Democrat Staffers Withdraw Demand For Shorter Work Weeks After Mockery
Democrat staff members who belong to a far-Left caucus withdrew a letter that they wrote this week to congressional leaders asking for a 32-hour workweek to avoid burnout after they were widely mocked online over the request.
The Congressional Progressive Staff Association said in a statement that it “hereby withdraws its recent letter to congressional leadership on a rotating 32-hour workweek.”
“The letter failed to make two things clear: First, that progressive congressional staff are dedicated to serving the American people no matter how many hours it takes to get the job done,” they claimed. “Second, that there are well-known, longstanding workplace issues that deserve Congress’s immediate attention if it wishes to effectively serve the people.”
“There are myriad ways Congress can address these issues,” they continued. “Right now, a 32-hour workweek for staff will not be one of them.”
“We are ready to continue the urgent task of serving our bosses’ constituents and advancing the causes that put working-class people first,” they further claimed.
The sudden reversal came as numerous top Republicans and business leaders openly mocked the letter on X.
CELEBRATE #47 WITH 47% OFF DAILYWIRE+ MEMBERSHIPS + A FREE $20 GIFT
The Congressional Progressive Staff Association claimed in their original letter that the 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 said. “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 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.”
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.