.webp)
A judge ruled Thursday that the Trump administration’s directive to fire tens of thousands of workers across the federal government is likely illegal. But it’s not yet clear what that means for current employees, as well as those who were already terminated under the directive.
The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) issued the orders earlier this month amid Elon Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency’s efforts to slash government spending. It targets “probationary” workers who have been in their current position for less than two years, which includes people who have been working in government for a long time and were recently promoted.
A group of labor unions swiftly challenged the directive in federal court, arguing that OPM lacked the authority to order mass firings and that the agency falsely cited employee performance issues. In remarks from the bench on Thursday, the judge in the case ordered OPM to rescind its directive and temporarily blocked planned terminations of civilian employees at the Department of Defense specifically.
US District Judge William Alsup said that “Congress has given the authority to hire and fire to the agencies themselves.”
“The Office of Personnel Management does not have any authority whatsoever, under any statute in the history of the universe, to hire and fire employees at another agency. They can hire and fire their own employees,” he added.
However, that doesn’t necessarily mean that the jobs of federal workers are safe or that terminated employees will be able to return to their old posts. That may depend on what happens next in the courts.
“We know this decision is just a first step, but it gives federal employees a respite,” Lee Saunders, president of the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, said in a statement.
What’s next for federal workers?
Alsup will consider whether to block the Trump administration from carrying out further terminations at a March 13 hearing. But even if he does, the Trump administration likely will not give up so easily on their goal of cutting the federal workforce by at least 10 percent.
“The Trump administration would argue that federal courts have no authority to tell us who we have to hire,” said Cary Coglianese, a professor of administrative law at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School.
At most, any such court interventions may only be able to temporarily delay the Trump administration’s plans. OPM may have to rescind its directive to fire workers, but Alsup acknowledged that government agencies, many now headed by Trump allies, still have the authority to do so themselves. The process might just be slower than it would be under a blunt government-wide directive.
Coglianese said that, just as during his first term, Trump and his allies attempted the “quick and dirty method” to achieve their policy goals, and after facing roadblocks in the courts, will likely “go back at it again in a smarter, more deliberate way, or a way that can be more justified on legal grounds.”
“This won’t be the last in the last skirmish in the larger battle, to be sure,” he said.
Delivery platform GrubHub is laying off 23% of its workforce, approximately 500 positions, as the company merges operations with new owner Wonder Group. The layoffs span all sectors of the company and are intended to reduce "management layers" and redundancy, according to a staff email from CEO Howard Migdal posted to GrubHub's website. Blue Apron owner Wonder announced its acquisition of GrubHub for around $650 million last November.
RIP, Skype.
It's the end of an era.
Microsoft says it will shut down Skype on May 5, 2025, and is directing users to migrate all their contacts and chat data to Teams: https://lnkd.in/gKh6G6C6
Skype launched over two decades ago on August 29, 2003.
It was so straightforward to use that my grandfather installed the app, set up his account, and demanded that my father get on so they could talk internationally for free.
Skype brought free calling and chat worldwide to the masses, long before WhatsApp took over as the top messaging app, and the rise of Zoom, Google Meet, and Microsoft Teams.
In September 2005, eBay acquired Skype for $2.6 billion, and then in May 2011, Microsoft acquired Skype for $8.5 billion.
For Microsoft, Teams will now replace Skype, which once replaced MSN Messenger.
I have to wonder... what will Microsoft build or buy next to replace Teams?
In April 2024, Citigroup nearly transferred $81 trillion instead of just $280 due to a manual input error—one of ten near misses over $1 billion that year.
This isn’t a one-time fluke. In 2020, Citigroup was fined $400 million for risk and control failures, and just last year, regulators hit them with another $136 million fine for not addressing these issues fast enough.
The lesson? Outdated systems + human error = massive risk.
✅ Automation reduces costly mistakes
✅ Validation checks catch errors before they happen
✅ Cloud-based systems improve security & compliance
With billions at stake, what’s stopping companies from modernizing their finance systems?
Egg producers blame the bird flu outbreak for driving prices to record highs, but critics believe giant companies are taking advantage of their market dominance to profit handsomely at the expense of budget-conscious egg buyers.
Advocacy groups, Democratic lawmakers, and a Federal Trade Commission member are calling for a government investigation after egg prices spiked to a record average of $4.95 per dozen this month. The Trump administration did unveil a plan this week to combat bird flu, but how much that might ease egg prices — a key driver of inflation — remains to be seen.
“Donald Trump promised to lower food prices on ‘Day One’, but with egg prices skyrocketing out of control, he fired the workers charged with containing bird flu. Working families need relief now,” Sen. Elizabeth Warren said in a statement.
What’s behind the record egg prices?
The industry, and most experts, squarely blame bird flu. More than 166 million birds have been slaughtered to contain the virus. Some 30 million egg layers have been wiped out just since January, significantly disrupting egg supplies. The Department of Agriculture’s longstanding policy has been to kill entire flocks anytime the virus is found on a farm.
As a result, the number of egg layers has dropped nationwide by about 12% from before the outbreak to 292 million birds, according to a Feb. 1 USDA estimate, but another 11 million egg layers have been killed since then, so it’s likely worse. When prices spiked to $4.82 two years ago and prompted initial calls for price gouging probes, the flock was above 300 million.
