Federal workers sue USDA over forced relocations, attrition

The plaintiffs say the reorganization plan violates the Administrative Procedure Act, as it's arbitrary and capricious.SAN FRANCISCO (CN) — The American Federation of Government Employees argues in a lawsuit filed Tuesday that the U.S. Department of Agriculture intends to push workers out of their jobs through what it calls an unprecedented reorganization of the agency.The federation and others say in their lawsuit that office closures and relocations will force USDA employees to choose between their families and careers, and that USDA knows this will lead to attrition and the departure of knowledgeable and experienced workers, negatively impacting its ability to perform.The changes will affect initiatives like the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children.USDA performed no assessment on how employee attrition could affect its mandated responsibilities, the plaintiffs say.That, and other actions taken by the department, violate the Administrative Procedure Act, due to being arbitrary, capricious and contrary to law, they add.The plaintiffs are asking a federal judge to find the USDA and its secretary have exceeded their constitutional and statutory authority, as well as stop the office closures and forced relocations.“USDA knows and intends these moves will cause significant attrition among existing USDA staff, depriving the agency of a wealth of knowledge, experience and the ability to perform its statutorily authorized and mandated functions,” the groups say.According to the plaintiffs, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins in July 2025 announced the reorganization plan, which would move several offices and programs away from Washington, D.C., to spots across the nation. It also had four goals, or pillars: reduce staff, move employees away from the capital, remove management layers, and consolidate certain functions.USDA didn’t implement the plan last year but instead asked for public comment.“USDA received overwhelmingly negative comments opposing the actions USDA set forth in the secretary memorandum,” the plaintiffs say. “It received 46,845 comments, the ‘overwhelming majority’ (82%) of which ‘expressed negative sentiment.’”Comments focused on workforce attrition and weakened operational ability. One example cited was the Forest Service’s ability to manage public lands.In December, USDA issued a summary of those comments but gave no response.However, despite USDA’s move to enact the plan through the budget process, Congress directed it against taking any restructuring or downsizing actions until it signaled approval, the plaintiffs say.While it delayed implementing the plan last year, USDA this past spring started releasing public information about enacting it. It also informed congressional committees about its planned actions, they add.“USDA conceded in those letters that its actions triggered the prohibitions in the appropriations acts,” the plaintiffs say.The Agriculture Department offered impact bargaining to some employee unions, which included the timing of notices. However, it declined to bargain over the reorganization plan itself, office closures or employee relocations, the plaintiffs say.In fact, a large number of USDA employees previously in Washington, D.C., have been forced to relocate. A much larger push to force employee moves is imminent and will come in the form of management-directed reassignment letters, they add.“Those MDR letters inform individual employees of their assigned relocation location; the date by which the employee must decide whether to accept relocation; and the date by which the employee must relocate,” the plaintiffs say. “These forced relocations will cause widespread attrition.”The changes will affect agencies like the Food and Nutrition Administration, which oversees the SNAP and WIC programs.Pointing to the SNAP program, the groups say it helps 40 million low-income Americans monthly. WIC helps over 40% of infants in the country.The reorganization plan calls for closing seven Food and Nutrition Administration regional offices and consolidating them into five new hubs, which in most cases are distant from where existing employees live and work, they add.Several other agencies under the USDA will face similar impacts.“Workforce attrition caused by the reorganization’s closures and relocations will cause delays, reductions, and degradation of services and functions at each of the components and offices from which employees are being relocated,” the plaintiffs say.USDA could not be reached for comment.Subscribe to our free newslettersOur weekly newsletter Closing Arguments offers the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world, while the monthly Under the Lights dishes the legal dirt from Hollywood, sports, Big Tech and the arts.Additional Reads