Every few months, like clockwork, a tech CEO emerges to remind us: Artificial Intelligence is coming for your job. The latest voice in this semi-regular ritual? Amazon CEO Andy Jassy.

In a memo to employees titled “Some thoughts on Generative AI,” Jassy spent more than 1,200 words cheerleading Amazon’s progress in AI: Alexa is getting “meaningfully smarter,” the customer service chatbot is becoming “an even better experience,” and so on. Metrics? Not really. Just “you get the idea,” he wrote.

But buried deep in paragraph 15 came the actual point: Yes, Amazon is planning to replace workers with AI.

“We expect this will reduce our total corporate workforce,” Jassy wrote, referring to the “efficiency gains” Amazon anticipates from deploying AI “extensively” across the company.

He gave no specific timeline, only that it would happen “in the next few years.” No numbers either—just a vague warning: many of the AI “agents” that will eventually take over haven’t even been built yet. But, he insists, “make no mistake, they’re coming, and coming fast.”

Weaponizing the AI Hype Cycle

Jassy isn’t the only one. Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei recently warned that half of all entry-level white-collar jobs could vanish in the next five years thanks to AI. Why half? Why five years? Who knows. The number seems to exist more to scare than to inform—while conveniently highlighting how powerful Amodei’s own technology is.

To be fair, not everyone in Big Tech is banging the same apocalyptic drum. Nvidia’s Jensen Huang and Google DeepMind’s Demis Hassabis, two heavy hitters in the AI world, have both pushed back on these doom-laced forecasts.

Still, the pattern is clear: the louder the fear, the more excited investors get. AI isn’t just a tool anymore—it’s a business model powered by uncertainty.

Let’s Remember: This Isn’t New

Despite the dramatic headlines, AI isn’t a new threat to the labor force. Automation and machine learning have been reshaping jobs for decades. What’s changed is the hype—and who gets to control the narrative.

Generative AI, especially, is pitched as revolutionary. But many of these large language models are riddled with flaws. The bigger they get, the more likely they are to “hallucinate” facts. And engineers are already running out of the high-quality human data needed to train them effectively.

In other words, it’s powerful—but nowhere near infallible.

And curiously, when Jassy talks about jobs AI might replace, he’s not talking about his. Or his fellow executives’. Just the people lower down the food chain.

The New Language of Layoffs: “Efficiency” and “Flexibility”

There’s something familiar about all of this. Every workplace tech advancement for the past 30 years—from email to Slack to Zoom—was sold to us using the same buzzwords: efficiency, productivity, flexibility.

But while these tools did help during the pandemic lockdowns, they also created a reality where workers are always online. Flexibility turned into availability. Permanently.

Even Microsoft, which is pouring $80 billion into AI development this year, recently admitted that its tools may have broken the modern workday.

In a company study, the average office worker now gets interrupted 275 times a day—by emails, meetings, chat messages, pings from Teams, Outlook, and more. Employees receive an average of 117 emails per day and send or receive 58 instant messages outside their official work hours. That’s a 15% jump from last year.

And what’s Microsoft’s proposed fix for this endless disruption?

You guessed it: more AI agents.

So, Who Really Benefits?

Here’s the bottom line: Every time a CEO warns that AI might take your job, they’re not making a neutral observation—they’re pushing a vision of the future that consolidates power and cuts labor costs. It’s a story that makes investors happy and keeps workers uncertain.

The irony? These same CEOs are sitting in roles that AI, frankly, might actually be better at. Drafting memos, managing spreadsheets, making calculated decisions based on incomplete data—sounds a lot like what current AI tools already excel at.

But don’t expect any of them to give up their bonuses to a chatbot.

The Future of Work Doesn’t Have to Be Fear

Yes, AI is here to stay. And yes, it will change how we work. But it’s time we stopped letting CEOs set the terms of that change with vague memos and ominous predictions.

Let’s ask better questions:

• How can AI make work more humane, not just more efficient?
• Who decides what jobs get automated—and why?
• And how do we ensure the benefits of this technology are shared, not hoarded?

