200 word response 1 reference/intext citation
Due 2/14/2025
Etienne
State if you agree or disagree with the first part of their response as to their thoughts about “Schedule F” workforce restructuring; and 2) review their answer to the
second question and then explain how your ethics theory works differently then theirs and if your ethical theory would result in a different conclusion if the administrative agency is acting ethical or not in passing such a new agency rule for restructuring the agency workforce (ie. making many of the agency workers at-will political appointees)
Schedule F Executive Order and Ethical Relativism
The Schedule F executive order instituted by President Trump in 2020 established a system that converted federal civil servants into political appointees who lacked previous job security. While President Biden rescinded the executive order, it was reinstated in January 2025. This discussion explores the ethical implications of Schedule F through the lens of moral relativism.
Pros and Cons of Schedule F
Proponents advocate for Schedule F because they believe it creates better accountability and operational effectiveness among federal workers. Under this order, agency heads gain the authority to remove workers more efficiently, which helps maintain policy-aligned personnel across positions of influence (Ingle, 2025). According to supporters, this approach prevents bureaucratic resistance from interfering with policies from elected officials and streamlines government operations. However, critics argue that implementing Schedule F weakens the fundamental principles of impartial civil service administration for career employees. Removing job protection through this order establishes a framework where employers base hiring and dismissal decisions primarily on political affinity instead of professional skills (WBAL-TV 11 Baltimore, 2025). The lack of job protection under Schedule F threatens to diminish established expertise while introducing instability by lowering public confidence in federal agencies. Federal career professionals may avoid working for the federal government because extensive restructuring would create unstable job conditions.
Whether Schedule F Executive Order Is A Good Idea
The Schedule F executive order is flawed because it violates the fundamental principles of an impartial civil service system with its nonpartisan framework. The Schedule F executive order provides better accountability by removing workers who support opposing policies but increases political interference to a degree that destabilizes federal agencies (WUSA9, 2024). The protective measures surrounding civil service protect public servants by ensuring they deliver service based on qualifications instead of political allegiance. Eliminating protections for civil servants allows political leaders to hire and fire employees based on personal allegiances instead of qualifications, thus creating a situation that could undermine the effectiveness and integrity of public institutions.
Ethical Relativism and Schedule F
Under ethical relativism, people’s ethical standards emerge from their cultural backgrounds, societal guidelines, and personal beliefs. Within this ethical framework, no absolute standard of right or wrong exists since ethical principles differ from group to group and from context to context (Ingle, 2025). The reasons behind reclassifying federal employees through Schedule F depend entirely on how one aligns with cultural or political opinions under ethical relativism.
From one standpoint, swiftly dismissing workers could benefit governmental efficiency according to a specific administrative view. A government focusing on both fast policy execution and employee loyalty will find ethical alignment with Schedule F. Within this perspective, implementing political goal-focused agency restructuring is required to enable elected leaders to deliver their policies successfully (WBAL-TV 11 Baltimore, 2025). Conversely, others may argue that civil service protections maintain democratic standards, according to some scholars, because they restrict politicized control of public agencies. People who value expert-driven nonpartisan bureaucracy consider the removal of job protections as unethical. An independent federal workforce ensures that federal operations rely on expertise instead of political alignments (WUSA9, 2024). Under the ethical relativist framework, Schedule F’s ethics depend on what core values each specific society or administration upholds. From an ethical relativist perspective, Schedule F status depends on how each administration interprets its public meaning.
Conclusion
Schedule F remains a highly controversial executive order that provides both positive aspects and negative consequences. The scheduling system generates stronger governmental accountability while simplifying administrative processes but threatens to eliminate essential civil service safeguards and grant administration to direct political intervention. The moral assessment of this policy depends on how different observers interpret and value actions under ethical relativism concepts. Schedule F remains at the center of a public discussion that depicts it as vital administrative reform or endangerment to democratic systems.
