The Federal Reserve (Fed), the central bank of the United States, recently took a significant step by removing the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) section from its official website. This section, previously a key source of information on the Fed’s efforts to promote a more inclusive workplace, is no longer accessible to the public. Before the change, the page provided links to specific data on the racial, ethnic, and gender composition of the bank’s staff, along with a set of guidelines outlining how the institution addressed diversity issues within its workforce. Now, these links automatically redirect users to the site’s homepage, offering no further information on the topic.
Interestingly, the decision to remove the DEI section was made without any public explanation from the Fed. The institution chose not to comment on the reasons behind this change or provide details on how it might impact future hiring and recruitment practices. This has led to speculation about the motives for the removal and its implications for the Fed’s approach to diversity and inclusion. The lack of transparency surrounding this change raises questions about whether the removal reflects a new strategic direction for the Fed or is a response to external pressures related to government policy, which has grown increasingly restrictive toward inclusion programs.
Research on previous versions of the website, accessed via the Wayback Machine, indicates that the DEI section’s removal occurred in the days immediately before or shortly after Donald Trump assumed the presidency in January 2017. This timing coincides with one of Trump’s first actions in office: signing an executive order prohibiting the implementation of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion programs within the federal government. The measure also directly impacted hiring processes and federal contracts, subjecting them to stricter criteria regarding diversity policies.
Trump’s executive order mandated that federal departments and government agencies suspend DEI programs, halt resource allocation for such initiatives, and ban diversity and inclusion training for public employees. Additionally, the order required all public employees involved in diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility activities to be placed on “paid administrative leave,” meaning these professionals were temporarily suspended from their roles while continuing to receive their salaries, with no immediate timeline for returning to their duties. This move sparked significant debate about its impact on various government agencies, particularly institutions like the Fed, which have historically struggled to adequately represent racial, ethnic, and gender diversity within their teams.
Diversifying the Fed’s workforce has long been a challenge for the institution. While the central bank has made efforts to foster a more inclusive workplace, the field of economics—dominated by a highly specialized academic elite—has largely consisted of a homogenous group of professionals. This reflects broader patterns across financial and academic institutions, where racial and ethnic minority representation has been historically limited. The Fed, in particular, relies heavily on highly qualified economists and researchers, which has posed an obstacle to building a team that more accurately reflects the demographic diversity of the U.S. population.
Jerome Powell, chair of the Fed since 2018, has been a vocal advocate for workplace diversity and inclusion. At a 2021 diversity conference, he remarked that throughout his career in both the public and private sectors, he observed that the most successful organizations were those with a strong and sustained commitment to diversity. For Powell, diversity is not only a moral or ethical issue but also a critical factor in organizational success. “The best organizations, the ones that truly stand out, are those that are committed to diversity and inclusion at all levels,” he said during one of the events.
Moreover, Powell highlighted the importance of creating a workplace environment where employees feel comfortable regardless of their race, ethnicity, gender, or sexual orientation. He emphasized that fostering an inclusive environment is not just an ethical responsibility but also a practice that benefits the organization as a whole by enhancing employee well-being and productivity. “We are working to promote an inclusive workplace where employees can feel comfortable and valued,” Powell stated.
The Fed chair also underscored the institution’s efforts to expand its recruitment practices to increase team diversity. Specific initiatives include broadening the scope of recruitment efforts, focusing on historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs) and institutions serving Hispanic populations. These efforts aim to ensure that the Fed attracts candidates from a wider range of backgrounds, providing greater diversity in the selection process for economist and researcher positions—areas essential to the institution’s operations.
However, the removal of the DEI section from the Fed’s website raises concerns about the future of these initiatives. With the changes in government under Trump’s leadership, questions arise about whether the focus on diverse recruitment will be maintained or if the institution will adopt a more conservative approach to diversity in its hiring practices. The removal of this section from the website, amid such significant political changes, can be interpreted as a reflection of the pressures the Fed—like other government agencies—faces regarding these issues. This decision might indicate that the prioritization of inclusion programs will be softened, at least in the short term, as Trump’s policies influence institutional practices across the federal government.
This transformation within the Fed is part of a broader shift occurring across U.S. government agencies as the Trump administration reverses previous policies and redefines the role of diversity in the public sector. For many observers, the change at the Fed signals that while diversity remains a priority for some organizations and leaders, others are rethinking how these policies are implemented, particularly in an increasingly polarized and divided political climate. The impact of this shift will be observed not only in the Fed’s immediate future but also in how other financial and academic institutions respond to this changing direction in diversity and inclusion policies.
