Progressive staff on Capitol Hill are asking lawmakers to shave eight hours off their work week for the same pay, but how their progressive bosses in Michigan will respond is anyone’s guess.

None of the state’s six Democratic members of Congress replied to a request for comment on the proposal, which was sent from the Congressional Progressive Staff Association to minority leaders of both chambers on Thursday.

“We write to you 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,” the letter read.

“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,” it continued. “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.”

CPSA, the largest staff association on Capitol Hill, launched in 2021 “to uplift the voices and experiences of progressive congressional staffers across the country,” and the group’s members approved the policy initiative on Jan. 12, according to the letter.

CPSA in 2022 demanded a $45,000 base salary and the right to unionize.

Inquiries about the most recent proposal sent by The Midwesterner to Democratic U.S. Reps. Hillary Scholten, Debbie Dingell, Kristen McDonald Rivet, Haley Stevens, Rashia Tlaib, and Shri Thanedar went unanswered on Friday.

Go Ad-Free, Get Content, Go Premium Today - $1 Trial

Lawmakers and consultants for both Republicans and Democrats, meanwhile, are panning the idea in the press and online.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., one of the most progressive members of the upper chamber, described the CPSA’s proposal as a “terrible idea” in comments to reporters.

“But do understand that most of my staff hasn’t seen a 32-hour work week in months and months and months, because they come in and work for the American people, hour after hour after hour,” she said, according to an X post from Politico’s economy reporter Elanor Mueller.

U.S. Rep. Ritchie Torres, D-NY, offered a similar response on the same social media site.

Go Ad-Free, Get Content, Go Premium Today - $1 Trial

“Why not be bold and ask for a 0-hour workweek?” he posted. “I wonder how blue-collar Americans would feel about white-collar workers demanding a 32-hour workweek.”

It’s not the first time the idea of a 32-hour work week has been floated in Congress. In March 2024, Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., unsuccessfully championed the Thirty-Two Hour Work Week Act to cut down the standard work week by eight hours over four years, a proposal that would also have reduced the threshold for overtime at time and a half to workdays longer than eight hours, and double pay for days longer than 12, the New York Post reports.

Unlike the CPSA’s proposal, however, the 83-year-old Democratic socialist’s bill would have set a national standard for all workers, not just Hill staffers.

“The financial gains from the major advancements in artificial intelligence, automation, and new technology must benefit the working class, not just corporate CEOs and wealthy stockholders on Wall Street,” Sanders said in a statement last year. “It is time to reduce the stress level in our country and allow Americans to enjoy a better quality of life. It is time for a 32-hour workweek with no loss in pay.”

CPSA echoed a similar argument this week, suggesting progressive staff could accomplish more with less time.

“Given the cyclical nature of the schedule, we propose implementing 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,” the letter read. “Doing so – without a reduction in pay – would allow both D.C. and district 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.”

“Select Member and committee offices across both chambers implement the practice during August Recess, a further demonstration the proposal has efficacy in a governmental setting,” the CPSA wrote.

“This is so tone deaf,” Democratic pollster John Anzalone posted to X, along with the CPSA letter. “And quite frankly, insulting to real people and constituents they represent. In politics and government you work hard for the greater good. We all make our choices, but if you want to only work 32 hours a week you need to be somewhere else.”

Conservative consultants Caitlin Legacki and Matt Wolking suggested the same in separate X posts on Thursday.

“I just find it extremely offensive,” Legacki posted. “This work is a privilege and an honor. The idea of clocking out after *32* hours because the work day is done is such an insult to the people who do this and the people we are supposed to serve.”

“To state the obvious: if you want to work only 32 hours a week, Congress is not the place for you to get a paycheck,” Wolking wrote.

Others on the right mocked the proposal, suggesting it would be a good place for the Department of Government Efficiency to look for cuts.

“Progressives should opt in,” Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, posted to X. “Easy place to cut 20%+ @elonmusk.”

“BREAKING: Progressive staffers won’t be needed more than 32 hours a week on the Hill this Congress – our Trifecta will be busy at work for the American people!” Rep. Max Miller, R-Ohio, wrote.