Until then, take every AI warning from the C-suite with a healthy pinch of silicon.

Source: CNN – AI warnings are the hip new way for CEOs to keep their workers afraid of losing their jobs

The post AI Is Coming for Your Job — Just Not the CEO’s appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

The head of one of the world’s leading AI companies has issued a stark warning: artificial intelligence could trigger a surge in unemployment that we’re not prepared for.

Dario Amodei, CEO of Anthropic, told CNN’s Anderson Cooper that AI is rapidly surpassing humans at nearly every intellectual task. “We’re going to collectively, as a society, grapple with it,” Amodei said. “AI is going to get better at what everyone does — including CEOs like me.”

How bad could it get? Amodei predicts that AI could wipe out half of all entry-level white-collar jobs, pushing unemployment in the U.S. as high as 20% within the next five years. For context, the last time unemployment neared that level was during the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic.

This isn’t just a casual forecast — it’s a warning from someone at the forefront of the AI revolution. And it comes as Anthropic unveils AI technology designed to work nearly a full human workday on complex tasks, with minimal supervision.

Why This Matters: White-Collar Jobs at Risk

Historically, technology has tended to replace low-skilled jobs, with the idea that displaced workers could retrain for better-paying roles. But Amodei’s warning flips that script: AI might soon replace specialized, highly educated professionals — people who’ve invested years in training and schooling. And retraining at that level may not be easy or even possible on a large scale.

He even suggests that governments consider taxing AI companies to help offset the societal impacts. “If AI creates huge total wealth, a lot of that will, by default, go to the AI companies and less to ordinary people,” Amodei said. “It’s not in my economic interest to say that, but I think this is something we should consider — and it shouldn’t be a partisan issue.”

Jobs in the Crosshairs: Who’s Most Vulnerable?

From paralegals to payroll clerks, financial advisers to software coders, many white-collar roles could face major upheaval. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg recently predicted that AI will write half of Facebook’s code within a year, and Microsoft’s Satya Nadella said AI already writes about 30% of Microsoft’s code.

Amodei shared that about 40% of people using Anthropic’s AI are employing it to fully automate jobs, while 60% use it to augment their work — and the automation number is growing. Just last week, Anthropic launched an AI model that can work independently for nearly seven hours straight.

A Rapid, Unprecedented Shift

What sets this AI revolution apart is its speed and scope. Amodei warns this wave of change is “faster, broader, harder to adapt to” than previous technological shifts. Most people don’t realize how quickly AI is evolving.

While some experts believe AI will mostly automate tasks rather than entire jobs, and others think the pace may slow as AI runs out of training data, there’s broad agreement on one thing: it’s time to start planning for AI’s economic impact.

University of Virginia economist Anton Korinek put it plainly: “Historically, the economy has created new jobs to replace old ones. But intelligent machines might be able to do those new jobs, too — and faster than humans.”

The Silver Lining: AI’s Potential to Help Humanity

Amodei isn’t sounding the alarm just to scare people. He believes AI can help solve major challenges — from curing diseases to advancing human knowledge. “I wouldn’t be building this technology if I didn’t think it could make the world better,” he said.

His warnings also build his reputation as a responsible leader who wants to steer AI development carefully, amid growing public and governmental scrutiny. Tech futurist Tracey Follows explained, “By raising these concerns now, Amodei is being transparent. If AI causes major disruption in the next five years, Anthropic can say they warned us.”

What’s Next? Facing the AI Future Together

Amodei told Cooper he’s “raising the alarm” because others in the industry haven’t been as vocal. “I don’t think we can stop this bus,” he said. “But I hope to steer the technology so we’re aware of and address the harms — while still unlocking the benefits.”

The AI revolution is already here — and it’s changing how we work faster than most of us realize. The question now is how society, business leaders, and policymakers will respond before the economic shockwaves hit.

Source: CNN – Why this leading AI CEO is warning the tech could cause mass unemployment

The post Leading AI Expert Predicts 20% Unemployment Due to Automation appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

When Can Employers Fire You Over Social Media Posts?

