Furloughed Federal Workers May Not Receive Back Pay

In a dramatic turn during the ongoing 2025 federal government shutdown, President Donald Trump has floated the possibility that furloughed federal workers might not receive the retroactive pay they long have assumed would follow any funding lapse. That shift marks a sharp break from established precedent — and from a law Trump himself signed — raising serious legal and political alarms. 

Press Release: SHRM Statement on the 2025 Government Shutdown

Since the shutdown began on Oct. 1, an estimated 750,000 federal employees have been furloughed or forced to work without pay. Historically, once a shutdown ends, Congress passes legislation restoring full pay to all affected workers. 

Yet, a draft memo circulating within the White House’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB) argues that such payments are not automatic. Rather, it claims, the 2019 law guaranteeing back pay, the Government Employee Fair Treatment Act (GEFTA), is not “self-executing” and instead requires that Congress explicitly appropriate funds in any bill ending the lapse. 

The OMB memo, penned by General Counsel Mark Paoletta, draws a distinction: Employees “excepted” during a shutdown (those who must continue working) are considered to have binding legal obligations and thus must be paid retroactively, while furloughed employees are viewed differently — their entitlement depends on later congressional action. 

The memo also notes that Congress, in its 2019 implementation of GEFTA, added language stating that compensation for furloughed employees is contingent on “the enactment of appropriations Acts ending the lapse.” To the OMB, that suggests a deliberate limitation: Even though GETFA authorizes back pay, the funding to cover it must be enacted case by case. 

In recent days, Trump has reinforced this reinterpretation. He has said that whether a worker receives back pay “depends on who we’re talking about” and has threatened to withhold it from those he deems not “deserving.”

Related Article: Ongoing Shutdown Continues to Limit Agencies, Hinder Workers 

Vulnerable to Challenge

Critics argue that the OMB’s interpretation misreads both the text and intent of GEFTA. Legal scholars point out that the statute was explicitly designed to remove uncertainty for workers by mandating that furloughed employees be compensated once funding is restored. 

Under the “plain meaning” rule of statutory interpretation, when statutory direction is unambiguous, courts must apply it. Opponents of the OMB’s stance contend that GEFTA’s language is plain: “shall” receive pay, for any lapse beginning Dec. 22, 2018, onward. 

Furthermore, they argue, Congress in practice always has included retroactive pay in shutdown-ending bills, reinforcing back pay as the norm. 

The OMB’s memo is a legal opinion, not binding policy, and it has already prompted pushback on Capitol Hill. Some Republicans, even if uneasy, have suggested that the only real guarantee is ending the shutdown itself. Others believe courts would likely reject a policy that withholds pay from workers who are entitled to it under statute. 

If salary restoration becomes a requirement in an appropriations bill rather than an automatic entitlement, affected employees or unions could sue, seeking declaratory or injunctive relief. A court might conclude that the OMB’s reinterpretation is inconsistent with GEFTA’s purpose and text.