When I wore a young man's clothes and lived in Washington, D.C., anyone interested in politics knew that the holy grail of jobs was working for a representative or senator.
Jobs on the Hill didn't pay very well. Most staffers lived outside the District because they couldn't afford the rent. And the hours were brutal; twelve and fourteen-hour days were not uncommon.
Staffers tended to burn out very quickly. Also, it was a cutthroat business, as they would sabotage each other to get noticed.
That's why I actually laughed when I read this story about Democratic staffers on the Hill. The entitled little twits want a 32-hour workweek.
Progressive Hill staff are asking for a 32-hour workweek
— Nicholas Wu (@nicholaswu12) January 16, 2025
"We write today to encourage you to consider adopting a proposal that would improve worker satisfaction, increase staff retention in Congress, and model a more sustainable approach to work on a national level." pic.twitter.com/t1LmmcycNp
Members of Congress don't usually give a hoot about "worker satisfaction." Most members are not very good bosses. Many are abusive cretins. Moreover, there's no such thing as a "40-hour workweek" for most staffers on the Hill, so why should anyone want a "32-hour workweek?"
Related: Black Lives Matter Demands Grocery Store Remain Open Despite Losing $7,000 a Day to Theft
The staffers realize that and only want a lighter workload when the member isn't in the office.
Under the proposal, congressional staffers would still work long hours when their boss is around. But when Congress is in session, district office staffers would be entitled to an abbreviated, 20-percent-lighter schedule, and when it is not, D.C.-based staff would have a lighter week.
“We do not want a 32-hour workweek to just be another special benefit for Congressional staff,” the group said in its letter. “We hope that by adopting this policy, Members of Congress can help to advance the discussion around a more sustainable workweek as a national priority and model how it can work for private and public employers across the country and the world.”
The proposal immediately came under fire from both sides of the aisle.
“Why not be bold and ask for a 0-hour workweek?" asked Democratic Rep. Ritchie Torres. "I wonder how blue-collar Americans would feel about white-collar workers demanding a 32-hour workweek."
Texas GOP Rep. Chip Roy suggested that Elon Musk and DOGE take a hard look at Hill staffer salaries.
Progressives should opt in. Easy place to cut 20%+ @elonmusk https://t.co/2FjLW1vThb
— Chip Roy (@chiproytx) January 16, 2025
"The frustration about this initiative comes from a fundamental misunderstanding. CPSA is not calling for Congress to jeopardize its productivity with a new office schedule," said group spokesperson Michael Suchecki. "We believe — and researchers agree — that implementing a rotating 32-hour work week will not maintain existing levels of productivity and work quality, but increase them."
Which researchers? What methodology did they use? Liberals love to say things like "researchers say..." or "studies show..." without mentioning the source. It makes them sound authoritative. It's actually the number one way of bulls***ting without saying anything substantive.
Not expending one ounce of energy more than they believe is required for the job defines this generation's attitude toward employment.
In their mind, they owe nothing to their employer while their employer owes them everything. The Babylon Bee explains.
Republicans are hoping the Democratic staffers adopt the 32-hour workweek. In fact, reducing it to 20 hours would probably allow Republicans to run rings around Democrats on the floor.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member