Tag: politics

Silence Gets You Nowhere – FDA Layoffs

Add me to the list of people who are disheartened y the silence of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America and the Biotechnology Innovation Organization to the cuts at the FDA. In an interest to write something that should be coming loud and clear from our industry groups, I give you…

The Impact of Recent FDA Layoffs on Agency Capacity and Public Health

The recent wave of layoffs at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), enacted as part of broader illegal federal workforce reductions under the Trump administration, has exacerbated long-standing staffing challenges at the agency. By targeting probationary employees—recent hires and those promoted within the past two years—the cuts have disproportionately affected early-career professionals with cutting-edge technical expertise, disrupted workforce development pipelines, and weakened oversight in critical areas such as medical device regulation, food safety, veterinary medicine, and emerging technologies. These reductions come at a time when the FDA is already grappling with recruitment challenges, inspection backlogs, and increasing demands for regulatory innovation.

Scope and Targets of the Layoffs

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), under Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., terminated approximately 5,200 probationary employees across its agencies in mid-February 2025, including hundreds at the FDA. While the agency’s drug review divisions were largely spared, layoffs hit staff in the Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH), the Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (CFSAN), the Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM), and the Center for Tobacco Products (CTP).

Medical Devices and Digital Health

In CDRH, at least 230 employees were dismissed, including specialists in artificial intelligence (AI) and digital health—fields undergoing rapid technological advancement. These roles are critical for evaluating AI-driven diagnostic tools, wearable devices, and software-as-a-medical-device (SaMD) products. The loss of early-career researchers and engineers threatens the FDA’s ability to keep pace with industry innovation, potentially delaying approvals for technologies like neural interfaces and AI-powered imaging systems.

Food Safety and Additives

CFSAN lost staff responsible for reviewing new food additives, colorings, and ingredients—a priority area for Kennedy, who has advocated for stricter chemical regulations. With approximately 2,000 uninspected food and drug facilities globally, the FDA’s inspection backlog is now likely to grow further, raising risks of contamination incidents similar to recent outbreaks linked to infant formula and baby food.

Veterinary Medicine

The Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM) saw cuts to reviewers assessing the safety of pharmaceuticals for pets and livestock. These roles ensure that medications for animals are effective and that residues in products like milk and eggs remain safe for human consumption. Reductions here could delay approvals for veterinary drugs and weaken monitoring of antimicrobial resistance.

Exacerbating Existing Staffing Challenges

The FDA has historically struggled to recruit and retain specialized staff due to competition from higher-paying private-sector roles. The layoffs worsen these issues by destabilizing workforce development and eroding institutional knowledge.

Loss of Early-Career Talent

Probationary employees—often younger professionals with advanced degrees in fields like data science, bioengineering, and toxicology—represent the FDA’s pipeline for replacing retiring staff. By targeting this group, the cuts disrupt the “learning chain” essential for maintaining expertise. As Kenneth Kaitin, a Tufts University professor, noted: “You’re eliminating the learning chain of people who come into the agency. There’s a long learning curve, and you’re eliminating people at the early stage” (https://www.biopharmadive.com/news/fda-layoffs-trump-doge-hhs-cuts-impact/740499/).

Increased Workloads and Burnout

Remaining staff now face expanded responsibilities. For example, CDRH’s device reviewers, already managing a surge in AI and digital health submissions, must absorb the work of dismissed colleagues without additional support. Similarly, food safety inspectors—many of whom were hired post-pandemic to address backlogs—are now stretched thinner, increasing the likelihood of oversights.

Recruitment and Morale

The layoffs have demoralized the workforce and damaged the FDA’s reputation as a stable employer. As Mitch Zeller, former FDA tobacco director, stated: “The combined effect of what they’re trying to do is going to destroy the ability to recruit and retain talent” (https://www.startribune.com/trump-administration-cuts-reach-fda-employees-in-food-safety-medical-devices-and-tobacco-products/601223844). With hiring frozen under an executive order requiring agencies to replace only one employee for every four departures, the FDA cannot easily rebuild capacity.

The Training Bottleneck

The probationary period at the FDA (1–2 years for new hires) is designed to provide hands-on training in complex regulatory science. Dismissing employees during this phase wastes significant investments in onboarding and delays the development of proficiency.

Specialized Skill Development

Reviewers in areas like AI-driven medical devices or gene therapies require months of training to evaluate technical dossiers, assess clinical data, and understand regulatory precedents. Losing these employees resets progress, forcing the FDA to restart the training process once hiring resumes.

Cross-Departmental Collaboration

New hires often rotate through multiple divisions to build interdisciplinary expertise. For instance, a food additive reviewer might collaborate with toxicologists and epidemiologists to assess long-term health risks. Disrupting these rotations limits opportunities for knowledge-sharing, weakening the agency’s ability to address novel public health challenges.

Long-Term Consequences for Public Health

Slower Product Reviews

User fee-funded positions—which account for nearly half of the FDA’s $6.9 billion budget—were not spared from cuts. Since these roles are financed by industry to expedite reviews, their elimination could delay approvals for new drugs, devices, and food ingredients without reducing federal spending.

