Sweeping layoffs to hit UN as it already grapples with internal crisis

The United Nations is bracing for significant staff reductions in the coming months due to deep funding cuts, particularly from the United States.

Secretary-General António Guterres has launched a system-wide review aimed at trimming bureaucratic excess, but even before the full scale of the US financial retreat was known, concerns about the UN’s effectiveness and bloated structure were already widespread among international staff with some officials believing the organization was long due for an overhaul.

The World Food Programme, one of the biggest humanitarian organizations, has announced it could lose up to a quarter of its workforce—about 6,000 people—while the UN refugee agency expects to see its operational capacity slashed by a third. Although the looming financial constraints won’t completely collapse the international civil service, an article by the World Politics Review argues that the resulting job cuts and streamlining are bound to lower morale and diminish the stature of those who remain. This comes atop pre-existing frustrations among UN personnel, many of whom were already feeling undervalued even before the US cuts were formalized. The article has identified at least three major issues that have been contributing to this widespread sense of discontent within the organization. 

The first and most immediate source of pessimism within the UN is the troubling state of global affairs. As the post-Cold War period of energetic international cooperation has waned, the UN has struggled to maintain relevance. While the Security Council authorized dozens of peacekeeping operations in the 1990s and 2000s, it hasn’t launched a significant new mission since 2014. The UN’s own assessments reflect faltering progress on major fronts, including global development and climate change mitigation—hardly a motivating backdrop for its employees. Second, internal dynamics have also played a major role in fuelling staff dissatisfaction. Many UN officials fear that neither the institution’s bureaucracy nor its member states are truly committed to nurturing a competent, motivated international workforce. 

A former UN official has been cited criticizing the Secretariat’s hiring patterns, saying they too often favor either technical experts unfamiliar with the system or long-time insiders lacking hands-on experience. The organization has increasingly turned to consultants and contractors, adding to the perception that real accountability is slipping away. At the same time, powerful member states seem to frequently push for their own nationals—often ex-diplomats or retired politicians seeking a second act—to be placed in top positions within the organization. Although some external hires bring valuable expertise, others are less well-qualified, and career staff see these appointments as obstacles to advancement and institutional coherence. A third challenge to UN staff morale stems from the lingering impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. 

When the crisis struck, the majority of staff were forced to work remotely, and in some hubs like New York, many still haven’t returned to regular office routines. A weekday walk through certain UN floors reveals rows of empty desks. Diplomats complain that it has become increasingly difficult to reach UN officials for urgent discussions, eroding the informal networks that once sustained diplomacy. These issues have prompted calls from some quarters for structural reform of the international civil service—and the author believes that there’s cautious optimism that the current budget crunch might accelerate long-needed changes. But the danger remains that the response will be driven by short-term political and financial calculations rather than thoughtful strategic planning. 

Guterres and his top team face intense pressure and limited time to make difficult decisions that could reshape the UN for years to come. While few would deny that the system has flaws, a rushed or uneven downsizing process risks doing more harm than good. If poorly managed, this moment of crisis could leave UN departments more risk-averse and even less responsive to global challenges. If handled carefully, however, it might become an opportunity to streamline the institution and strengthen its effectiveness. But if mismanaged, the author warns that the result could be a deepening of bureaucratic dysfunction—undermining not only the UN itself, but also the broader international community and the vulnerable populations that rely on the essential services it provides. 

By Nazrin Sadigova