Billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk, head of Tesla and SpaceX among other companies, recently drew serious controversy when he publicized the names of certain federal employees he wanted to see terminated from their jobs. That landed him in his role of advising President-elect Donald Trump on the efficiency of government, but it had real consequences for the safety and job security of those in his sights, and possibly even bigger implications for the federal workforce.
The context of Musk’s actions
Musk recently made social media reposts of an account with the handle, Fentasyl, which described itself as a “Unincorporated Think Thank,” naming four federal employees whose work touches on climate issues. He referred to those positions as “fake jobs,” but went further, calling into question their legitimacy and opening them up to waves of online harassment. His tweets have been viewed by millions of people, which has put the named individuals in serious jeopardy. For example;
- One employee reportedly deleted her social media accounts after the backlash she experienced following being publicly named by Musk.
- Another woman serving at the Department of Health and Human Services was also targeted by Musk.
- Musk also singled out the senior advisor on climate to the Department of Housing and Urban Development stating that, “She should not be paid $181,648 by the U.S taxpayers just for being a climate advisor.”
This seems to be part of a larger plan in the DOGE (Department of Government Efficiency) under Trump’s vision, which would seek to “drain the swamp” in Washington and reduce the size of government. Musk’s move has been seen by many as a way to bully the civil servants into quitting without having to go through the formal process of dismissal. Such critics go further to argue that this results in a hostile work environment where people will feel unsafe or compelled to quit their jobs.
The short-term effects on targeted employees
The impact on those that Musk names is profound. Now, many federal employees live in fear of becoming the next target, bringing added anxiety and job insecurity. Some have reportedly started to consider resigning over the hostile work environment that Musk’s public naming and shaming actions have fostered.
Everett Kelley, president of the American Federation of Government Employees, accused Musk of “sowing terror” among civil servants. She explained that these are, in fact, tactics aimed at instilling fear so that the federal employees will be fearing the consequences of speaking out or fighting to protect their jobs. What this may amount to, for the freezing of the experienced personnel in the government service, is tremendous disintegration of its functioning.
Broader implications for federal employment
Musk’s singling out of individual government employees puts on display an unsettling pattern in the clash between social media and public service. With his giant platform, Musk does more than merely shape public opinion; he goads on his followers to harry those whom he criticizes. The actions taken bring ethical questions of accountability in leadership and responsibility at the helm of great online presence.
Experts warn that such actions could dissuade qualified individuals from pursuing a career in public service, for fear that they might become the target of online abuse or political retribution. Harassment could extend to those being named and further create an atmosphere in which all federal employees might feel vulnerable to similar treatment, something that would stifle innovation and open dialogue within government agencies.
This incident once again exposes the fragility of job security in an age when social media could be used to attack public servants personally. As these dynamics play out, many federal workers are having second thoughts about their career choices, and some are actively seeking work outside of government positions.
Response from federal unions and officials
Federal employee unions have pushed back in the wake of Musk’s moves against what they see as strong-arm tactics to break up public service positions. Union leaders say efficiency is one thing, but not on the backs of employee safety and morale. They want a respectful conversation about government employment, not public shaming and harassment.
Some officials have tried to distance themselves from Musk’s approach. Vivek Ramaswamy, another participant in DOGE, said that while bureaucracy can be frustrating, one has to treat individual employees respectfully and not attack them personally. That attitude represents the increasing awareness of how this kind of approach can damage public confidence in government.
Read more: Who is Lori Chávez-DeRemer, Trump’s pick to be the new Secretary of State for Labor