According to labor law experts, most employees in the U.S. work under “at-will” employment, meaning they can be terminated for nearly any reason, including social media activity.

“In general, an employer could fire an employee for just about anything, including criticizing the company on social media,” says Jeffrey Hirsch, a labor and employment law professor at the University of North Carolina.

However, legal protections may apply in some cases, depending on the nature of the post, the employee’s industry, and state laws.

Legal Protections for Employees on Social Media

While employers have discretion in terminations, some laws protect workers from retaliation over specific types of social media posts:

1. The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA)

The NLRA protects employees who engage in “concerted activity,” such as discussing wages or working conditions with co-workers. If an employee’s social media post is work-related and encourages dialogue among employees, it may be legally protected. Even something as simple as “liking” a co-worker’s post about work conditions could fall under this protection, according to labor law experts.

However, general complaints such as “my job stinks” or “my boss is awful” are not protected under the NLRA unless they specifically relate to workplace policies affecting multiple employees.

2. Public Sector Employees & First Amendment Rights

Government employees have additional protections under the First Amendment. If their social media post addresses a public concern and is made off-duty without disrupting workplace operations, it may be safeguarded from employer retaliation.

“There are cases where teachers or police officers have been disciplined for social media posts and successfully argued First Amendment protections,” says Catherine Fisk, an employment law professor at UC Berkeley.

3. State Laws and Contracts

Montana is the only U.S. state that does not follow at-will employment, meaning employers there must have a valid reason to fire an employee. Additionally, some workers have employment contracts that specify conditions under which they can be terminated, offering more security.

What Can and Can’t Be Included in Social Media Policies?

Companies can establish social media policies to regulate employees’ online behavior, but these policies must follow legal guidelines. Employers can:

• Prohibit employees from making false statements about the company.
• Restrict employees from revealing trade secrets or confidential business information.
• Discourage employees from making negative posts about competitors.

However, companies cannot create overly broad policies that prevent workers from expressing concerns about workplace conditions. The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has ruled that such policies can discourage employees from exercising their legal rights.

What to Do If You’re Fired Over a Social Media Post

If an employee believes they were wrongfully terminated for a protected social media post, they can file a complaint with the NLRB.

“The bad news is most people don’t know about this option,” says Hirsch. “Even many lawyers don’t realize that non-unionized employees can still be protected under the NLRA.”

After a complaint is filed, the NLRB will investigate and determine whether the case has merit. If the employer does not settle, the board will pursue the case at no cost to the employee. If the employee wins, they could be reinstated and awarded back pay.

The Impact of Politics and Social Issues

Businesses often see a rise in concerns over employees’ social media posts during politically charged times, such as elections or social justice protests. Employers may seek legal advice on how to handle politically sensitive posts while avoiding potential lawsuits.

“When things are calm, these issues quiet down,” says employment attorney Mark Kluger. “But in today’s world, there always seems to be something that sparks debates affecting workplaces.”

Final Thoughts

While employees do have some protections for online speech, they should still be cautious about what they post. Understanding workplace policies and labor laws can help employees navigate social media use without jeopardizing their jobs.

Would you rethink posting about work on social media? Share your thoughts in the comments below!

Source: Can you lose your job for what you post on social media? Here’s what the experts say

The post Can You Be Fired for Social Media Posts? Experts Explain appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

Thousands of federal employees across the U.S. were left reeling Friday as the Trump administration moved aggressively to shrink the federal workforce, ordering agencies to fire probationary employees who have yet to qualify for civil service protections.

Shockwaves Across the Country

While much of the administration’s focus has been on disrupting bureaucracy in Washington, the layoffs extend far beyond the capital. Workers from Michigan to Florida were blindsided by termination notices, leaving many confused, angry, and uncertain about their future.

Adding to the chaos, some employees received layoff notices despite already accepting buyout agreements—which were supposed to guarantee their salaries until September 30. By Friday evening, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) acknowledged that some employees may have been fired in error, promising that buyout agreements would be honored.

