A directive from Elon Musk requiring federal employees to submit weekly performance reports has left government agencies divided, creating widespread confusion. The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) sent out an email on Saturday asking employees to list five accomplishments from the past week. However, agencies responded with conflicting instructions, leaving workers unsure of how to proceed.
Over the weekend, several major agencies, including the Departments of Defense, State, Homeland Security, and Energy, told their employees to ignore the request. But within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the directive sparked internal contradictions, as some divisions, such as the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), initially instructed employees to comply.
Similarly, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) first directed staff to respond but later asked them to hold off pending further guidance. By Monday evening, HHS issued another clarification, stating that employees were not required to respond and that their jobs would not be affected if they chose not to. Employees who did reply were warned not to disclose sensitive information, such as colleagues’ names or details about specific projects.
Some Agencies Enforce Compliance
While several agencies resisted Musk’s directive, others instructed employees to comply. The Treasury, Veterans Affairs, Commerce, and Interior Departments all required responses but warned workers not to include classified or sensitive details.
The lack of consistency across agencies fueled frustration among federal employees. Some feared retaliation, while others were left confused by rapidly changing instructions. One employee described the situation as “chaotic,” saying leadership had failed to provide clear guidance.
OPM’s Mixed Messaging
On Monday, OPM issued an internal update stating that responses were voluntary and that noncompliance would not be considered a resignation. However, a public memo from OPM’s Acting Director, Charles Ezell, painted a different picture. Rather than confirming that responses were optional, Ezell instructed agencies to “review responses and evaluate nonresponses,” implying that there could be consequences for not complying.
He also stated that agency leaders could decide whether to exempt employees from the directive and that they had the discretion to take “appropriate actions” against those who failed to respond. This vague language did little to ease concerns among employees, many of whom remained unsure about the potential repercussions of ignoring the request.
Musk and Trump’s Pressure Campaign
Adding to the tension, both Elon Musk and former President Donald Trump suggested that federal employees who refused to respond could lose their jobs.
On Monday, Musk posted on X (formerly Twitter) that workers had “another chance” to comply or risk termination. Trump, speaking from the Oval Office, claimed without evidence that some employees were avoiding the email because “they don’t even exist.” He also downplayed agencies’ resistance, suggesting that they were simply protecting sensitive government information rather than defying Musk’s directive.
Pushback from Senior Officials
Despite the pressure from Musk and Trump, some high-ranking officials openly opposed the directive. A senior official at the State Department told employees that the agency would respond as a whole, emphasizing that individual staff members were not required to submit reports outside their normal chain of command.
Energy Secretary Chris Wright issued a similar statement, reaffirming that his department alone was responsible for managing employee performance. His message closely resembled one issued by the Department of Defense, signaling coordinated resistance from agencies with national security responsibilities.
Federal Workers Remain on Edge
Even after OPM’s clarification, many employees were uneasy about ignoring the request. Some feared that noncompliance might put them at risk, despite civil service protections that prevent most federal employees from being fired without cause.
“I hate the idea of complying, but I feel like it’s safer to respond,” one worker told NPR anonymously. Another employee described the situation as “micromanagement from the shadows,” expressing concerns over Musk’s growing influence in government operations.
Complicating matters further, some government contractors—who are not official federal employees—also received the email, raising questions about whether OPM had overstepped its authority.
Legal Battle Over the Directive
In response to the controversy, labor unions and advocacy groups filed a lawsuit in a federal court in San Francisco, seeking to block the directive. The lawsuit argues that OPM lacks the legal authority to impose such requirements on federal agencies.
U.S. District Judge William Alsup has given the government until Wednesday to respond, with a hearing scheduled for Thursday. The ruling could determine whether OPM has the power to enforce Musk’s directive or if agencies can continue to manage their own performance evaluations.
As the situation unfolds, federal employees remain caught in the middle, uncertain about what the future holds under Musk’s increasing influence over government operations.
