Democrat staff members who belong to a far-Left caucus wrote a letter to congressional leaders this week asking that they reduce the full-time work week to just 32 hours so that they do not get burned out.
The Congressional Progressive Staff Association, which represents House and Senate employees across the country, claimed that their proposal was about “a more sustainable approach to work on a national level.”
“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,” they claimed. “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.”
They complained that their jobs working for members of Congress were “often demanding and intensive.”
“Staffers routinely work long hours at a level of rigor that regularly leads to burnout,” the letter claimed.
The proposal, which was widely mocked online, said that members should institute “a 32-hour workweek for D.C.-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 D.C. 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,” they added. “If implemented, offices are not likely to see a drop in overall productivity.”
CELEBRATE #47 WITH 47% OFF DAILYWIRE+ MEMBERSHIPS + A FREE $20 GIFT
The staffers claimed that members who were skeptical should “engage in a six-month pilot” to see if the reduction in hours leads to increased outcomes.
Rep. Burgess Owens (R-UT) responded to the letter: “Members of Congress are always looking to hire and retain the best staff—hard workers who you can count on to go above and beyond on behalf of constituents.”
“My advice to these ‘progressive staffers’ is simple: find a new industry. Public service is clearly not meant for you,” he added.
Rep. Mike Lawler (R-NY) responded: “If progressive hill staffers worked 0 hours per week, it would probably do more to help the Democrats win than anything else they could do.”
“You want to work 32 hours but get paid for 40? Nope,” said Rep. Kat Cammack (R-FL). “The taxpayers aka your boss, deserve folks who hustle and work hard FULL TIME on their behalf. This is public service after all…”
[#item_full_content]
[[{“value”:”
Democrat staff members who belong to a far-Left caucus wrote a letter to congressional leaders this week asking that they reduce the full-time work week to just 32 hours so that they do not get burned out.
The Congressional Progressive Staff Association, which represents House and Senate employees across the country, claimed that their proposal was about “a more sustainable approach to work on a national level.”
“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,” they claimed. “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.”
They complained that their jobs working for members of Congress were “often demanding and intensive.”
“Staffers routinely work long hours at a level of rigor that regularly leads to burnout,” the letter claimed.
The proposal, which was widely mocked online, said that members should institute “a 32-hour workweek for D.C.-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 D.C. 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,” they added. “If implemented, offices are not likely to see a drop in overall productivity.”
CELEBRATE #47 WITH 47% OFF DAILYWIRE+ MEMBERSHIPS + A FREE $20 GIFT
The staffers claimed that members who were skeptical should “engage in a six-month pilot” to see if the reduction in hours leads to increased outcomes.
Rep. Burgess Owens (R-UT) responded to the letter: “Members of Congress are always looking to hire and retain the best staff—hard workers who you can count on to go above and beyond on behalf of constituents.”
“My advice to these ‘progressive staffers’ is simple: find a new industry. Public service is clearly not meant for you,” he added.
Rep. Mike Lawler (R-NY) responded: “If progressive hill staffers worked 0 hours per week, it would probably do more to help the Democrats win than anything else they could do.”
“You want to work 32 hours but get paid for 40? Nope,” said Rep. Kat Cammack (R-FL). “The taxpayers aka your boss, deserve folks who hustle and work hard FULL TIME on their behalf. This is public service after all…”
“}]]
