STAFF NEWS: Three of Four Hill Aides Say They Are Satisfied With Their Jobs But …

Results from the survey by the House Office of Diversity and Inclusion (HODI) of attitudes among congressional staffers about their workplaces, compensation, benefits and bosses are revealing some unexpected results and a few apparent contradictions.

Asked to agree or disagree with the statement “Considering everything, I am satisfied with my job,” a huge majority, 75.6 percent of the respondents agreed, with only 12.8 percent disagreeing and 11.6 percent being neutral. Similarly, when asked about benefits, 70.7 percent of the respondents professed to be satisfied, while 16.9 percent were not and 12.4 percent were neutral.

But a different picture is suggested when two other questions were asked. Only 38.6 percent of the respondents said they are satisfied with their compensation, compared to 45 percent who aren’t and 16.4 percent who are neutral.

And in perhaps the most eye-opening result of the HODI, respondents were asked if they have “NOT seriously considered looking into employment elsewhere,” only 35.4 percent agreed (that is, they haven’t been thinking about leaving the Hill). A total of 44.3 percent disagreed, meaning they have been thinking about seeking a new position off the Hill. And 22.3 percent were neutral, perhaps reflecting reluctance to respond out of concerns about anonymity.

Is it a contradiction when three out of four respondents say they are satisfied with their positions, but then more than four out of 10 disclose that they are thinking about leaving the Hill? I would suggest the answer is yes and no.

Maybe Yes, Maybe No:

Yes, having nearly half of a workforce pondering leaving is surely a sign that something about the workplace needs prompt attention because it is not providing sufficient incentive to remain on a congressional staff.

No, because for the most part working on a congressional staff is not typically seen as a career in itself, but rather an essential and valuable training ground for other forms of involvement with the nation’s central government.

In other words, it’s not a good thing if legions of Hill staffers are merely putting in time to get credentialed for the big bucks they hope to make working for a K Street lobbying firm or as a vice-president for government relations at a Fortune 500 corporation within a couple of years. That keeps the turnover rate high, and deprives taxpayers of needed skills, institutional memory and experience in the First Branch of government.