USA 
United Kingdom
President-elect Donald Trump’s appointment of tech entrepreneurs Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy to lead the newly created Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), is one of several team picks for the new administration that are raising eyebrows.
Senator Elizabeth Warren remarked: “The Office of Government Efficiency is off to a great start with split leadership: two people to do the work of one person. Yeah, this seems REALLY efficient.”
There are a lot of big egos being gathered in the Trump team, so unified decision making and effective execution of policy is by no means a given.
Whatever critics say, a seismic shift looms over the federal workforce. The duo’s mission to slash bureaucracy, cut regulations, and drastically reduce government spending represents not just a bureaucratic overhaul but a potentially transformative moment for public sector employees and present a huge challenge for those tasked with managing the fall-out within the federal government.
While the prospect of streamlining operations may appeal to fiscal conservatives, the scope of the proposed cuts raises profound challenges for federal workers, HR professionals, and the broader US economy.
Ramaswamy says he expects certain federal agencies to be “deleted outright”.
Musk has floated ideas like eliminating up to 75% of government functions, while Ramaswamy has advocated for mass layoffs, even proposing that workers be terminated based on whether their Social Security numbers end in an odd number. Such drastic reductions would affect over two million civilian employees nationwide, disrupting local economies, especially in regions reliant on federal jobs, like southern Oklahoma and northern Alabama.
For public sector employees, the uncertainty is palpable. Many face the prospect of losing their livelihoods, pensions, and job protections under a revived "Schedule F" initiative, which redefines roles and strips certain federal workers of civil service protections. While Musk has hinted at offering severance packages - potentially “a couple of years of pay” - it remains unclear whether this promise is feasible or merely political posturing.
He has also asked for “super high IQ” volunteers prepared to work 80 hours a week on a voluntary basis to carry out the work.
It’s either a weak attempt at humor, or an accidental admission that there is no real budget for the work. Or option three, he’s serious.
Challenges for HR departments
Quite apart from the effect on the lives of the many workers that could lose entire careers as a result, the fallout from these proposals would land squarely on HR professionals. Managing layoffs on this scale is an unprecedented logistical challenge.
Federal HR teams would need to design and implement equitable severance packages, ensure compliance with federal labor laws, and maintain transparency throughout the process.
Additionally, the question of notice periods could exacerbate the strain. If employees are abruptly terminated (as has been the Musk way in the past), it could lead to chaos, with essential government functions grinding to a halt. On the other hand, lengthy notice periods will do little to lift morale among remaining employees, creating an environment of uncertainty and resentment.
HR departments will also need to navigate the ethical and operational dilemmas posed by Musk and Ramaswamy’s mooted scorched earth policy. From firing decisions based on arbitrary metrics, like Social Security numbers, to recruiting those unpaid "super high-IQ" volunteers to help identify inefficiencies, the proposals risk alienating employees and invite multiple legal challenges.
The morale conundrum
Mass layoffs rarely come without a cost to organizational morale. Those who remain in their positions after significant reductions may face increased workloads, reduced trust in leadership, and a diminished sense of job security. In a federal context, such challenges could undermine the efficiency DOGE claims to champion.
HR professionals will play a critical role in managing this morale crisis. Clear communication, professional development opportunities, and incentives for remaining employees will be essential. With Musk and Ramaswamy pushing a no-frills, "chainsaw" approach to downsizing, however, HR teams may find their hands tied, unable to implement retention strategies that go beyond the immediate cost-cutting agenda.
What price efficiency?
To their credit, Musk and Ramaswamy are addressing a long-standing criticism of the federal government: inefficiency and excessive bureaucracy. Advocates for reform argue that bloated agencies and redundant regulations stifle innovation and waste taxpayer dollars. Musk’s track record as a private-sector disruptor could bring fresh perspectives to government operations, and his call for "massive severance packages" might ease the transition for laid-off workers.
However, the benefits of such reforms depend on thoughtful execution, which thus far seems lacking in DOGE’s plan. Reducing inefficiency requires careful assessment of which roles and agencies are truly redundant. Blindly slashing jobs (let’s say by a sort of…. social security number lottery) risks eliminating critical functions, from public safety to disaster response, leaving Americans vulnerable.
AI in Hiring: Trends, Insights and Predictions
As AI revolutionizes the recruitment life cycle at warp speed, HR leaders must stay informed about AI’s advantages and its current shortcomings.
How can we adopt these tools to stay competitive and efficient while retaining the human touch that remains critical to optimizing candidate experience, making informed decisions, and, ultimately, building strong teams and cultures?
That is our industry’s biggest challenge as we navigate this new terrain. We hope these insights, tips, and predictions will help drive innovation and excellence in your hiring practice.
Another pressing issue is DOGE’s lack of accountability. Musk and Ramaswamy will not be federal employees, and will not, therefore, be bound by ethical disclosure requirements or conflict-of-interest rules. Musk’s business interests in Tesla, SpaceX, and other ventures that benefit from federal contracts and incentives raise significant questions about impartiality.
DOGE’s advisory status further complicates matters. Without clear oversight or transparency, its recommendations could prioritize private interests over public welfare. For HR professionals, such a lack of clarity could mean navigating conflicting directives or implementing policies that lack legal or ethical grounding.
Implications for the federal workforce
The ripple effects of DOGE’s work may extend beyond layoffs. If successful, the initiative could set a precedent for future administrations to politicize the federal workforce, undermining civil service neutrality. Unions and watchdogs have warned that it could turn federal employment into a “political spoils system” that could erode the already fragile public trust in government institutions.
DOGE’s proposed agenda treads heavily over the line between reform and disruption. While trimming government waste is a noble and even a vote-winning goal, doing so without regard for the human and operational repercussions risks creating more problems than it solves.
For HR professionals, it is likely to prove one of the most challenging periods in federal history. Success will depend on their ability to navigate complex legal and ethical issues, support affected employees, and rebuild morale among those who remain.
The question being asked is can efficiency be achieved without sacrificing the public interest and the well-being of the workforce tasked with serving it?
As Musk and Ramaswamy prepare to wield their metaphorical chainsaws, one thing is clear - DOGE’s work will reshape the federal workforce in ways that will be felt for decades to come. Whether it leaves behind a leaner, more efficient government or a fractured, demoralized bureaucracy will depend on how thoughtfully these changes are implemented and whether the human cost is truly accounted for.
