some observers, expand the number of these positions above the 10% cap of political appointees in the Senior Executive Service (and paid at higher rates).

Critics argue that the new schedules risk politicizing the Federal workforce and make the system more complicated and confusing. However, the Administration has argued that the changes are needed to make the Federal workforce more accountable and responsive to the policy priorities of the President. The Administration’s position in the MSPB case similarly reflects its expansive view of Presidential authority over the Federal workforce.

CED Newsletters & Policy Alerts

Trusted Insights for What's Ahead^®