The Pentagon has quietly changed the rules for handling civilian employees, issuing a memo on Sept. 30 titled “Separation of Employees with Unacceptable Performance” that pushes managers to move quickly to remove workers judged to be underperforming. The new guidance, signed by Under Secretary of Defense Anthony Tata, stresses supervisory accountability and leans into a no-excuses approach to personnel decisions amid furloughs and broader reshaping efforts. Critics worry the language is broad enough to invite political misuse, while supporters argue it simply enforces standards and clears out bureaucratic “debris.”
The memo arrived one day before the government shutdown and tells supervisors and HR to take decisive action. “Supervisors and human resources (HR) professionals are directed to act with speed and conviction to facilitate the separation from Federal service of employees performing unsuccessfully,” the document reads, signaling a clear shift toward faster personnel moves. This is framed as restoring accountability after years of tolerant practices that some say dulled effectiveness across the department.
Managers are warned they will be held responsible if they fail to address poor performance, an accountability push that has both practical and political implications. Some managers worry the guidelines could be applied too broadly and used to remove people for political reasons rather than job failures. That fear of overreach feeds into a broader debate about how to balance firm leadership with fairness and due process inside the Defense civilian workforce.
Officials in the Pentagon say they are still adapting to the changes and are not ready to provide specifics about personnel actions. “The Department is in the process of adapting to the new guidance outlined in Under Secretary of War Tata’s memo from September 30th and we have nothing specific to share at this time,” the statement reads. At the same time, it remains unclear how many civilian employees, if any, have actually been separated under the new rules so far.
Nearly half of the Defense civilian workforce was furloughed during the shutdown, a backdrop that ratchets up tensions over staffing and pay. Earlier in the month the administration tried to fire thousands of furloughed employees, but a federal court blocked that move, underscoring legal limits on how far managers can push. Those court actions are likely to shape how aggressively the Pentagon can apply its new procedures.
The personnel changes are part of a larger push by the Pentagon leadership to clear away what they call unnecessary layers and underperforming staff that stand in the way of mission priorities. Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth has framed this effort as removing “debris” to focus on national defense goals, and he laid out a simple philosophy: “The sooner we have the right people, the sooner we can advance the right policies. Personnel is policy,” he said. That line captures the viewpoint driving the memo: people decisions are tools for policy execution, not merely administrative chores.
Practical shifts in the memo include added emphasis on Douglas Factors, the federal criteria used to evaluate performance, but with new language that expands managerial discretion. The memo instructs supervisors to incorporate these factors while also signaling that any shortfall in a role can justify strong action. “Every DoW position supports the mission, so deficiencies in any role can warrant strong action,” the memo reads under the Douglas Factor section addressing roles and responsibilities.
Those changes are cast as empowering supervisors to act with clearer authority and fewer procedural roadblocks when performance falls short. “This approach empowers supervisors to act decisively when performance undermines DoW’s objectives, reinforcing a culture of excellence. Supervisors are to use the Douglas Factors in consideration of their action,” the memo added. Supporters say this will shrink the time it takes to correct problems and strengthen mission readiness.
Even so, critics warn that increased subjectivity in evaluations can open the door to favoritism or politically motivated firings if safeguards are not carefully applied. Managers will need to strike a balance: use the tools to enforce standards without permitting arbitrary decisions that undercut morale or spark costly legal battles. The legal checkpoint that halted the mass firing attempt earlier this month serves as a reminder that the courts still play a major role in policing how the Pentagon handles workforce changes.
The changes also follow separate moves inside the services, where civilian job cuts and reorganizations have been part of a broader push for readiness. Some branches have already trimmed public affairs and other civilian roles to refocus resources, a trend the memo is likely to accelerate. As the department adapts to the memo and watches how courts respond, the debate will continue over whether speed and strictness will restore performance or create new conflicts inside the civilian ranks.
