At a public Commission briefing on May 7th, Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) staff made clear that Congress has provided adequate funds for the agency to operate more effectively in this fiscal year, including by hiring needed staff.  The agency, however, is under a hiring freeze and the White House is prohibiting even the filling of mission critical staff vacancies identified by the agency.  Staff further disclosed that they were being directed to prepare for potential staff reductions, although no mission or safety-related rationales were provided for such action.  In fact, key performance metrics adopted by the Commission and provided to the Administration and Congress are unlikely to be met this year in part because of understaffing.  At the time, I spoke strongly against further staff reductions and advocated for strategically hiring to fill high priority vacancies.

On June 17, 2025, in response to this situation the Commission by majority vote adopted a policy prohibiting all Reductions in Force (RIFs), unless approved by a vote of the full Commission.[1]  I supported this policy to provide a backstop against the ham-fisted, haphazard, and harmful efforts to reduce the number of staff at the CPSC we have seen under this Administration.

The next week, I learned that contrary to Commission policy, the Acting Chairman unilaterally decided to issue RIF notifications to several staff members who are relied upon to produce vital, mission focused work. This is unacceptable and in contravention of law.

The Consumer Product Safety Act gives the Chairman significant authority to manage the agency.  But Section 4 of the statute also establishes that the Chairman must abide by the “general policies of the Commission and by such regulatory decisions, findings, and determinations that may be made as the Commission may by law be authorized to make.”  When I was in the Chairman’s seat, I occasionally lost a vote.   When that happened, I may have been disappointed, but it never occurred to me to disregard the policy established by my colleagues.

In a vote yesterday, the Commission reiterated and strengthened the June 17th policy.[2]  The policy makes clear that no agency funds, including staff time and resources, may be spent to take action toward RIFs.  Further, staff are directed to immediately withdraw any pending RIF notices. I hope this will put an end to the unnecessary RIFs directed by the Acting Chairman outside the process set forth in agency policy.

If the Acting Chairman and his leadership team disregard the policy and do not withdraw the RIFs, I would worry about not only consumer safety and the affected staff, but also the legal risk for the agency.   Affected staff could file administrative complaints or lawsuits in court to stop such actions.  This would waste agency resources and create an unneeded distraction from the product safety work of the agency.  In addition, use of agency funds for RIFs may raise Antideficiency Act issues because they would involve unauthorized spending.  I would be deeply concerned if the agency were to become entangled in litigation to pursue RIFs that are entirely unnecessary.

At this point, I hope that we can return our focus to the critical safety work of the CPSC.  We should be supporting our staff, not diminishing our agency’s most valuable asset and ultimately jeopardizing our safety mission.  I greatly appreciate the work of the staff during these incredibly difficult times.  Know that you and your work are valued greatly.

*The views expressed in this statement are solely those of Commissioner Hoehn-Saric and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Commission.

[1] See vote at:  https://www.cpsc.gov/s3fs-public/RCA-Commission-Directions-Commission-Policy-Reductions-Force-and-Staff-Details-620.pdf.

[2] See policy language at: https://www.cpsc.gov/s3fs-public/Time-Critical-Vote-Sheet-Reiterating-and-Strengthening-the-Commission-Policy-Regarding-Reductions-in-Force.pdf.  See vote results at:  https://www.cpsc.gov/s3fs-public/RCA-Reiterating_and_Strengthening_the_Commission_Policy_Regarding_Reductions_in_Force.pdf.