RIF During a Congressional Freeze: What Federal Employees Need to Know
When Congress passes a continuing resolution (CR) that prohibits agencies from initiating, carrying out, implementing, or even noticing a reduction in force, most federal employees understandably assume that means one thing: layoffs stop. Full stop. So when an agency insists your previously-noticed RIF is still moving forward, the confusion—and fear—can be overwhelming.
This moment calls for clarity, not panic. It also calls for understanding what the law actually says.
The Appropriations Rule: “Carry Out or Implement” Has Meaning
The CR’s language is unusually broad. Congress didn’t merely pause new RIFs—they barred the use of federal funds to initiate, carry out, implement, or notice a RIF designed to reduce staffing levels. And separation is not a cost-free administrative act. HR processing, payroll adjustments, SF-50 issuance, severance calculations—every step requires the expenditure of appropriated funds.
That matters. Under longstanding principles of appropriations law, if Congress restricts an expenditure, agencies cannot sidestep that restriction by pointing to when the first step in the process occurred. Whether your notice went out months ago or yesterday, separation during a funding freeze still requires the very expenditures Congress prohibited.
Why “We Already Started” Isn’t a Legal Safe Harbor
Some agencies—including State, SBA, and GSA—are leaning on internal guidance to justify pushing forward with RIFs noticed before the CR. Their argument boils down to: “We aren’t initiating anything new; we’re simply finishing what we began.”
But the statute blocks more than initiation. It bars carrying out or implementing a RIF during the CR’s effective period. If an agency must spend funds to finish the layoff—and it unquestionably does—that action fits squarely within what Congress prohibited.
For employees, this mismatch between statutory text and agency behavior isn’t just unsettling; it is a signal that these decisions may not withstand legal scrutiny.
Chaotic Messaging Is More Than Bad Optics
Many employees were first told their RIF was canceled because of the CR, only to be told hours later that the separation was back on—or that it would occur retroactively. That kind of whiplash is not merely demoralizing. It suggests internal uncertainty about whether the agency’s position is legally defensible.
When unions like AFSA publicly assert that carrying out these RIFs violates the CR, it reinforces the seriousness of the issue.
Deadlines Won’t Wait for Clarity
Even if agencies are wrong on the law, your appeal deadlines will continue to run. MSPB, foreign service grievance boards, EEO, and union grievance timelines can be unforgiving. Waiting for an agency to “figure this out” may mean losing your right to challenge the separation.
If your RIF is scheduled to proceed during the freeze—or already has—this is the moment to speak with counsel experienced in federal employment law. Our firm provides deeper guidance through our Power Hub membership and newsletter.
Legal Disclaimer: The information provided in this article is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice. While I am a federal employment attorney, this post does not create an attorney-client relationship. Every situation is unique, and legal outcomes depend on specific facts and circumstances.