150,000+ US federal staff depart in historic talent exodus

More than 150,000 US federal employees are leaving their jobs this week under a buyout program that experts warn will trigger the largest single-year loss of government expertise in decades, Reuters reported. The official resignations begin for workers who opted into deferred exits that kept them on payrolls through September, while many had already left their desks months earlier. The buyouts are central to President Donald Trump’s plan to shrink the civil service, combining financial incentives with threats of dismissal for those who declined. Scholars and union officials say the exodus is stripping agencies of long-tenured specialists whose institutional knowledge is hard to replace, complicating everything from weather forecasting and food safety to health programs and space projects. Nearly 200 National Weather Service staff accepted buyouts, affecting equipment maintenance and forecasting capacity, according to union representatives. NOAA said vacancies are being filled as needed to protect public safety and taxpayer value. At NASA, almost 4,000 employees took two rounds of buyouts, the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers said, prompting concerns over the loss of engineers and scientists. NASA maintained it is pursuing a “golden age” of exploration and will align staffing with priorities. The administration projects as many as 300,000 civil service reductions by year-end through buyouts, firings and other measures, while estimating $28 billion in annual savings—figures Reuters said it could not independently verify. The payroll impact on the wider US labor market is expected to be limited because federal workers comprise less than 1.5% of total payroll jobs. Health agencies have also been hit: the Department of Health and Human Services outlined thousands of reductions at the FDA and CDC, though officials insist core missions continue. Critics argue the cuts are indiscriminate and risk undermining critical public services; supporters say the federal workforce had grown inefficient and required streamlining.