Left-wing congressional staffers withdraw letter demanding 32-hour work week after bipartisan backlash
Progressive Capitol Hill staffers demanded that they work less, proposing a 32-hour week in a letter sent to House and Senate leaders that was later withdrawn.
The letter sent from the Congressional Progressive Staff Association on Thursday stated that they want to have a “strong, diverse workforce prepared to help Congress deliver for the American people.” In order to accomplish this, the staffers claimed the best way to do so was to cut work hours and establish a rotating 32-hour work week for congressional staff. This is despite that in many instances, staff take off early on Fridays due to the regular in-session congressional schedule.
“By adopting a 32-hour workweek for staff on a rotating basis, you can accomplish these goals while retaining the productivity and quality of work you expect and deserve from your team. We urge you to consider piloting the program in your own offices and encouraging your fellow Members across your conference or caucus to do the same,” the staffers wrote. They claimed that the adjusted schedule would “improve worker satisfaction, increase staff retention in Congress, and model a more sustainable approach to work on a national level.”
“While Congress is always busy,” staffers added, “responsibilities often wax and wane based on the session calendar. Given the cyclical nature of the schedule, we propose implementing a 32-hour workweek for DC-based staff during district work periods and a 32-hour workweek for district-based staff while in-session. Doing so — without a reduction in pay — would allow both DC and distinct staff to be fully available around the clock throughout more intensive periods when the Member is in town while allowing for a more sustainable schedule when workloads are more manageable.”
On Friday the group withdrew the letter after backlash from both sides of the aisle. “The Congressional Progressive Staff Association hereby withdraws its recent letter to congressional leadership on a rotating 32-hour workweek,” the group said in a statement, per Politico.
They said their letter had failed to make it clear that the staffers were dedicated to “serving the American people no matter how many hours it takes to get the job done.” They added that there are “well-known, longstanding workplace issues that deserve Congress’s immediate attention” and a “myriad ways Congress can address these issues. Right now, a 32-hour workweek for staff will not be one of them.”
The letter had been widely panned by both sides of the aisle, with former Hill staffer and Democratic communications consultant Tim Hogan writing, “lol read the room guys.”
Rep. Ritchie Torres wrote, “Why not be bold and ask for a 0-hour workweek? I wonder how blue-collar Americans would feel about white-collar workers demanding a 32-hour workweek.”
GOP Rep Chip Roy wrote, “No. I was a staffer. I worked 100 hours a week and loved it. I once pulled back to back all nighters to kill a really bad bill. I’d do it again. Grow up.”
“You want to work 32 hours but get paid for 40? Nope. The taxpayers aka your boss, deserve folks who hustle and work hard FULL TIME on their behalf. This is public service after all,” Rep Kat Cammack wrote.