Latest / Women at Work: Career, Leadership & Modern Work / Why Women Are Leaving Public Service Careers Mid-Track
Transcript
- Lucas: We talk a lot about women leaving corporate jobs at mid-career — the burnout, the glass ceiling, the pay equity issues. But there's a whole sector where this happens even more quietly, and with less data attached to it: government and public service. Luna: You mean federal agencies, state governments, that kind of thing? Lucas: Exactly. And I want to anchor today in a specific number from a study the Partnership for Public Service put out late last year. They found that women in federal agencies between ages 35 and 50 — so deep into their careers — are leaving at a rate 1.6 times higher than their male peers. Not entry-level churn. These are women who've already put in ten or fifteen years. Luna: That's a huge number. And it's not just Washington DC — this is across agencies everywhere. Lucas: Right. And what's interesting is the reasons they give aren't exactly what you'd expect. It's not primarily about salary, though salary does play a role. It's about what they call 'opaque advancement paths' and 'political whiplash' — those are the terms that come up in exit interviews. Luna: Political whiplash — that's a great phrase. I think we all intuitively understand it: every time an administration changes, the priorities shift, the leadership changes, and mid-career women are often left holding the bag. Lucas: Exactly. Let me give you a concrete case. A woman named Elena — I spoke with her for this episode, former senior policy advisor at the EPA. She joined the agency in her early 30s, passionate about environmental justice, worked on rulemaking through two administrations. She told me the first transition was hard but manageable. The second one broke her. Luna: What happened the second time? Lucas: She had spent three years building a community air monitoring program. She'd gotten buy-in from states, from community groups, from industry even. Then the new administration came in and defunded it in the first budget. No notice, no transition plan, just 'this program no longer aligns with agency priorities.' And she was expected to pivot overnight to something completely different with the same enthusiasm. Luna: And that's the whiplash. You're not just losing your project — you're losing the relationships, the expertise, the credibility you built with external partners. It's a professional reset that costs years. Lucas: She left about six months after that. Moved to a corporate sustainability role at a large utility company. Thirty percent pay bump, she told me, but more importantly: a five-year roadmap. She knew what she'd be working on in 2028, 2029. That kind of visibility just doesn't exist in most public service career tracks. Luna: And the irony is, the public sector prides itself on stability. But for women at mid-career, that stability can feel like a cage if you can't see how to move up or sideways in a way that respects your experience. Lucas: There's a structural issue here too. The GS pay scale — the General Schedule that most federal employees are on — compresses at the senior levels. A GS-14 or GS-15 step 10 might make around $140,000 to $160,000 in DC. That's decent money, but it's a ceiling. And the next step into the Senior Executive Service is a completely different application process, competitive, political in some cases. It's not a natural promotion track. Luna: So women hit that ceiling and look around. And they see their male colleagues either staying put because they're more comfortable with the politics, or leaving for industry at even higher rates. But the women who leave — they're not leaving for more of the same. They're leaving for roles that offer more autonomy and clearer progression. Lucas: The Partnership for Public Service study also flagged something they called 'flexibility stigma' in agencies. Remote and flexible work arrangements, which became standard during the pandemic, have been rolled back in many federal departments. And women with caregiving responsibilities — disproportionately women — feel that acutely. When you can't adjust your hours, and the promotion path is already murky, the calculus shifts. Luna: There's also a cultural piece that I think gets overlooked. Government agencies tend to have very formal, hierarchical cultures. The informal networks that help women navigate the unwritten rules — those are weaker than in the private sector, especially for women who aren't already in senior leadership. Lucas: And that connects to something we've discussed in earlier episodes: the difference between mentorship and sponsorship. In government, you often get assigned a mentor. But sponsorship — someone actively putting your name forward for a stretch assignment or a detail — that happens much less. And it's sponsorship that drives advancement. Luna: Right. So you have this combination: a pay ceiling, political whiplash, shrinking flexibility, and weak sponsorship. No wonder women are voting with their feet. Lucas: And the cost to agencies is real. The study estimated that replacing a mid-career professional in a specialized role — like Elena's environmental policy expertise — can cost 1.5 to 2 times their annual salary when you factor in recruitment, onboarding, and lost institutional knowledge. And when women leave, the diversity of perspective