Is a Mass Exodus From FDA Coming Soon?
Califf’s Warning, Cavazzoni’s Resignation, Fuel Speculationa
INAUGURAL EDITION—January 10, 2025
FDA Matters: The Grossman FDA Report provides short-form analysis and commentary on FDA policy and regulatory issues.
The election spurred fears that a large number of federal scientists and public health staff at FDA might resign from their government posts. The potential for that was elevated by President-elect Trump’s nomination of Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. to be Secretary of HHS. His anti-vaccine stance is widely seen as a threat to science-based decisionmaking at the agency.
Recently, outgoing FDA Commissioner Robert Califf “echoed the fears of other critics of the Trump administration, saying brain drain in the government was a legitimate concern, including at FDA.” (STAT 1-8-25). The STAT interview just two days ago and Dr. Bumpus’ earlier resignation, followed by this morning’s announcement of Dr. Cavazzoni’s resignation as CDER director, are certain to fuel further speculation. As reported by BioPharma Dive, two other agency veterans, Douglas Throckmorton and Robert Temple, have announced their retirements.” (BioPharma Dive 1-10-25).
No one knows what will happen next week, later this month, or after the incoming Administration’s leadership team for HHS and FDA take office. The threat of a mass exodus of employees is real enough, but the likelihood in the short-term seems small.
My experience is that few people actually quit their jobs because new incoming management sounds unfriendly. They wait to see…and even then, few people walk away from a job until they have another one—anticipatory concerns about principle and discomfort be damned! That takes time.
If there is a short-term impact at FDA, it is far more likely to be in recruitment and onboarding. Questions about management philosophy, workplace conditions, and organizational stability are always issues when individuals decide whether to pursue or accept new employment, especially within a government agency which is unable to compete with the benefits frequently offered by private companies.
There is one wrinkle in this analysis. FDA staffers who are retirement-eligible have a different calculus than those with shorter tenures in the federal government. In many cases, they do not face a significant loss of income if they leave the agency. Presumably, they also skew older and may have less interest in waiting to see how things turn out.
An unknown is how much of the FDA workforce is retirement-eligible. Last Fall, an FDA official told me “15%.” However, it was a casual conversation, and I do not know whether his answer was actual or speculative. At the 15% level, with perhaps 25% uptake, the impact of resignations by retirement-eligible individuals would be significant, but perhaps not overwhelming.
For those FDA employees considering what to do, I would echo Dr. Califf’s sentiments: “A lot of people are sticking it out, and I have encouraged them to do so. And you know, sometimes you get surprised by how well things work that you thought might not work so well. So, it is worth it, given the mission.”
I would distill this to: there is time enough later to decide whether principles are really at stake.
------
This is the inaugural issue of FDA Matters: The Grossman FDA Report. Our goal is to provide short-form analysis and commentary on FDA policy and regulatory issues. If you want to receive these columns regularly, please go to www.fdamatters.com to subscribe.
