Providing for the Closing of Executive Departments and Agencies of the Federal Government on December 24, 2024

Overview

Objective and Scope: Executive Order 14129, signed by President Joseph R. Biden Jr., mandates the closure of all executive departments and agencies of the federal government on December 24, 2024. This directive follows a tradition of observing Christmas Eve as a holiday to allow federal employees additional time with family and to prepare for Christmas Day festivities. While not uncommon, the decision to close government offices recognizes cultural and social values around the holiday period.

Implementation Framework: The order stipulates that all federal employees are to be excused from duty unless their roles are deemed essential for reasons of national security, defense, or other critical public needs. This discretionary power given to the heads of departments allows for necessary operational continuity in critical areas while broadly acknowledging the holiday's significance to the workforce at large.

Comparison to Previous Practices: Consistent with previous administrations, this order reflects an understanding of the importance of morale and work-life balance for federal employees. It aligns with past executive decisions to grant days off around major holidays, underscoring the president's acknowledgment of federal workforce contributions and the need for government flexibility during holiday seasons.

Relation to Executive Order 11582 and Other Statutes: The executive order explicitly references Executive Order 11582, signed by President Nixon, which governs pay and leave for federal employees. By positioning this closure within the scope of existing legal frameworks, the order ensures compliance with established statutes related to federal employee benefits, minimizing ambiguity in its implementation.

Expected Impact on Federal Operations: While the closure may slow down certain government services temporarily, the strategic allowance for essential operations to continue mitigates any lasting disruptions. The recurring nature of these closures ensures that there is a structured approach to handling such days, with departments likely having contingency plans for maintaining critical functions.

Legal and Policy Implications

Legal Frameworks Involved: Executive Order 14129 operates within the constitutional authority of the president to manage the executive branch. It relies on established statutory frameworks, including 5 U.S.C. 5546 and 6103(b), which manage employee compensation and public holidays, thereby sidestepping the need for legislative input or changes to existing law.

Balance of Authority: The order maintains the traditional scope of presidential powers without overstepping into legislative territory. By leaving room for department heads to exercise discretion, it exemplifies respect for the decentralized nature of federal authority, allowing individual agencies to meet specific operational demands.

Policy Considerations and Precedence: While primarily administrative, these closures can be viewed in the context of broader policies promoting family values and employee well-being. Historically, such orders bolster workforce morale and are generally uncontroversial, thus reinforcing bipartisan support for policies that respect cultural traditions.

Interaction with Budgetary and Administrative Policies: Section 5’s note on the order's implementation being subject to appropriation availability highlights fiscal prudence. It ensures that any administrative costs associated with employee leave are accounted for under existing budget constraints, thus reinforcing fiscal responsibility.

Non-creation of Legal Rights: By explicitly stating that the order does not create enforceable rights, the administration limits potential legal claims or disputes arising from misinterpretations, thereby precluding litigation that could complicate implementation or incur unforeseen legal liabilities.

Who Benefits

Federal Employees: The most direct beneficiaries of this order are federal employees, who are granted an additional holiday without any change to their pay or leave entitlements. This action not only enhances their work-life balance but also serves as a gesture of appreciation for their service, boosting morale and job satisfaction.

The Public Sector as a Whole: By implementing these closures regularly, the government fosters a culture that values the personal well-being of its workers. Happy and rested employees are often more productive and engaged, benefiting the public sector's efficiency and operational effectiveness in the long term.

Local Economies and Small Businesses: Communities surrounding federal installations may experience economic boosts as employees use their day off for holiday preparations, shopping, and leisure activities. Increased consumer spending often correlates with holiday closures, which can provide temporary economic uplift to local businesses.

Families and Communities: As employees spend more time at home, families benefit from the strengthened social bonds. This may have a ripple effect, improving community well-being and cohesion, particularly in times when social isolation has been prevalent due to remote work or pandemic-related adjustments.

Government Efficiency in Public Relations: The administration itself benefits by reinforcing its image as worker-friendly and culturally savvy. It capitalizes on the goodwill generated by such initiatives, bolstering public perceptions of an empathetic government that considers employee welfare as part of its operational ethos.

Who Suffers

Essential Workers: Employees deemed essential and required to work on December 24 may perceive the closure as inequitable, particularly if their roles do not substantially differ in urgency compared to others who receive the day off. This may affect morale among some sections of the workforce.

Sectors Dependent on Federal Interactions: Businesses and individuals needing critical federal services could encounter delays due to the closures, particularly those reliant on timely processing such as permits, approvals, or regulatory oversight, leading to potential inconvenience or financial impacts.

Public Perception Challenges: Critics may argue that such closures contribute to inefficiency within the government, particularly those pointing towards already perceived lethargy or backlog issues in federal processes. This can fuel narratives centered on the need for reform or privatization.

Opportunity for Policy Detractors: Partisan opponents of the administration may use the closure as fodder for criticism, casting it as an unnecessary cost to taxpayers. Such rhetoric can contribute to political polarization, especially if framed as an example of perceived governmental largesse.

International Observers and Diplomacy: International counterparts may perceive holiday-related closures as reflective of a less consistent government presence, potentially affecting diplomatic engagements. However, the global recognition of Christmas as a holiday usually mitigates any significant diplomatic concern.

Historical Context

Past Executive Practices: The closure of federal offices during holiday times has historical precedence, utilized by several administrations as a means to enhance work-life balance for federal workers. Such orders resonate with past traditions that reflect shifting societal values around labor and family.

Alignment with Biden Administration Policies: The Biden administration's commitment to social policies that emphasize equality and well-being is demonstrated through this executive order. It aligns with broader Democratic values that valorize the workforce, reflecting consistency with the administration's goals.

Broader Executive Trends: On a macro scale, holiday closures contribute to the evolving dialogue around employee rights and benefits within the federal system, part of larger discussions on the necessity of reforming public sector labor practices to suit modern societal expectations.

Political Dimension and Implications: Though typically nonconfrontational, such orders can be situated within the political narrative as examples of executive discretion aimed at fostering positive sentiment among workers, thus potentially enhancing electoral favorability among federal employees.

Reflection on Cultural Shifts: This practice can also be viewed as part of the broader cultural milieu of accommodating diverse religious and social practices, underscoring changing public expectations and acceptance toward institutional flexibility during prominent holidays.

Potential Controversies or Challenges

Litigation and Legal Disputes: While unlikely given the consensual nature of holiday closures, any dispute would likely center on the application of essential service designations. Questions may arise concerning inconsistent applications among agencies which could provoke legal scrutiny.

Congressional Criticism: Legislative opposition might emerge from lawmakers advocating for smaller government footprints or those highlighting fiscal prudence, critiquing the efficacy of widespread government closures from the standpoint of taxpayer costs or delayed services.

Operational Challenges Within Agencies: Departments might face logistical difficulties in determining which operations qualify as essential, potentially leading to claims of favoritism or irrationality, affecting internal cohesion or employee satisfaction.

Critiques in Media or Public Discourse: An administration's decision to close offices can draw media ire if framed as indicative of larger inefficiencies within government bureaucracy, thereby becoming the focus of public debate regarding operational productivity.

Future Precedent and Policy Framing: Establishing a precedent for such closures may set expectations for future administrations, imposing an informal obligation to adhere to similar practices lest they risk employee dissatisfaction or media controversy. This consideration frames the decision as strategic within the broader continuum of administrative practices.