Some workers at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration who were fired in February, rehired in March and then fired for a second time in April, say the agency has missed some salary payments during that period, and failed to have their health insurance plans restored or provide basic paperwork.
“I have described it as intentional chaos and weaponized incompetence,” said Kayla Besong, who did not receive one of her last paychecks after she was initially fired from her job as a physical scientist at the Pacific Tsunami Warning Center. Besong, who issued tsunami alerts as part of her job, was later rehired and then fired again.
Another NOAA worker said she underwent a $70,000 surgery only to find out after the fact that she didn’t have active insurance coverage.
The Department of Commerce and NOAA fired more than 600 probationary employees at the agency alone on Feb. 27, including hurricane hunters, meteorologists and storm modelers. In mid-March, judges ordered many of those workers to be reinstated and NOAA placed the workers on paid administrative leave instead. Last week, the Supreme Court paused some of the reinstatements and NOAA chose to fire the workers for a second time.
The agency’s limited communication with its personnel has prevented workers from receiving unemployment benefits and left some forced to pay out-of-pocket charges for health care that should have been covered while under the agency’s employ, according to the Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER), a nonprofit organization that supports environmental workers. Tim Whitehouse, the executive director of PEER, said he’d talked to about a dozen NOAA workers seeking help and reporting a variety of human resources issues.
Neither NOAA nor the Department of Commerce responded to an interview request and a request for comment from NBC News.
Critics say these events illustrate how unprepared the federal agencies were to execute the mass firings the Trump administration has argued are necessary to make the federal government more efficient.
“To me, it just points to a deliberate lack of planning,” Whitehouse said. “That’s the strategy. They don’t care. It’s creating all these problems for employees.”
PEER outlined its concerns in a Tuesday letter to Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, claiming that “sloppy record-keeping” and “illegal actions” by the Department of Commerce were harming NOAA workers.
“These problems are not the result of the human resource staff at NOAA, but the failure of the Department of Commerce to follow the law and provide the necessary support,” the letter said.
Three NOAA workers interviewed by NBC News said the only communication they have received directly from the agency during the legal back-and-forth are four short memos of legalese containing few details about the practical aspects of a job loss or reinstatement. The documents included two firing notices, a reinstatement notice and the agency’s request for current contact information.
Several workers told NBC News they had to seek help from former colleagues still working at NOAA for basic human resources tasks and information, drawing current employees away from their typical responsibilities.
Andy Hazelton, a former hurricane modeling specialist, said he’s never received any formal separation paperwork or instructions from the agency.
“There hasn’t been any communication about what’s happening. It’s a mess,” Hazelton said. “My paycheck had health premiums taken out, but they haven’t said our benefits have been restored. It’s not at all clear what’s happening.”
After she was initially fired, Ya’el Seid-Green, a former special assistant in NOAA’s Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research, said she fretted over whether to postpone a hip surgery she had scheduled in January.
The surgery was slated for April 9. Seid-Green reached out to a former supervisor and received an indication that health insurance would be restored while she was on administrative leave. Insurance premiums continued to be deducted from her paychecks.
But, when Seid-Green got the surgery, which has an estimated cost of about $70,000, she learned that her insurance had not been active. The next day, on April 10, NOAA fired Seid-Green for a second time.
“I know I’ll figure something out, but it has been very stressful,” Seid-Green said, adding that she’s struggled to get answers on how to proceed from NOAA or the Department of Commerce.
Besong, meanwhile, said she was missing pay owed from when she was initially fired. She’s not been able to rectify the error.
“I’ve had to reach out to my local office,” Besong said, referring to former colleagues. “They’re really doing the best they can and they’re not receiving any guidance.”
Besong said she worries her firing will prevent her from getting a federal job in the future. Despite favorable reviews from supervisors, Besong will now have to disclose on federal job applications that she was terminated from a federal position.
“Checking that box will greatly diminish or eliminate prospects of moving on to the next round,” said Whitehouse, who often deals with federal employment issues.
Despite the confusion, Besong would like to return to her job as a physical scientist.
“I was hoping when all this settles down in two to four years, I could reapply and get back to my job that way,” Besong said, adding that she now feared her application would be screened out through the federal job application website. “I don’t even know if I’ll make it through the USA JOBS hiring process now.”
