There is a document in a federal records office somewhere that hardly anyone ever reads. For many years, the Handbook of Occupational Groups and Families has subtly regulated one of the most important issues in American civic life: what precisely does the government employ people to do? For the first time in what seems like a very long time, someone opened it last week and began crossing things out.
The federal occupational handbook will no longer include 115 job titles, according to an announcement made by the Office of Personnel Management. Among those killed were “bowling equipment repairing,” “buffing and polishing,” and “elevator operator.” It’s similar to looking through a great-aunt’s attic when you read the list; you keep discovering items you didn’t know existed, some of which were once useful and most of which are no longer. Although they won’t lose their jobs, about 5,000 federal employees will have their job titles changed. It’s not a layoff; it’s administrative surgery.
| Key Information | Details |
|---|---|
| Governing Body | U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) — the federal government’s HR agency |
| OPM Director | Scott Kupor, former venture capitalist |
| Announcement Date | Late April / Early May 2026 |
| Job Titles Removed (Phase 1) | 115 job descriptions removed from the federal occupational handbook |
| Employees Affected (Phase 1) | Approximately 5,000 federal workers — titles changed, jobs retained |
| Total Federal Workforce | Over 2 million civilian employees |
| Long-Term Goal | Reduce total federal job titles by roughly 25 percent — at least 100 more titles to be cut |
| Reference Document | Handbook of Occupational Groups and Families — the obscure OPM manual listing every federal position |
| Reform Model | “Broad-banding” — private-sector practice of grouping jobs under wider descriptions |
| Parallel Reform (Pakistan) | Pakistan’s federal government has abolished or phased out 55,545 posts as part of its own rightsizing initiative |
| Next Phase Timeline | Full rewrite of all federal job descriptions targeted for completion by 2027 |
This is just the beginning, according to venture capitalist turned OPM director Scott Kupor, who is spearheading the initiative. At least 100 more job descriptions will eventually be eliminated because he wants to reduce the total number of federal job titles by roughly a quarter. There’s a feeling that this is more about what comes next—a complete rethinking of how the government defines, categorizes, and employs its workforce—than it is about the specific titles vanishing. That concept is more expansive than it may seem.
Kupor is utilizing a private sector concept known as “broad-banding.” The idea is to group positions under broader umbrellas and give managers actual discretion over who they hire and how much they pay, rather than describing jobs in fine, bureaucratic detail (the current Equal Opportunity Compliance series runs to 72 pages and involves nine separate ranking factors). For years, the majority of big businesses have operated in this manner. In contrast, the federal government has been operating a classification system designed for a world that no longer exists, including jobs that haven’t been created in the private sector since the middle of the 20th century.
It’s still genuinely unclear if this results in better government or just leaner government. One anonymous federal HR official described the reform as the most sensible and data-driven change OPM has made in recent memory, which is either encouraging or a comment on how low the bar has been set. The reform has received unusually positive reviews from within the bureaucracy. It’s difficult to ignore the fact that the administration pursuing this reform has also been making widespread cuts to federal employees, and it’s difficult to distinguish between the two. Although they are not the same policy, streamlining job categories and eliminating the workforce have similar goals.
What Kupor intends to do with IT hiring might be the more intriguing aspect. The current description for the information technology category, which is one of the biggest in the federal government, calls for candidates to have a college degree or a certain number of years of experience. These requirements have nothing to do with an applicant’s ability to perform the job. Instead, skill-based assessments would be the focus of the proposed rewrite. In support of his claim that technical aptitude should take precedence over credentials on paper, Kupor cited the example of a 19-year-old software developer who encountered internal resistance in part due to his lack of a degree. It’s a valid point. Additionally, hiring managers in the private sector have been making this decision for about ten years.
There are two ways to interpret this as it develops. One interpretation is a long-overdue modernization in which the government quietly lets go of decades’ worth of accumulated bureaucracy and finally catches up to how the rest of the working world operates. The other version is less clear-cut; it’s a reform that seems good on paper, but its true impact won’t be apparent until managers begin using their new discretion and we see who gains and loses from it. Perhaps the handbook is becoming thinner. The question of whether the government it describes becomes more capable is a different one, and the answer is likely to come in a few years.
