Federal Probationary Workers Leaving Jobs at Higher Rates

Why It Matters

Since January 2025, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) has directed agencies to reassess which probationary employees to retain, expanding the criteria for termination decisions beyond traditional performance and conduct measures. But a significant downward rate in how federal agencies are holding on to their workforces, particularly employees still in probationary status, is the focus of a recent Government Accountability Office (GAO) report.

Approximately 282,000 employees across 11 major agencies with health and safety missions served in probationary or trial periods during 2025, and the data shows these workers are separating at notably higher rates than their permanent counterparts.

In August, OPM issued a final rule titled "Streamlining Probationary and Trial Period Appeals" with an effective date of September 2, 2026 that also strips away longstanding appeal protections, leaving terminated probationary workers with severely limited recourse.

The Big Picture

Probationary periods generally last one or two years during which newly hired employees and recently appointed managers have limited job protections. Historically, agencies could only terminate probationary workers for performance or conduct reasons.

That changed in April 2025. The Trump administration's OPM guidance expanded the criteria agencies could use when deciding to terminate probationary employees. Beyond performance and conduct, agencies could now consider whether their continued employment would advance organizational goals, language that opens the door to terminations based on factors entirely unrelated to job performance or misconduct.

The shift accelerated further in December 2025, when OPM proposed a sweeping rule that would fundamentally restructure how probationary employees can challenge their terminations. The proposed regulation would make OPM itself the adjudicator of all probationary and trial period appeals, replacing the U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board, which has historically provided independent review of federal personnel actions.

Under the new framework, appeals would be limited to claims alleging discrimination based on partisan politics, marital status, or the agency's failure to follow termination procedures. OPM finalized this rule on August 3, establishing a limited OPM-administered appeals process for employees terminated during probationary or trial periods, and for supervisors and managers who fail to complete their probationary periods.

The GAO analyzed 2025 workforce data for 11 agencies and 12 subcomponents with health or safety missions. These included the Departments of Agriculture (Forest Service), Commerce (NOAA), Defense, Energy, Health and Human Services (CDC, FDA, NIH), Homeland Security (FEMA, TSA), Interior (BLM, NPS), Transportation (FAA), Veterans Affairs (VHA, VBA), the Environmental Protection Agency, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. These agencies and subcomponents collectively employed roughly 1.8 million people.

The findings are stark: probationary employees separated from these selected agencies at a rate of 19 percent, compared to 15 percent for all employees at those agencies. Approximately 41,500 probationary separations, or 78.6 percent, were voluntary in 2025, while approximately 9,400 probationary separations, or 17.8 percent, were due to reduction-in-force or other termination action.

One notable exception emerged: At the Department of Defense, separation rates for probationary employees and the overall Defense workforce were nearly identical, at approximately 14 percent in 2025.

The agencies examined include those responsible for critical public health and safety functions. The CDC and FDA manage disease surveillance and drug safety; the FAA oversees aviation safety; the Forest Service manages vast federal lands; FEMA coordinates disaster response; and the TSA screens passengers at airports.

High separation rates among probationary workers in these agencies can disrupt training pipelines, reduce the pool of candidates with federal experience, and create gaps in critical functions where experience and continuity directly affect public health and safety outcomes.

The Bottom Line

The combination of expanded termination authority, new performance standards, and restricted appeal rights creates a framework in which federal agencies have significantly more latitude to manage their probationary workforces. Whether this is deployed to improve agency performance or to reshape workforce composition along political or ideological lines depends on implementation and oversight.

Probationary employees, often the least experienced and most vulnerable members of the federal workforce, lack the tenure and institutional knowledge of permanent staff, making them potentially easier targets for pressure or retaliation. Traditional civil service protections exist partly to ensure that employment decisions are based on merit rather than politics or favoritism. Narrowing the grounds for appeal could weaken these safeguards during the period when workers are most vulnerable.

Access the Legis1 platform for comprehensive political news, data, and insights.

Spot something wrong? Report an issue with this article