“This has been slash and burn,” said Nicholas Detter, a natural resource specialist in Kansas, who was abruptly fired via email Thursday night. “None of this has been done thoughtfully or carefully.”

Scope of the Firings Remains Unclear

The White House and OPM declined to say how many probationary employees—those typically on the job for less than a year—have been let go so far. However, government records show that as of March 2024, 220,000 workers had less than a year of service.

Agencies were given a deadline of 8 p.m. Tuesday to complete the layoffs, according to a source familiar with the plan who spoke on condition of anonymity.

A Sweeping Effort to Cut the Workforce

The layoffs are part of a broader initiative led by Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to downsize federal employment. In an executive order Tuesday, Trump instructed agency leaders to prepare for “large-scale reductions” after a voluntary buyout program attracted only 75,000 participants.

Who’s Being Laid Off?

• Veterans Affairs (VA): More than 1,000 employees, including researchers working on cancer treatment, opioid addiction, prosthetics, and burn pit exposure.
• Education Department: Dozens of special education specialists and student aid officials were dismissed, according to a workers’ union.
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC): Nearly 1,300 probationary employees—one-tenth of the agency’s workforce—are being forced out.
• Department of Agriculture: Secretary Brooke Rollins confirmed that layoffs “will be forthcoming” after welcoming Musk’s team with “open arms.”

“Clearly, it’s a new day,” Rollins said at the White House. “I think the American people spoke on November 5th—they believe government is too big.”

Workers Speak Out

Veteran Fired From VA Medical Center

Andrew Lennox, a 10-year Marine veteran, was part of a supervisor training program at the VA Medical Center in Ann Arbor, Michigan. On Thursday evening, he received an unexpected email: he was fired.

“In order to help veterans, you just fired a veteran,” said Lennox, 35, who served in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria.

Despite starting his VA career just three months ago, he said he “would love nothing more” than to continue helping veterans.

Foreign Affairs Specialist Laid Off in Middle of a Meeting

David Rice, a disabled Army paratrooper, was working as a foreign affairs specialist at the Department of Energy when he was abruptly fired.

Rice had just logged into a virtual meeting with Japanese representatives on Thursday night when he saw an email notifying him of his termination.

“It’s just been chaos,” said Rice, 50, who had recently bought a home in Melbourne, Florida, after securing his federal job.

Although Rice supports the administration’s goal of improving government efficiency, he strongly objects to what he calls a “random, scattershot approach.”

Fired Despite Signing Buyout Agreements

Some employees, like Nicholas Detter, had already agreed to the administration’s buyout deal, expecting it to shield them from sudden layoffs. Instead, they received immediate termination notices.

Detter, 25, had worked for the Natural Resources Conservation Service at the Department of Agriculture, helping farmers reduce soil erosion and water pollution. Despite receiving “completely positive” performance reviews, he was fired Thursday night.

“You’re just a pawn in a much bigger struggle,” Detter said. “Elon Musk seems to have taken on this personal mission to shrink the government.”

His Kansas office, which already struggled with understaffing, saw two out of four employees laid off.

Unions and Lawmakers Push Back

• The National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU) and other labor groups filed a lawsuit Thursday, arguing the terminations are “unlawful.”
• Doreen Greenwald, NTEU president, warned that these cuts “will have a devastating impact on agency missions.” Many agencies are already struggling due to years of frozen or slashed budgets.
• Advocacy group Democracy Forward filed a complaint with the Office of Special Counsel, requesting an investigation into whether the mass firings violated federal personnel policies.

Protests erupted Friday morning outside the Hubert H. Humphrey Building in Washington, with workers fearing this is just the beginning.

“They’re picking us off, one by one,” said a federal contractor who declined to be named. “First, it’s the probationary workers. Then we’re next.”

Murkowski: “This Won’t Fix the Federal Budget”

Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) criticized the indiscriminate cuts, writing on X (formerly Twitter):

“Indiscriminate workforce cuts aren’t efficient and won’t fix the federal budget.”

Murkowski’s office has demanded answers from federal agencies but has received “evasive and inadequate” responses so far.

Will the Layoffs Reduce the Deficit?

