February 28th, 2025

Hundreds in US climate agency fired in latest cuts

NOAA laid off about 880 employees amid federal workforce reductions led by Elon Musk, raising concerns among lawmakers about public safety and the legality of the mass firings.

Read original articleLink Icon
Hundreds in US climate agency fired in latest cuts

Hundreds of employees at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) have been laid off as part of the Trump administration's efforts to reduce the federal workforce. Approximately 880 staff members, including weather forecasters, were terminated, with the cuts being overseen by Elon Musk, who leads the Department of Government Efficiency (Doge). NOAA, which previously employed around 12,000 people, is crucial for providing weather forecasts and emergency alerts, with its data being utilized by various sectors, including media and private weather services. The layoffs have raised concerns among lawmakers and climate scientists about the impact on public safety and the agency's ability to respond to severe weather events. Congressman Jared Huffman criticized the cuts, stating they would jeopardize essential programs and public safety. Additionally, confusion arose among federal employees following a directive from Musk to report their weekly accomplishments, which some agencies were instructed to ignore. A federal judge has also indicated that the mass firings of probationary employees may be unlawful, further complicating the situation.

- NOAA has laid off approximately 880 employees as part of federal workforce reductions.

- The cuts are part of a broader initiative led by Elon Musk to streamline government spending.

- NOAA's data is vital for public safety, providing weather forecasts and emergency alerts.

- Lawmakers express concern over the impact of layoffs on public safety and essential programs.

- A federal judge has suggested that the mass firings may be illegal, adding legal complications.

Link Icon 7 comments
By @inverted_flag - about 2 months
> "I was fired from my dream of working at NOAA. I'm so sorry to everyone also affected," climate scientist Zack Labe wrote on X. He said that he had worked on strengthening the agency's machine learning and AI tools.

https://xcancel.com/ZLabe/status/1895244032923836498#m

Note the replies

https://bsky.app/profile/zacklabe.com/post/3ljapdyp7os2u

By @JKCalhoun - about 2 months
> Huffman lamented the loss of "hundreds of scientists and experts at NOAA" who helped collect data that kept the public informed about dangerous weather events.

Perhaps I should learn to stop worrying and love this anti-science (anti-intellectual?) zeitgeist we find ourselves in.

(Bummer, seems divinginrods.com is taken, redirects to britishdowsers.org Gotta move fast, I guess.)

By @jmclnx - about 2 months
> "We continue to provide weather information, forecasts and warnings pursuant to our public safety mission," the NOAA spokesman added.

"except for anything related to Climate Change, there is no such thing as Climate Change per our all powerful co-dictators. Also, we hope to be closed down so we can be privatized, this way if you want forecasts you need to pay 20 USD per week to obtain them."

I think the spokesman left something out, so I added it here above. Best to know all the facts since Musk/Trump likes to skip or lie about the important stuff.

By @jorblumesea - about 2 months
move fast and break things, except now it's storm warnings, weather prediction and climate forecasting. What could go wrong?

In a country of ~340M and a budget of trillions, what does this really save? Having a few hundred scientists on staff seems worth it. Pretty obvious DOGE is just a propaganda campaign and won't accomplish any of its listed goals. It's just hurting the American people.

By @croes - about 2 months
> The cuts come as Elon Musk, as the head of the so-called Department of Government Efficiency (Doge)

Musk isn’t the head, Amy Gleason is.

Musk does not work for DOGE, nor are there any conflicts of interest between Musk's company and DOGE's activities.

By @foxglacier - about 2 months
What I don't understand about people complaining about governments removing programs and reducing their staff is that implies either the status quo is just right or it's already not enough. Should they have hired 900 new workers too or just left it alone? Where were the complaints about previous governments not growing them fast enough? Will they accept any correction from an overshoot in finding the right amount?

Apparently NOAA grew rapidly in the previous few years [1], so was it underfunded by Obama?

[1] https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF12406/3