in policy development takes a hit. Luna: It's not just a retention problem. It's a mission effectiveness problem. If you're designing environmental or health or education policy without enough women at the table who've been in the trenches for a decade plus, you're going to get blind spots. Lucas: What's interesting is that some agencies are starting to experiment with solutions. The Department of Veterans Affairs, for instance, has created a 'rotational leadership track' for GS-14 and GS-15 women — two-year assignments across different divisions with a clear promotion outcome at the end. Early data shows retention of women in that track is over 90 percent after three years. Luna: That's promising. It's essentially what private sector leadership development programs have done for decades. Government is just starting to catch up. Lucas: Another fix that's gaining traction: 'portable expertise' credits. Some agencies now recognize that women who've led complex stakeholder processes — like Elena's community air monitoring program — have skills that should translate across agencies, not just within one silo. So they're creating interagency mobility without losing step or grade. Luna: That's smart. Because one of the biggest fears women have about leaving government is that they'll lose their pension or their seniority. If you can move between agencies without penalty, you're not stuck in one bad situation. Lucas: And then there's the private sector lesson. Companies that are good at retaining mid-career women — firms like Deloitte or Procter & Gamble — they don't just offer flexibility. They offer 'career lattice' thinking: you can move sideways into a new function, or take a step back for a couple years to manage a family situation, and still be on track for senior leadership. Government is mostly still a ladder, not a lattice. Luna: If I'm a woman in her late 30s or early 40s in a federal agency right now, what's the one thing I should do to take control of my career? Lucas: I think the most actionable takeaway from the data is: build an external network early. Don't wait until you're frustrated. Elena told me she started going to industry conferences two years before she left. She joined a professional association for environmental policy professionals. By the time she was ready to move, she had solid connections outside government. That made the transition smooth. Luna: That's really practical. Because when you're inside an agency, it's easy to think your whole professional world is that building or that mission. But the skills you're building — stakeholder management, regulatory analysis, cross-agency coordination — those are highly valued outside. Lucas: And that's actually a good place to mention something else. Luna: Yeah? Lucas: Look, if this conversation has helped you think about your own career trajectory — whether you're in government or anywhere else — and you feel like it was worth a coffee, you can find us at buy me a coffee dot com slash fexingo. It's the smallest possible ask, and honestly it keeps this show independent and free of ad breaks. We don't have a big media company behind us — it's just us, a couple microphones, and listeners like you. Luna: And we mean that. The support we've gotten from listeners has directly paid for research time — including the Partnership for Public Service study we talked about today. It's a quiet way to say 'keep going,' and we really appreciate it. Lucas: So back to that practical advice. The other thing Elena did that I think is replicable: she kept a 'career journal' for the last two years in government. Every month, she wrote down one thing she learned, one frustration, and one skill she wanted to develop. When she finally updated her resume and started interviewing, she had concrete stories ready. Not just 'I managed programs,' but 'I led a cross-agency negotiation that resulted in a 15 percent increase in community participation.' Luna: That level of specificity is exactly what hiring managers outside government want to hear. And it's something government employees often struggle with — translating bureaucratic language into business impact. Lucas: Yeah. And it's not just about leaving. Even if you stay, being able to articulate your value that clearly helps you advocate for promotions or special assignments inside the agency. The study actually found that women who regularly documented their accomplishments were promoted within their agencies at rates close to men — which suggests part of the gap is about how you present yourself, not just structural bias. Luna: So there's agency even within a system that isn't perfectly fair. Lucas: Exactly. And I think that's the note I want to end on. The public sector still has a lot of work to do — on flexibility, on sponsorship, on creating real career lattices. But individual women can take steps today to protect their options and build their narrative. Whether you stay or go, you want to be in control of that decision. Luna: And if you've made the choice to leave or to stay, we'd love to hear your story. You can find us on the show's page or on social media. Next episode, we're going to look at something a lot of women face but rarely talk about: the feeling of being overqualified and under-challenged in a role you thought was a step up. Lucas: That's a good one. Thanks for listening, everyone — see you next time.