Experts say the cuts will have little impact on the national deficit. The federal government spends $270 billion annually on civilian workers, with 60% going to Defense, Homeland Security, and Veterans Affairs.

Even if every federal employee were fired, the U.S. would still run a deficit exceeding $1 trillion.

Additionally, these mass layoffs could hurt economic data—potentially turning job growth negative in upcoming reports. The last time the economy lost jobs was in December 2020, during the pandemic.

“It’s very plausible that job growth could turn negative,” said Martha Gimbel, executive director of the Budget Lab at Yale University.

Impact Beyond the Workers

For those fired, the impact isn’t just personal—it affects the people they serve.

“We were actually out there helping people,” said Rice, the former Department of Energy employee. “This work mattered.”

Source

The post Thousands of Federal Workers Fired as Government Downsizing Accelerates appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

Elon Musk Defends Government Cuts at White House, Acknowledges Mistakes

Washington, D.C. — In a rare public appearance at the White House on Tuesday, Elon Musk, President Donald Trump’s most powerful adviser, defended his aggressive push to downsize the federal government. Standing next to the Resolute Desk with his young son, Musk acknowledged that while the effort has exposed “shocking” wasteful spending, there have also been mistakes—and more are likely.

Musk and Trump Expand Government Overhaul

President Trump, praising Musk’s work with the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), signed an executive order to expand Musk’s influence. The order gives DOGE greater control over hiring and directs agencies to reduce their workforce, with exceptions for immigration, law enforcement, and public safety.

Under the order:

• A DOGE representative must approve almost all new federal hires.
• Agencies can hire only one employee for every four who leave.
• Leaders must prepare for “large-scale reductions in force”, prioritizing cuts to functions not required by law.

Musk framed these cuts as “common sense”, rejecting claims that they are radical.

“The people voted for major government reform, and that’s what the people are going to get. That’s what democracy is all about,” he said.

Criticism Over Transparency and Accountability

Despite Musk’s assurances, critics say DOGE operates with little transparency or oversight. Musk insisted that information on DOGE’s actions is available online and on X (the social media platform he owns), but:

• The DOGE website contains no public details on its cuts.
• Posts on X lack key specifics, including which programs are being eliminated.

Meanwhile, the White House has taken steps to limit independent oversight. The inspector general for the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) was fired a day after warning that DOGE’s actions had made it nearly impossible to monitor $8.2 billion in humanitarian funds.

Musk Acknowledges Errors

Facing scrutiny, Musk admitted that some of his claims about government spending have been inaccurate.

When asked about his false assertion that the U.S. was spending $50 million on condoms for Gaza, Musk conceded:
“Some of the things that I say will be incorrect and should be corrected. So nobody can bat 1,000.”

He also acknowledged that DOGE itself could be making mistakes:
“We are moving fast, so we will make mistakes, but we’ll also fix the mistakes very quickly.”

Federal Workforce in Fear and Uncertainty

With government cuts accelerating, federal employees are growing increasingly anxious. Trump and Musk are pushing a deferred resignation program—a buyout plan offering financial incentives for workers to resign. Over 65,000 federal employees have already accepted the offer, though a judge has paused the program while reviewing its legality.

Across the street from the U.S. Capitol, hundreds gathered Tuesday in support of federal workers.

Voices from the Workforce

• Janet Connelly, a Department of Energy graphic designer, said she’s tired of emails pressuring her to quit. “From the get-go, I didn’t trust it,” she said.
• Helen Bottcher, a former EPA employee and union leader, warned that fear has gripped the workforce: “They’re worried about their jobs. They’re worried about their families. They’re also worried about their work and the communities they serve.”
• Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) condemned Musk and Trump’s approach: “Workers deserve better than to be threatened, intimidated, and pushed out the door.”

A government lawyer, speaking anonymously due to fears of retaliation, described the atmosphere as terrifying.

“People are worried their phones and computers are being monitored. My father is urging me to take a private-sector job, but I don’t trust this resignation program. If we accept it, we can’t sue if we’re not paid what we’re promised. The whole thing is insane.”

