Involuntary Separation Group v. USAGMFiled: April 6, 2026
Former VOA and USAGM employees challenge separation offers
The former employees seek reinstatement after filing a consolidated appeal with the Merit Systems Protection Board.
By Sonya Laurence Green, Kane Farabaugh, Amy Katz, and Ajdin Muratovic
Updated
A group of 59 former Voice of America (VOA) and U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM) employees is challenging the legality of Deferred Resignation Program (DRP), Voluntary Early Retirement Authority (VERA), and Voluntary Separation Incentive Payment (VSIP) offers made by the agency after March 5, 2025.
The case arises from the unprecedented disruption of VOA and USAGM following actions taken by agency leadership in 2025. Many employees accepted separation offers amid fears of mass layoffs and the possible elimination of their positions. The appellants argue that those decisions were made under extraordinary circumstances and that the separation offers are legally “voidable” because they were processed during a period when a federal court later found that Kari Lake lacked legal authority to act on behalf of USAGM.
The case began on April 6, 2026, when former VOA employees Sonya Laurence Green, Kane Farabaugh, Amy Katz, and Ajdin Muratovic filed a proposed class action with the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB). In May 2026, MSPB Administrative Judge Paul DiTomasso declined to certify the matter as a class action but ruled that affected employees could pursue individual appeals and later seek consolidation. By the court’s June 10 deadline, 59 former employees had filed appeals seeking remedies that could include reinstatement and back pay.
On June 12, 2026, the MSPB consolidated those appeals into a single proceeding, formally designated “USAGM Involuntary Separation Group 1 Consolidation v. U.S. Agency for Global Media.” The case is now moving forward under a schedule established by the MSPB as the parties prepare their next filings.
Recent statements from the appellants
Former VOA employees file individual appeals with the MSPB
Published
A group of 59 former Voice of America and U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM) employees has filed individual appeals with the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB), seeking remedies that could include reinstatement and back pay after employees accepted separation offers last year amid fears of widespread layoffs.
The filings follow a May 6, 2026, ruling by MSPB Administrative Judge Paul DiTomasso declining a request to adjudicate the matter as a class action when it was first submitted on April 6, 2026, as “Green v. USAGM.” The judge noted that while a class was not certified, affected employees who wished to participate could file individual appeals by June 10, 2026, and later seek consolidation. The appellants are following that procedural recommendation.
The appeals challenge the legality of the Deferred Resignation Program (DRP), Voluntary Early Retirement Authority (VERA), and Voluntary Separation Incentive Payment (VSIP) offers made through the USAGM after March 5, 2025. The appellants argue that these separation offers are legally “voidable” because they were authorized during a period when a federal court found Kari Lake lacked legal authority to act on behalf of the agency.
Former VOA employees challenge voluntary separation agreements
Published
A group of former Voice of America employees has filed a class action case before the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB), challenging the legality of the Deferred Resignation Program (DRP), Voluntary Early Retirement Authority (VERA), and Voluntary Separation Incentive Payment (VSIP) offers made since March 5, 2025, through the U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM).
The complaint follows a recent U.S. District Court ruling by Judge Royce Lamberth finding that Kari Lake did not have the legal authority to take certain actions on behalf of USAGM. The plaintiffs argue that, as a result, the separation offers extended during that period are legally “voidable.”
The case seeks potential remedies including reinstatement and compensation for affected employees who choose to participate.
“We were led to believe that widespread layoffs were imminent. People had to weigh how they would support their families, maintain health insurance, and, in some cases, whether they would be forced to relocate.”
— Sonya Laurence Green, a lead appellant and former senior editor at VOA