Trump finds another way to hit thousands of federal workers.

The Trump administration plans to get thousands of workers from the United States Department of Agriculture outside the Washington region, DC, forcing them to move to distant offices if they want to keep their jobs.

The Secretary of Agriculture, Brooke Rollins, announced the plan in a press release on Thursday, with his office claiming that the measure “would better align” the agency “with its founding mission to support US agriculture, livestock and forestry.”

Rollins said the department uses around 4,600 workers in the DC area, but by the time the transition is over, it plans to have “no more than 2,000” in the capital of the nation and its surroundings. It also hopes to close most of its buildings in the area, including an important research center.

DC area employees would be transferred to “hub” locations in Raleigh, North Carolina; Kansas City, Missouri; Indianapolis, Indiana; Fort Collins, Colorado and Salt Lake City, Utah, said the agency.

Rollins acknowledged that the measure would create “personal interruption for you and your families”, in a video aimed at the agency’s employees.

“This decision was not held lightly,” he said.

Everett Kelley, president of the The American Federation of Government employees, a union that represents USDA workers, told News themezone in a statement that the measure would damage the agency. He pointed out that, despite common erroneous perceptions, 85% of federal employees already live outside the Washington, DC and DC region.

“But DC is the center of the government of our nation for a reason, since it facilitates the necessary coordination between senior leadership and field offices and ensures that the agencies are at the headquarters of the table when decisions are made in the White House and in Congress,” Kelley said.

Brendan Smialowski through Getty Images

The announced closure of the Belttsville Agricultural Research Center was highlighted in Maryland as particularly wrong, describing it as “Crown Jewel” for critical research.

“I worry that this reorganization is just the last attempt to eliminate USDA workers and minimize their critical work,” Kelley added.

The relocation proposal reminds a similar and controversial plan in the USDA of Trump’s first presidency.

In 2019, the then Secretary of Agriculture of Sonny Perdue announced that two agencies within the USDA would be relocated to Kansas City to save money and place employees in Heartland. The measure crushed the morals and led many workers to go instead of flying the lives of their families; He also fed a successful union organization campaign among USDA staff.

Mick Mulvaney, who had served as Trump’s budget director, then boasted how many resignations had stimulated the plan.

News themezone reported earlier this year about how that movement was still chasing the agency and its mission more than five years later. A USDA economist said the relocation plan seemed to be little more than a massive dismissal disguised.

“We had many people who had spent their careers working in very specific fields, very niche questions,” said the economist. “And when they left, it was so sudden and abrupt that there was no time to bring to the next generation. You had to leave your whole job and leave.”

Rollins argued that pushing workers to other states would benefit the agency’s work.

“President Trump was chosen to make a real change in Washington, and we are doing exactly that when moving our key services outside the road and large US cities throughout the country,” he said.

The proposal is aligned with the broader attacks of Trump against the Federal Work Force.

Since he took power in January, the Administration has done everything possible to expel federal government employees, either by dismissing them by legally doubtful means, attracting to leave through early retirement offers or making them so miserable that they decide to quit smoking.

More than 15,000 USDA employees took the proposal of “deferred resignation” of the Administration earlier this year, raising concerns about how would they continue applying food security, administer agricultural programs and conduct critical investigations. In fact, many chose to let the leadership of the USDA had to Encourage some to change their minds.