The Future of Musk’s Government Reforms

With Musk wielding unprecedented power over federal employment and Trump fully backing his cuts, the impact of these sweeping reforms remains uncertain. Will they lead to efficiency—or chaos?

For now, one thing is clear: Musk’s influence over the U.S. government has never been stronger.

Source

The post Elon Musk Defends Government Cuts at White House, Admits to Mistakes appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

A federal judge has temporarily halted President Donald Trump’s plan to offer financial incentives for federal workers to resign, throwing a wrench into the administration’s effort to downsize the government. The ruling came just hours before the application deadline for the controversial program, which was spearheaded by Trump adviser Elon Musk.

Judge Issues Emergency Block on Program

U.S. District Judge George O’Toole Jr. in Boston ruled on Thursday to pause the program’s implementation until he hears legal arguments from both sides in a court hearing scheduled for Monday afternoon.

“The deadline to apply must be extended until the court has had a chance to review the legal concerns,” the judge stated.

Labor unions and Democratic lawmakers argue that the program was not authorized by Congress, raising concerns that participants may not receive their promised payouts.

White House Defends the Plan, Calls Remote Workers “Lazy”

Despite the legal setback, the White House defended the program, claiming it had already drawn 40,000 applicants who had agreed to resign while being paid through September 30.

Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt dismissed criticism of the plan, taking aim at remote federal workers:

“They don’t want to come into the office. If they want to rip off the American people, then they’re welcome to take this buyout,” she said.

Federal Workers React: “It’s Demoralizing”

The program has sparked fear and frustration among government employees. Many see it as an attack on public service.

• A federal worker in Colorado said that insults from the administration have demoralized those providing essential government services.
• Another worker in the Pacific Northwest resigned despite the judge’s decision, saying she could no longer comply with the administration’s elimination of diversity initiatives.

One employee at the Department of Education expressed concern that the deal included a waiver of the right to sue if the government failed to follow through on payments.

Unions and Democrats Warn: “It’s a Scam”

Opponents argue the administration is pressuring employees to leave while hinting that layoffs or firings may follow.

The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) sent an email Wednesday, warning that federal agencies could soon face restructuring, downsizing, and job cuts.

“The majority of agencies are likely to be downsized through restructurings, realignments, and reductions in force,” the email read.

It also stated that remaining employees would be required to show “loyalty” and meet stricter conduct standards.

Union leaders warn federal workers not to take the offer, arguing they may never be paid.

“It’s a scam, not a buyout,” said Everett Kelley, president of the American Federation of Government Employees.

Trump’s Vision: A Radical Government Overhaul

The program is part of Trump’s broader effort to shrink the federal workforce, an initiative led by Elon Musk, whom Trump appointed to run the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).

Musk’s team has drawn comparisons between this program and his management style at Twitter, where he gave employees a “fork in the road” ultimatum—stay or leave with a severance package.

Rachel Oglesby, Chief of Staff at the Department of Education, told employees:

“It’s exactly what it looks like. This is just one of the many tools to reform the civil service.”

However, concerns remain about whether Trump has the legal authority to distribute federal funds for these buyouts.

Federal Workers Protest “Forced Resignations”

Opposition to Musk’s restructuring efforts has sparked demonstrations outside federal buildings, including a protest Tuesday at the Office of Personnel Management.

• Dante O’Hara, a government employee, warned: “If people don’t speak up, we’re all going to lose our jobs and be replaced by political loyalists.”
• Dan Smith, a Maryland resident, said: “It’s one thing to downsize the government. It’s another to obliterate it.”
• Mary-Jean Burke, a physical therapist for the Department of Veterans Affairs, fears mass resignations could severely impact veteran healthcare services.

A Plan Too Good to Be True?

Skepticism over the buyout offer grew after a DOGE social media post encouraged employees to take the deal by saying:

“Take the vacation you always wanted, or just watch movies and chill, while receiving your full government pay and benefits.”

For many, the message was a red flag, making them second-guess the legitimacy of the offer.

What’s Next?