Weakened Outbreak Response

The FDA collaborates with the CDC to trace contamination sources during foodborne illness outbreaks. With fewer inspectors and scientists, the agency’s capacity to identify pathogens like Salmonella or Listeria will diminish, prolonging outbreaks and increasing hospitalization risks.

Erosion of Global Leadership

The FDA’s regulatory standards influence global markets. Slower reviews and outdated technical capacity could push companies to seek approvals in regions with more predictable oversight, such as the EU or Singapore, undermining U.S. competitiveness.

Conclusion

The FDA layoffs represent a shortsighted approach to government efficiency that prioritizes short-term spending cuts over long-term public health. By targeting probationary employees, the administration has exacerbated recruitment challenges, disrupted workforce development, and weakened oversight in critical areas. Rebuilding the FDA’s capacity will require reversing hiring freezes, increasing salaries to compete with the private sector, and safeguarding user fee funds from political interference. Without these steps, the agency’s ability to ensure food safety, evaluate emerging technologies, and respond to health crises will continue to erode—with dire consequences for consumers, industry, and global health security.

“The cuts at FDA will be terribly harmful for the American people. Indiscriminately firing people because they are new to the agency makes no sense.”
– Patti Zettler, former HHS Deputy General Counsel (https://www.biopharmadive.com/news/fda-layoffs-trump-doge-hhs-cuts-impact/740499/)

Preparing your BCP for Trump’s Attacks on Immigration

Time (maybe past-time) to evaluate your organization’s business continuity plan and anticipate the potential actions against immigrants, in particular the potential impact of Trump’s proposed immigration policies on the facility cleaning industry, particularly cleanrooms, which could be significant.

Labor Shortage

The cleaning industry, including cleanroom maintenance, heavily relies on immigrant labor. A mass deportation policy could lead to:

  • Significant workforce reduction: Many cleaning companies employ immigrant workers, both documented and undocumented. A large-scale deportation could severely reduce the available workforce.
  • Increased labor costs: With fewer workers available, companies may need to offer higher wages to attract and retain employees, potentially increasing operational costs.

Industry Disruption

The cleanroom industry, which requires specialized skills and training, could face particular challenges:

  • Loss of experienced workers: Cleanroom maintenance requires specific knowledge and expertise. Deporting experienced workers could lead to a skills gap in the industry.
  • Reduced productivity: As companies struggle to replace deported workers, there might be a temporary decrease in productivity and quality.
  • Increased costs for clients: Higher labor costs in the cleaning industry could be passed on to clients, potentially affecting industries that rely on cleanroom facilities, such as pharmaceuticals and electronics manufacturing.

Actions to Evaluate

Time to evaluate internal training programs to quickly upskill current and new workers, particularly for specialized cleanroom maintenance. Be prepared for the need to have your staff step in and clean, on the moment’s notice. This is a key action to have in the business continuity plan, and frankly should already be there.

Compliance and Legal Challenges

Beyond that, companies should be evaluating their other plans with broad stakeholders like HR and legal for when law enforcement comes calling as a result of heightened enforcement and audits of cleaning companies to ensure compliance with immigration laws. Remember these cleaners work side-by-side with your staff and quite frankly, are really hard to tell the difference. Are you prepared to side with law enforcement, or delay law enforcement? What is your risk tolerance for navigating the complex legal situations, particularly if long-term employees are suddenly subject to deportation?

While the full extent of the impact remains uncertain, Trump’s proposed immigration policies could significantly disrupt the facility cleaning industry, which will greatly impact every manufacturing site I know. The industry may need to adapt quickly to potential labor shortages, increased costs, and changing regulatory landscapes, while navigating the thorny ethical considerations.

No time like the present to start.

What is Ahead for US Pharma?

It has been a wild ride this past week. I know my family and I have been on an emotional rollercoaster, and I bet many of you are feeling the same way. One question that keeps popping up in our household (and probably yours too) is: “What does this mean for my job, and should I be freaking out?”

Short-term outlook: Keep calm and carry on

First things first, take a deep breath. In the immediate future, it’s unlikely that we’ll see any massive shifts in pharma world. Most of us can probably continue our daily grind without too much disruption. So, for now, it’s business as usual, folks! Unfortunately that business has been pretty tough the last two years.

Long-term forecast: Cloudy with a chance of uncertainty

Now, here’s where things get a bit murky. The long-term outlook? Well, it’s like trying to predict the weather a year from now – pretty darn tricky. What we do know is that this situation has cranked up the uncertainty dial, and let’s face it, uncertainty in the pharmaceutical world is very unwelcome.

We already have a hefty dose of uncertainty due to the 2024 Supreme Court decisions, which are slowly starting to have impact but the boundaries are really unknown. Add to that an incoming administration with a noted dislike (and a set of vendettas) against the HHS and FDA, and government employees. And on top of that we have the wild card of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. being able to “go wild on health” – whatever that ends up meaning but my fear is nothing good.

