Monday, September 14, 2015

THAT SICK LEAVE



As I previously wrote I wll not be attending tonight's Council meeting even though there are several subjects that I find to be of importance.

Tonight (Monday) an ordinance for first reading mandating “Paid Sick Leave” will probably be adopted on first reading. There undoubtedly will be a large group present whose agenda’s favors such a law in Plainfield. They will present “statistics and figures” without source verification to back up their cause.

With the apparent support of a majority of the Council who voted to put this on tonight’s agenda and of politicians such as the Mayor it is almost a certainty that it will be adopted.

But remember ‘Figures don’t lie but liars figure”.

Anyhow; read this Op-Ed from today’s (14th) Wall Street Journal.

Mandatory Paid Sick Leave’s Ill Effects

Obama’s executive order won’t help, and may hurt, workers.

By

Maxford Nelsen

Sept. 13, 2015 6:31 p.m. ET

President Obama signed an executive order on Labor Day requiring federal contractors to provide paid sick-leave benefits to employees and called on Congress to follow with a nationwide paid sick-leave law. His announcement emphasized standing up for the middle class. But there is scant evidence that mandatory paid sick-leave regulations help workers, and some evidence they do harm.

Contrary to White House assertions that “a body of research” shows mandatory paid sick leave will reduce workplace illness and improve productivity, a comprehensive examination of studies by the Freedom Foundation showed that these mandates consistently fail to keep sick employees from coming to work. Two studies (in 2011 and 2014) of San Francisco’s 2007 paid sick-leave ordinance found that employers were as likely to report increased workplace illness as decreased, with most employers reporting no change. Two studies (in 2013 and 2014) of Seattle’s 2012 paid sick-leave ordinance by University of Washington researchers reported identical findings. The researchers also found no decrease in employee turnover.

2 comments:

  1. I'd have no problem with the City mandating the same for its own contractors. Laying it in the laps of every employer in the city is far beyond the purview of a municipality. Supporters should lobby at the State and Federal level.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I am in agreement with the article. My employer provides 6 "sick days" a year. The majority of my peers will come to work sick and spread their illness so they can "save their days" for when they're feeling better.

    ReplyDelete