Public service redundancies nearly quadruple, but only 20 forced exits in 2025-26

Latest APS data shows voluntary packages and incentive-to-retire deals dominated a record retrenchment year

By LineZotpaper
Published
Read Time2 min
More federal public servants were retrenched in 2025-26 than in the previous three years combined, with total retrenchments nearly quadrupling to 1328, new Australian Public Service employment data shows, yet only 20 of those exits were involuntary.

The latest Australian Public Service (APS) employment figures reveal 1328 retrenchments in 2025-26, up from 352 the previous year and exceeding the 1198 recorded across 2022-23 to 2024-25 combined.

The vast majority of departures were voluntary. The Canberra Times reports that 1193 ongoing employees accepted voluntary redundancy packages, while 20 public servants were subjected to involuntary redundancy across federal agencies. A further 95 Senior Executive Service (SES) staff departed under formal "incentive to retire" arrangements, and 20 retrenchments were recorded as an unclassified redundancy.

Under Australian Public Service Commission (APSC) reporting, total retrenchments capture all formal separations where an employee is excess to requirements, including voluntary redundancies, involuntary retrenchments, SES incentive-to-retire packages and unclassified exits.

Executive ranks bore the brunt of the wave. Executive level (EL 1 and EL 2) and SES staff accounted for 832 of the total retrenchments, or 62.7 per cent: 435 at EL 1, 292 at EL 2 and 105 across the SES ranks. Among non-executive staff, APS 6 officers recorded 271 retrenchments and APS 5 officers 142.

The Social Services department led all agencies with 319 retrenchments in 2025-26, and several departments ran voluntary redundancy rounds aimed at contracting their executive-level ranks.

§

Analysis

Why This Matters

  • The APS workforce is being reshaped at a record pace, with the heaviest losses in executive and senior executive ranks, which could change how federal departments are staffed and managed.
  • The split between voluntary and forced exits matters: only 20 of 1328 retrenchments were involuntary, indicating the government is relying on incentives and packages rather than compulsory cuts.
  • Large-scale departures raise questions about morale and service delivery, particularly in agencies such as Social Services, which recorded the most retrenchments.

Background

The Australian Public Service is the federal government's civilian workforce, spanning policy departments and service delivery agencies. Redundancy rounds have been used across the public service as agencies are asked to reduce staff numbers, and in recent years several departments have run voluntary programs targeting senior and executive roles. The 2025-26 figures, recorded under the Albanese government, mark a sharp acceleration of that trend.

Key Perspectives

Australian Public Service Commission and agencies: The redundancy wave is presented as orderly workforce management, with voluntary packages the dominant mechanism and forced exits kept to a small number.

Public service unions and affected staff: Concerns centre on morale and the scale of departures. The Social Services department, which led with 319 retrenchments, has seen morale drop after its mass redundancy round, according to reporting referenced in the data release.

Critics: The concentration of retrenchments in executive and senior executive ranks, 62.7 per cent of the total, raises questions about institutional memory and whether frontline capacity is being protected while senior structures are trimmed.

What to Watch

  • Whether retrenchment numbers remain elevated in the next APS employment data release or return closer to pre-2025-26 levels.
  • Which departments follow Social Services in running further voluntary redundancy rounds aimed at senior staff.
  • Any response from unions or parliament to the record scale of departures and the comparatively small number of forced exits.

Sources

Zotpaper

Written by software from the reporting listed above, scored by an automated standards desk, and published without a person reading it first. If something here is wrong, tell the editor and it will be put right.