But I also need to be pragmatic, and as a quality individual involved in risk management and managing uncertainty, I need to start evaluating impacts. Here are the things I am looking at.

On-Shoring

On-Shoring has been a growing conversation for years. We are an incredibly global industry and have been hard hit by a variety of supply disruptions:

  1. Global Pandemic: COVID-19 threw a massive wrench into our well-oiled supply chain machine.
  2. Geopolitical Tensions: The ongoing trade tiffs between major economies have kept us on our toes.
  3. Natural Disasters: Mother Nature hasn’t exactly been playing nice lately.
  4. Labor Shortages: Finding skilled workers has become a bit like searching for a needle in a haystack.

Add to this cocktail the ongoing GMP issues with sites in key manufacturing countries like India and China, and you’ve got a recipe for some serious supply chain headache,

Add to that we have a whole lot of talk of tariffs. The incoming Trump administration is practically drooling to raise tariffs which will have some serious implications:

  • Market Access Issues: Suddenly, selling your products in certain countries becomes a whole lot trickier.
  • Higher Costs: Tariffs often mean higher prices for imported goods.
  • Retaliation Risks: When one country imposes tariffs, others tend to follow suit.

The Critical Component Conundrum

Here’s where things get scary. We are seeing an increase in both price and availability issues for critical raw materials and components. And it is not just about overseas suppliers – even our domestic suppliers are feeling the heat. Remember the great plastics shortage that hit our Single-Use System (SUS) component suppliers? That is potentially just the tip of the iceberg.

The Ripple Effect

Now, let’s connect the dots:

  1. Supply Chain Vulnerability: Our global supply chains are showing their weak spots.
  2. Critical Item Shortages: There’s a growing concern about shortages of essential items.
  3. Price Hikes: As supplies tighten and tariffs kick in, prices are heading north.
  4. Market Access Challenges: A potential trade war could make it tough to serve international markets from the U.S. And remember, we are a very global industry.

Risk Management Approach

  1. Diversify Supply Sources: Don’t put all your eggs in one basket (or country).
  2. Build Resilience: Create buffer stocks of critical components.
  3. Explore On-Shoring Options: Look into bringing some production closer to home.
  4. Stay Flexible: Be ready to pivot your strategy as the global situation evolves.
  5. Plan for multi-country impact: Evaluate what happens when other countries start retaliating and it becomes difficult to get clinical or commercial supply into a country.

Regulatory Changes

Here are my fears where RFK Jr can really do damage. He may push for less stringent approval processes for certain drugs or treatments he favors, potentially allowing more alternative or “natural” products to enter the market. Conversely, he could impose stricter regulations on vaccines and other pharmaceutical products he views skeptically (which is all of them).

There may be efforts to roll back regulatory controls that currently protect public health, potentially allowing unproven treatments to reach consumers more easily. All of this uncertainty is going to be difficult and will impact company’s ability to raise funds. Which will impact the job market. And it has been a bad couple of years for layoffs.

Harvard Business Review – Whitewashing business executives is their core business

In the latest edition of “Executive utilizes Harvard Business Review to whitewash their activities” we have Hubert Joly, CEO of Best Buy, who informs us that we should all

  • Making meaningful purpose a genuine priority of business operations
  • The “human magic” of empowered and self-directed employees
  • Admitting you don’t have all the answers is a sign of strong leadership.

Let’s see how Best Buy puts those practices in place.

It is hard to take the editors of HBR seriously when they discuss what a good company culture looks like when they whitewash corporate leaders with this sort of track record.

Probably Best Buy paid a lot of money for the reputation bump just before Christmas.

Hierarchy is not inevitable

I’m on the record in believing that Quality as a process is an inherently progressive one and that when we stray from those progressive roots we become exactly what we strive to avoid. One only has to look at the history of Six Sigma, TQM, and even Lean to see that.

I’m a big proponent of Humanocracy for that very reason.

One cannot read much of business writing without coming across the great leader (or even worse great man) hypothesis, which serves to naturalize power and existing forms of authority. One cannot even escape the continued hagiography of Jack Welch, even though he’s been discredited in many ways for his toxic legacy.

We cannot drive out fear unless we unmask power by revealing its contradictions, hypocrisies, and reliance on violence and coercion. The way we work is a result of human decisions, and thus capable of being remade.

We all have a long way to go here. I, for example, catch myself all the time speaking of leadership in hierarchical ways. One of the current things I am working on is exorcising the term ‘leadership team’ from my vocabulary. It doesn’t serve any real purpose and it fundamentally puts the idea of leadership as a hierarchical entity.

Another thing I am working on is to tackle the thorn of positional authority, the idea that the higher the rank in the organization the more decision-making authority you have. Which is absurd. In every organization, I’ve been in people have positions of authority that cover areas they do not have the education, experience, and training to make decisions in. This is why we need to have clear decision matrixes, establish empowered process owners and drive democratic leadership throughout the organization.