UPDATE: In a second ruling on Thursday, a federal judge in Baltimore directed 18 agencies to temporarily reinstate thousands of federal employees fired during their probationary periods. U.S. District Judge James Bredar ordered the agencies to reinstate these employees by March 17. The order affects some agencies not covered by other rulings — including the Departments of Health and Human Services, Education, Transportation and Homeland Security, as well as the Environmental Protection Agency and the General Services Administration. 

A federal judge is ordering several agencies to immediately reinstate thousands of recently fired probationary employees, having ruled that the Office of Personnel Management directed those firings.

Senior District Judge William Alsup, from the U.S. District Court for Northern California, ordered the Department of Veterans Affairs to “immediately order reinstatement to any and all probationary employees” terminated on or about Feb. 13 and 14.

Alsup said Thursday that VA’s termination of about 2,400 probationary employees was an “unlawful” directive from OPM and its acting director Chuck Ezell, and that “all such terminations were directed” by OPM.

The judge, is giving the VA seven days to submit a list of all probationary employees terminated on or about Feb. 13 and 14, explaining what has been done to comply with his order.

Alsup said the same relief is extended to the departments of Agriculture, Defense, Energy, Interior and Treasury. He added that the scope of agencies covered under his ruling may expand or narrow, depending on further proceedings in the case.

Alsup said agencies have statutory authority to order Reductions in Force, or mass layoffs of federal employees, but said “any terminations of agencies’ employees must be made by the agencies themselves.”

Plaintiffs in the case, brought by federal unions and advocacy groups, argued that federal procedures to coordinate a RIF often take a least a year, and that the Trump administration improperly fast-tracked that planning.

“What this case is about is really an attempt to do a Reduction in Force, but to force it through the OPM — to have OPM direct agencies to terminate probationary employees as an easy way to get a Reduction in Force underway,” Alsup said.

Alsup cited the case of a Forest Service scientist still serving in her probationary period, who was recently fired for poor performance — despite being rated “fully successful in every category” in her most recent performance review.

The judge said a clear pattern emerged, where agencies followed a similar template to fire most of their probationary employees, citing underperformance, despite receiving favorable reviews.

“It is sad, a sad day, when our government would fire some good employee and say it was based on performance, when they know good and well that’s a lie,” Alsup said.

Agencies supposedly firing these probationary employees for performance reasons, he added, was a “gimmick” to expedite mass firings.

“The law always allows you to fire somebody for performance. So OPM was thinking, ‘OK, if we tell them to use this template letter, that’ll give us an argument against the Reduction in Force Act, or maybe some other act, the Civil Service Reform Act,’” Alsup said.

Alsup said the Reduction in Force Act authorizes an agency to lay off employees, so long as it complies with the law’s requirements.

“The words that I give you today should not be taken as some kind of wild and crazy judge in San Francisco has said that the administration cannot engage in a Reduction in Force. I’m not saying that at all. Of course it does. It has to comply with the statutory requirements,” he said.

OPM’s acting director rejected a court order to appear for cross-examination or sit for a deposition, and the federal government withdrew a declaration he previously submitted in the case.

Instead of offering Ezell or other agency heads for cross-examination, the Trump administration submitted press releases from agencies stating their leaders decided to fire probationary employees.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Kelsey Helland said the press releases show agency leaders “were taking credit publicly for the decisions.”

“We do not deny that OPM had a role in coordinating these efforts. I think the documents that we’ve put forward are very clear about that,” Helland said.

Alsup, however, said the Trump administration, by not allowing the deposition of witnesses, was not “helping me get at the truth.”