With the court hearing set for Monday, the fate of the deferred resignation program remains uncertain. Federal workers face tough decisions as Trump’s administration continues its efforts to shake up the government workforce.

As union leaders and lawmakers warn against the plan, the big question remains: Will the government follow through on its promises—or leave workers empty-handed?

Source

The post Judge Blocks Trump’s Plan to Pay Federal Workers to Quit appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

When President-elect Donald Trump announced that Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy would spearhead efforts to downsize the federal government, many public employees feared their jobs could be in jeopardy. Now, their concerns have deepened as Musk publicly names government workers, turning them into targets for online harassment.

Government Employees Under Fire

Recently, Musk reposted messages on his social platform, X, revealing the names and roles of individuals holding four relatively obscure climate-related government positions. These posts, viewed tens of millions of times, have led to an onslaught of negative attention and harassment for those named. At least one of the targeted employees has since deleted her social media accounts.

Although the information Musk shared is publicly accessible, the targeted individuals are low-profile civil servants whose roles don’t involve direct public engagement. Federal employees fear these actions could result in permanent personal and professional harm, including physical threats.

“This tactic sows fear among federal employees,” said Everett Kelley, president of the American Federation of Government Employees, which represents over 800,000 civilian workers. “It’s designed to intimidate and silence them.”

A Pattern of Intimidation

Musk has previously used his platform to criticize individuals, often resulting in significant personal backlash for those targeted. Mary “Missy” Cummings, a professor at George Mason University and a former senior advisor at the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), experienced this firsthand. Musk criticized her publicly due to her comments on Tesla’s driver-assistance technology, leading to online harassment and even death threats. Cummings said she had to relocate temporarily due to safety concerns.

“He uses intimidation to pressure people to quit,” Cummings explained. “It’s a signal to others in government agencies: ‘You’re next.’”

The Climate-Related Jobs in Musk’s Crosshairs

Among those targeted were employees in climate-related roles at various government agencies:

• US International Development Finance Corporation (DFC): Musk reposted a message criticizing the role of a “Director of Climate Diversification,” calling such positions “fake jobs.” The DFC focuses on funding projects in low-income countries to address climate challenges. After Musk’s post, the targeted employee deactivated her social media accounts.
• Department of Energy (DOE): Musk called out the chief climate officer, whose role involves reducing barriers to clean energy adoption. Ironically, this office helped fund Tesla in its early days, awarding the company a $465 million loan in 2010.
• Department of Health and Human Services (HHS): A senior advisor on environmental justice and climate change faced criticism. The HHS focuses on mitigating pollution impacts on vulnerable communities, a role established during the Biden administration.
• Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD): Musk mocked the salary of a climate advisor at HUD, adding laughing emojis to his post. The advisor’s work centers on addressing climate risks in housing.

Despite the backlash, the agencies involved declined to comment on individual employees or their positions.

Impact on Public Service

Federal employees say Musk’s actions discourage civil service and endanger individuals committed to public work. Some have already resigned out of fear of becoming the next target.

Experts on cyber harassment note that Musk’s tactics create a chilling effect, discouraging discussion and public accountability. However, they often hesitate to speak publicly, fearing Musk’s online influence.

Broader Debate on Bureaucracy

Ramaswamy, Musk’s collaborator in the proposed downsizing efforts, emphasized the problem is systemic, not personal. “Our opponent is the bureaucracy, not any individual,” he said, while acknowledging that most federal employees deserve respect.

Meanwhile, Musk has faced criticism for benefiting significantly from federal programs. The American Federation of Government Employees pointed out that contractors like Musk receive around $750 billion annually—far more than the $200 billion spent on the civilian federal workforce.

A Call to Action

Despite the risks, Cummings insists on speaking out. “Someone has to stand up to this,” she said. “I refuse to let him win on this point.”

As Musk continues to wield his platform against government employees, the line between public accountability and personal harassment grows ever blurrier, leaving federal workers to navigate an increasingly hostile environment.

Source

CNN Full Video

The post Elon Musk’s Posts Put Federal Workers in the Spotlight, Sparking Fear appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.