From the early days of his mandate, President Donald Trump decided, by decree, to suspend foreign development aid for the duration of a budget review ("Stop Work Order"). On January 24, 2025, the State Department ordered all American government agencies, including USAID, to stop working on international aid programs and to freeze expenditures for a review period of eighty-five (85) days. 

This unexpected decision has significant consequences in beneficiary countries, notably Senegal: 

• Suspension of development projects: Suspension of development projects funded by American aid. 

• Impact on jobs: Threat to direct and indirect jobs created through these projects. 

The agencies responsible for implementing these grants face a legal challenge: reconciling the need to comply with the Stop Work Order, which results in an inability to support the costs related to the financing of development programs, including personnel expenses, with their legal obligations as employers under Senegalese labor law. 

Faced with this situational challenge, they will be required to take all necessary regular measures to determine the fate of individuals with employee status (fixed-term contract (CDD) and permanent contract (CDI) workers) and individuals working as service providers. 

Precisely, in this regard, Senegalese labor law offers interesting solutions that employers can implement. 

Solutions for Workers with Employee Status 

Based on the concerns expressed by employers, the initial reflexes in such a context consist of considering either a reduction in salary or working hours, or contemplating an economic layoff. However, these options are not necessarily the most interesting and least risky. Indeed, while any reduction in salaries or working hours follows the binding legal regime of contract modification, the option of economic layoff proves premature in a context where the Stop Work Order is currently temporary. 

In this context, considering placing staff on technical unemployment (1), terminating the trial period, or at the limit, negotiating departures (2) seem more interesting and less risky. 

1. Technical unemployment 

   Technical unemployment is provided for under Article L 65 of the Labor Code, which states: "In the event of the necessity of a collective work interruption resulting from conjunctural causes (...) the employer may, after consulting the staff delegates, decide to place all or part of the company's personnel on technical unemployment, whether the employment contract is fixed-term or indefinite-term." It follows from this provision that when a company or structure employing people is in a conjunctural challenge, it has the possibility to place all or part of the personnel (under CDD or CDI) on technical unemployment, subject to compliance with the rules organizing its procedure. 

   Therefore, for the agencies impacted by the government’s decision, technical unemployment could well be an option under the provisions of the Senegalese Labor Code, particularly the aforementioned article, and the duration provided for the suspension of international aid (85 days), for the agencies impacted by the government's decision. 

   From the perspective of salary and benefits treatment during this period, this mechanism offers interesting perspectives. 

2.  Termination during the probation period 

   Article 23 of the National Interprofessional Collective Agreement provides that "(...) during the probation period, the parties have the reciprocal right to terminate the contract without compensation or notice (...)" 

   As a result, if among the impacted individuals, there are workers in the probation period, the obvious solution is to simply terminate the probation period, which will end the contract. 

   It is important to understand that the probation period is particularly regulated under Senegalese labor law, so it is necessary to ensure full compliance with the legal provisions before considering it.

3.  Mutual separation  

   Mutual separation could also be considered in this context. It is provided for under Article L 64 of the Labor Code. Indeed, according to this text, the employer and the worker(s) can, through an amicable termination protocol, negotiate freely and fairly. Here, the law offers the possibility for both parties to terminate their contract by mutual agreement, which will be submitted to the Labor and Social Security Inspector by the employer for information. 

   Thus, development agencies based in Senegal to implement American government aid can negotiate with their employees to terminate their contracts since their financial resources are temporarily suspended and they will be unable to cover their expenses. 

   This solution is to be favored for a certain category among the impacted personnel, which we can explore with you. 

Solution for Service Providers

Service providers are independent individuals linked to their co-contractor by a "service provision contract" governed by a different legal regime from that of dependent workers, subject to labor law. Service providers do not have employee status. They are governed by the provisions of the Civil and Commercial Obligations Code (COCC). 

It should be noted that regarding these categories of contracts, Article 129 of the COCC provides that "there is no liability if the harmful event is the consequence of a force majeure or fortuitous event, that is to say, an external, insurmountable, and unforeseeable event (...)". 

In this regard, if their contract does not already include a mechanism to be observed in the event of a fortuitous or force majeure event, in which case this mechanism must be followed, the concerned American agencies will have the possibility to negotiate an amendment with them to suspend their contract during the period provided under the stop order, or to explore the possibility of terminating their contract due to the Stop Work Order considered as a force majeure event. 

Finally, in the face of the American government's decision to suspend international aid, development agencies in Senegal are confronted with a situational challenge but have interesting temporary solutions, notably technical unemployment. If the suspension becomes definitive at the end of this 85-day period, they can consider economic layoffs or negotiated departures. 

Yankhoba NDIAYE, Lawyer, Partner Employment & Immigration, and Ousmane Aliou LY, PhD, Associate Employment & Immigration are part of our Employment and Immigration Practice. We have accompanied several companies and entities in the implementation of these solutions, ensuring compliance with legal procedures and minimizing risks for the employer. Contact us to benefit from our expertise and personalized assistance.