New FAA Bill Bans Layoffs for One Year After Fatal Plane Crashes, Puts Congress in Charge of Any Staff Cuts

The “Don’t Cut FAA Workers Act of 2025” is straightforward: it puts a one-year freeze on mass layoffs at the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) immediately following any major aviation accident where a fatality occurs. The idea is to keep the agency stable and focused on safety and investigation during a critical, high-stress period. It’s a clear worker protection measure, but it also creates a new layer of bureaucracy for the agency’s leadership.

The Post-Accident Staffing Freeze

Under this bill, if there’s a plane crash that results in a death within 30 days, the FAA Administrator loses the authority to carry out any “mass layoff” for the next 12 months. This is a significant protection for the people who manage our airspace and inspect aircraft. The bill defines a mass layoff in two ways: either cutting 10 or more employees at a single FAA location (including remote workers assigned to that location) or cutting 250 or more employees across the entire agency, all within a 90-day window. This provision essentially ensures that the FAA maintains its institutional knowledge and staffing levels right when public scrutiny and safety demands are highest.

The Congressional Override Clause

This ban isn't absolute, but the escape hatch is political. If the FAA Administrator decides that a mass layoff is absolutely necessary during that one-year freeze—perhaps due to budget constraints or unrelated restructuring—they can only proceed if Congress explicitly signs off. The Administrator must notify Congress with a detailed plan of exactly who they plan to cut and why. Congress then has 60 days to pass a joint resolution approving the layoff. If they don’t approve it, the layoff doesn't happen. This moves a routine administrative decision—workforce management—into the legislative arena, giving elected officials direct sign-off power over FAA personnel decisions following a tragedy.

The Real-World Friction: Flexibility vs. Stability

For FAA employees, this bill is a clear win for job security during turbulent times. It prevents the agency from trying to quickly reorganize or cut staff under the pressure of a major incident, which could potentially distract from the core mission of investigating the accident and improving safety. However, for the FAA Administrator, this provision handcuffs their ability to manage the agency efficiently for a full year after an accident. If the FAA had already planned necessary staff reductions for efficiency—say, eliminating obsolete positions or merging offices—those plans are now paused, potentially costing taxpayers money by retaining unnecessary staff until the one-year clock runs out. The alternative is wading into a political fight in Congress just to get approval for what might be a simple, necessary administrative cut. That 60-day Congressional review period could become a significant bottleneck, trading administrative flexibility for workforce stability and political oversight.