Update 'Employment Lawyer Discusses what Trump Offer to Federal Employees to Resign Would Do'

Employment-Lawyer-Discusses-what-Trump-Offer-to-Federal-Employees-to-Resign-Would-Do.md

@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+<br>MICHEL MARTIN, HOST: Federal employees have until February 6 to choose whether to voluntarily leave their jobs. The U.S. Office of Personnel Management, OPM, informed employees on Tuesday that if they hand in their resignation by next Thursday - that's less than a week from now - most will be allowed to depart and be paid till the end of September. Michelle Bercovici is a work legal representative who represents federal workers as a large part of her practice,  [trademarketclassifieds.com](https://trademarketclassifieds.com/user/profile/2713507) so I asked her for her interpretation about what OPM's postponed resignation program would really mean.MICHELLE BERCOVICI: I actually do not consider it a lot an offer. I think it's a request to resign with a vague pledge that, possibly, you might be kept in administrative leave status for up to eight months - however no guarantees.MARTIN: Some people have actually been using the term buyout to describe what this is due to the fact that there appears to be the deal of administrative leave for as much as eight months if you take this deal. So is it a buyout?BERCOVICI: I would never describe it as a buyout. I think that's a really misleading term to utilize in this situation. When you think of a buyout, there's usually some sort of composed agreement or a concrete deal to provide an advantage in exchange for waiving particular rights. That is not the case here.MARTIN: If customers ask you for your advice, what are you telling them?BERCOVICI: First thing we inform them is exercise extreme caution. There are no guarantees contained in this email. The only thing I can tell you for certain is that if you alter your mind, the company's most likely not going to let you withdraw that resignation, and you are basically quiting control over a lot.MARTIN: Is there some [classification](https://brandworksolutions.com) of staff member who you think this might benefit? Maybe they're close to retirement. Is somebody like that might this be an appealing offer?BERCOVICI: Folks near retirement require to be the most [mindful](https://vagyonor.hu) since leaving earlier than intended can have severe consequences, potentially, on their benefits.MARTIN: Let me just play a clip from the White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt. She told reporters that this is a bargain for people who do not wish to return to the workplace. Let me just play it.(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)KAROLINE LEAVITT: This is a recommendation to federal employees that they need to return in - to work. And if they don't, then they have the choice to resign, and this administration is extremely kindly using to pay them for eight months.MARTIN: You're shaking your head no.BERCOVICI: It just - in such a way, it breaks my heart that federal workers are being jerked around like this. It sends out a signal to me that this return-to-office order remains in bad faith, that it's designed to get folks who work actually difficult to resign. I believe it's trying to pull the wool over a great deal of people's eyes because there are no warranties. And these are people who enjoy their task. They like the  of the firm. They strive. And right now,  [securityholes.science](https://securityholes.science/wiki/User:BernieK9731178) they're facing very difficult options, especially if they're remote. I indicate, it's really coercive.MARTIN: You state it's coercive. Because?BERCOVICI: Essentially, if you're someone who resides in Oregon and has been [informed](https://happywork.com.pe) to report to D.C. otherwise we're going to fire you, they might feel that they have no option than to take this option.MARTIN: Do you anticipate legal challenges just to the deal itself? And if so, on what grounds?BERCOVICI: This deal, to be sincere, is so unmatched that I believe a lot of us are still trying to find out what to do with it. I'm uncertain if the deal itself may be challengeable. I think the larger question is the execution of these terms. I'm not mindful of any authority that exists today for OPM to purchase companies to give this variety of people administrative leave. So I believe it is quite possibly setting the stage for difficulties because I feel OPM has vastly exceeded their authority.MARTIN: That is Michelle Bercovici. She is an [employment](https://29sixservices.in) attorney with the Alden Law Group here in Washington, D.C. Thank you a lot for joining us.BERCOVICI: Thank you a lot for having me here.<br>
+<br>Copyright © 2025 NPR. All rights booked. Visit our site terms of use and consents pages at www.npr.org for more details.<br>
+<br>NPR records are created on a rush due date by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its last kind and might be upgraded or modified in the future. Accuracy and accessibility might differ. The authoritative record of NPR's programming is the audio record.<br>