“This has nothing to do with anything other than bird flu. And I think to suggest anything else is a misreading of the facts and the reality,” American Egg Board President Emily Metz said.
“Our farmers are in the fight of their lives, period, full stop. And they’re doing everything they can to keep these birds safe,” Metz said. “This is a supply challenge. Due to bird flu. Nothing else.”
Farm Action suspects monopolistic behavior. The group that lobbies on behalf of smaller farmers, consumers, and rural communities notes that egg production is only down about 4% from last year and some 7.57 billion table eggs were produced last month, yet some consumers are still finding egg shelves empty at their local grocery stores.
“Dominant egg corporations are blaming avian flu for the price hikes that we’re seeing. But while the egg supply has fallen only slightly, these companies profits have soared,” said Angela Huffman, Farm Action’s president. The Justice Department acknowledged receiving the group’s letter calling for an investigation but declined to comment on it.
The fact that a jury ruled in 2023 that major egg producers used various means to limit the domestic supply of eggs to increase the price of products during the 2000s only adds to the doubts about their motives now.
What do the numbers show?
Retail egg prices had generally remained below $2 per dozen for years before this outbreak began. Prices have more than doubled since then, boosting profits for egg producers even with soaring costs.
Most of the dominant producers are privately held companies and don’t release their results. But the biggest, Cal-Maine Foods, which supplies about 20% of the nation’s eggs, is public, and its profits increased dramatically. Cal-Maine reported a $219 million profit in the most recent quarter when its eggs sold for an average of $2.74 per dozen, up from just $1.2 million in the quarter just before this outbreak began in early 2022 when its eggs were selling for $1.37 per dozen.
Sherman Miller, Cal-Maine’s president and CEO, said in reporting the numbers that higher market prices “have continued to rise this fiscal year as supply levels of shell eggs have been restricted due to recent outbreaks of highly pathogenic avian influenza.”
But he said Cal-Maine also sold significantly more eggs — some 330 million dozen, up from 288 million the year before — in the quarter because demand is so strong and Cal-Maine has made several acquisitions. Cal-Maine also suffered few outbreaks on its farms, outside of a couple facilities in Kansas and Texas. The Mississippi-based company didn’t respond to calls from The Associated Press.
What about production costs?
Economists and analysts say the record egg prices aren’t a sure sign of something nefarious, and short-term profits might only last until farms get hit. Once a flock is slaughtered, it can take as long as a year to clean a farm and raise new birds to egg-laying age. The USDA pays farmers for every bird killed, but it doesn’t cover all the costs for farmers as they go without income.
“The consumer, I think, will probably feel like they’re getting the rough end of the stick. But I guarantee you, the farmers that are having to depopulate the barns, they’re having a rougher time,” CoBank analyst Brian Earnest said.
Inflation in the costs of feed fuel and labor have contributed to rising egg prices, and farmers have been investing in biosecurity measures to help keep the virus away. So production costs also appear to be at an all-time high, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics producer price index.
“This isn’t a case where they’re taking the price up to gouge the market. The price is going up through wholesale auctions. And they’re benefiting from higher prices because supplies are tight,” University of Arkansas agricultural economist Jada Thompson said.
A federal judge ruled on Thursday that the Trump administration's directive to dismiss tens of thousands of federal employees was likely unlawful. However, the implications for current employees and those already terminated remain unclear.
The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) issued the directive earlier this month as part of Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency’s initiative to reduce government spending. The directive specifically targeted "probationary" workers who have held their current positions for less than two years, including long-term government employees who were recently promoted.
Labor unions quickly filed a lawsuit in federal court, arguing that OPM lacked the authority to mandate mass firings and that the agency incorrectly cited performance issues as justification. In response, Judge William Alsup ordered OPM to rescind its directive and temporarily halted planned terminations of civilian employees at the Department of Defense.
Judge Alsup emphasized that "Congress has granted the authority to hire and fire to the agencies themselves." He further stated, "The Office of Personnel Management does not have any authority whatsoever, under any statute in the history of the universe, to hire and fire employees at another agency. They can only hire and fire their own employees."
Despite his ruling, it remains uncertain whether federal workers' jobs are secure or if those already terminated will be reinstated. This decision may only represent a temporary reprieve, pending further legal developments.
Lee Saunders, president of the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, commented, "We know this decision is just a first step, but it gives federal employees a respite."
What lies ahead for federal workers?
Alsup will review whether to issue an injunction preventing the Trump administration from proceeding with further terminations at a hearing on March 13. Even if he does so, the Trump administration is unlikely to abandon its objective of reducing the federal workforce by at least 10%.
Cary Coglianese, a professor of administrative law at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, noted, "The Trump administration would argue that federal courts have no authority to dictate whom we must hire."
While court interventions might delay the administration's plans, they are unlikely to stop them entirely. OPM may need to revoke its directive, but individual government agencies, many led by Trump allies, still retain the power to carry out firings independently. This could slow the process compared to a broad, centralized directive.
Coglianese suggested that similar to strategies during Trump's first term, the administration initially pursued a "quick and dirty method" to achieve policy goals. After encountering judicial obstacles, they will likely refine their approach to better align with legal requirements.
"This won't be the last skirmish in the larger battle," Coglianese concluded.