WASHINGTON, D.C. (Law.com) — Swamped with calls and emails from prospective clients whose jobs are on the chopping block, some attorneys who represent federal employees are changing the way they deliver services, in hopes of reaching the most people.
But at the same time, these employment lawyers are taking steps to mitigate the risk of retribution for trying to impede the effort to cut the federal payroll.
And as a result, some are bolstering security at work and at home.
Not Traditional Consultation
At Kalijarvi, Chuzi, Newman & Fitch, for instance, the firm put together an email explaining various actions taking place concerning the job cuts, said managing partner Elaine Fitch.
The email provides resources and states “who’s handling what and who they should contact, and then saying, if there’s anything further you need, please reach out again,” Fitch said. “For many of them, that gives them direction, and it helps them know who to talk to.”
Additional informative emails are in the works to address the mass firings, and Fitch has had speaking engagements before bar groups to disseminate information on the situation.
The same is true at the Federal Practice Group in Washington, where the firm’s partners have provided updates on the firings in webinars before large groups of federal employees.
The webinars are “not like even a traditional consultation, where, typically I’m talking to someone one-on-one, usually for an hour or so. Instead, you’re talking to potentially hundreds of people all at the same time,” said the firm’s Ricardo Pitts-Wiley.
At one such webinar, the audience consisted of probationary federal employees, but Pitts-Wiley soon learned circumstances vary widely from one person to another.
“Everyone has a little something different going on, but we’re trying to reach as many people as possible—not necessarily for the purposes of representing them all, but really just to provide people information,” he said.
Security at Home and Work
But at the same time, some plaintiff-side employment lawyers say they are concerned about facing threats to their safety for fighting the Trump administration’s plans to cut jobs.
Fitch said the firm’s representation of federal employees prompted an increase in security in its office building, and several of the attorneys in her firm have increased security at their personal residences.
“This is an administration that is hell bent on retribution against people that it perceives as having crossed them. We have seen that in some of the firings. So, yeah, it is a concern. But my firm was founded 50 years ago by June Kalijarvi, and it was founded to specialize in representing federal employees. So we’ve had this expertise for a long time, and it feels good to be able to try to help preserve our democracy, even this small way,” Fitch said.
Pitts-Wiley said his wife has expressed concern to him about harm that could result from having his name being associated with opposition to the administration’s agenda. But his firm hasn’t increased security measures, Pitts-Wiley said. He noted that safety concerns are related to the long time Trump has had to develop a plan of action, and its swift implementation of that plan.
“That kind of comprehensive approach lends itself to identifying potential enemies, identifying individuals that may get in the way of them implementing their agenda. So it has crossed my mind. It’s also crossed the mind of my colleagues,” Pitts-Wiley said. Still, “the work has to be done—it’s necessary in order to try and preserve this democracy. And I’m not trying to be hyperbolic when I say that. I think that there’s a very real, serious concern that our democracy may be on a trajectory that could take generations to undo,” he said.
Another Washington employment attorney who is representing laid-off federal employees, Michael Vogelsang of the Employment Law Group in Washington, has heard such concerns but says he is not worried because he is “too small a fish to fry.”
“And I do want to take cases on because I think what’s happening is wrong and it will keep happening unless someone tells them to stop,” Vogelsang said.
Strategies
Tully Rinckey, the Albany, New York, firm with an office in Washington, is talking to hundreds of federal employees in probationary status, who have received notices of termination, said founding partner Greg T. Rinckey.
Federal employees are typically in probationary status for the first year on the job, and in that period they can be removed more easily than a tenured employee.
“So the question really becomes, are they using the right mechanism to terminate these probationary employees, or is this really a reduction in force?” Rinckey said. “If it’s a reduction in force, that triggers other protections and bumping rules for federal employees. So that’s something that we’re looking into, and a lot of this is on a case by case basis,” he said.
The Office of Special Counsel, a federal watchdog agency, has determined that a handful of the probationary employees who were cut were actually subject to reductions in force, in what appears to be a novel situation, said Vogelsang.
The OSC is seeking a stay of layoffs to probationary employees on that grounds, and the request is before the Merit Systems Protection Board, he said.
