Federal hiring is up 26 percent this year, yet the government continues to lose more people than it’s gaining. The increase itself may only seem big coming off an exceptionally low 2025 baseline after a wave of deferred resignations, reductions in force and other departures shrank the workforce dramatically.

Even among the 47 occupational groups where recruitment has ramped up this year, 45 still have fewer employees than they did at the end of 2025.

So is the federal workforce recovering, reinventing itself—or just trying to staunch the bleeding?

Jeff Neal, retired DHS chief human capital officer and principal at Chief HRO, says some of the hiring now underway is less about rebuilding the workforce than correcting earlier cuts that went too deep. He describes those as “oops” jobs—positions that were eliminated and then had to be restored, because agencies still needed the work done.

Neal also says that immigration and border-related positions are a major hiring focus right now, particularly at DHS and its components.

The bigger question though, he says, is what happens to the workforce after the immediate hiring needs are addressed. The federal government has already lost large amounts of experience, and replacing that experience isn’t as simple as posting a job and filling it.

There’s another problem hiding behind the hiring numbers. The people responsible for hiring have been cut, too.

Neal estimates the federal HR workforce itself is down about 15 percent, and while it might seem easy to replace federal HR professionals with people from the private sector, he explains that the skills don’t transfer neatly.

Federal hiring, classification and labor relations operate differently enough that new HR employees can require years of training to reach full performance. At the same time, many of the robust federal HR training programs that once existed have disappeared.

That creates an unusual problem, in that the government needs to hire more people, but some of the institutional expertise required for that hiring is also lacking. Neal says some newer HR professionals are relying heavily on applicant-tracking and rating technology without enough experience to evaluate whether the results make sense.

As he put it, “They just trust what the technology tells them,” which unfortunately leads to a high volume of HR-screened candidates that agencies deem unqualified for the job.

Neal describes the current hiring rebound as a repair effort, in large part, but with reshaping intent mixed in to fulfill the current administration’s vision of what government should be.

And while Neal is clear that the way it happened has been extremely damaging with long-term consequences to the operation of government, he isn’t advocating to return to the pre-cut workforce either. There were problems before the recent reductions, he says, including hiring and workforce-sizing issues.

The challenge now is determining what government needs to accomplish its mission and building a right-sized workforce to do that. This includes fixing a federal hiring system that Neal calls “ridiculously complicated.” Unlike the private sector, where an employer has a straightforward path from recruitment to evaluation to hire, federal agencies have dozens of hiring mechanisms, each with its own rules and requirements that can bog down the process and artificially elevate lesser-qualified candidates.

For federal employees watching the workforce change around them and wondering if there’s still another shoe left to drop on their own job, Neal offers pragmatic advice on how to keep an ear out:

1. Your agency’s budget request. Look at what the agency is asking for. Not just the headline number, but what programs and functions it’s proposing to fund or reduce.
2. The president’s budget and its supporting documents. Neal says these can contain considerable detail about what an agency is expected to do, assuming Congress goes along with the proposal.
3. Your agency’s job advertisements. Are they still recruiting in your occupational area? Neal specifically suggests watching whether your agency is hiring and where those openings are concentrated.
4. What the secretary or department leadership is saying publicly. Neal says speeches can contain useful clues about what leadership is planning for an agency and potentially for specific jobs or functions.
5. Elimination by relocation. Neal also says to look for government intent to move your position geographically. The ultimatum of moving your job—and your life—elsewhere can effectively eliminate your position, even when the job endures.

While none of these are foolproof measures to predict what could happen to your role or at your agency, they do offer feds perhaps the best hope of a bellwether.

For Neal’s full perspective on federal hiring trends, concerns and inefficiencies, as well as advice for what to do with it, listen to the entire Fed Thread conversation.

Catch more conversations on podcast platforms, YouTube or on the Fed Thread hub page.

Copyright © 2026 Federal News Network. All rights reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.