Just glad my company is not located in Seattle. Why is this the city council's business?

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2016188951_paidsickleave13m.html

As always, Seattle, San Frans' slutty little sister city. Anything they can do we can do better. I think paid employer sex changes are next. Come on city council you are behind the times.

I'm all for sick leave, but it seems weird for a city to legislate it. Does a city actually have this kind of authority?

Sg

I'm not against sick leave either, as long as it is understood exactly how much it amounts to. The problem arises when the employer hires one thing and gets something entirely different. If I say my employee has one day a month sick leave, then that is exactly what it means. Not sick leave for the new baby, wife, etc. How can an employer hire a "family" when all he wants is one employee?

Benefits don't need to be legislated. Don't like your benefits? Improve yourself and get a better job.

All this will do is zip. The employers will figure out the added cost for employee plus taxes / L&I / ect. Then simply no raise or higher co pay or something ................... then the last one, cut back on employees to cover the added payroll cost.

Gotta love the PC fools as they try to save the world.

Well AM I was IWA before IAM and we CHOSE not to have sick days but instead negotiated GREAT medical as a whole. Paid sick leave is a very abused item and my wife would build to the max then sell it back or loose it. In my case if sick call in sick, after three days they wanted a Doc's verification but no problem. We all preferred the almost ZERO co-pay or dependant charges with eye and full dental over sick days.

I wonder if we shouldn't adopt the Japanese custom of wearing a mask when sick. I know you would look silly, but if a mask could stop the spread of airborne contagions. I also think it would cut down on the risk of acquiring a contagion through touch, because a person is far less likely to wipe their nose or cough directly into their hands if a mask is worn.

Just an idea, and not one I would die on a hill for defending it.

As an employer, I do pay my employees sick leave. But, that's my decision. I had an employee who had worked for me for 5 years have a hernia operation. Instead of going on L&I, I paid him for his 6 weeks off. But, that's my decision, not a decision for the city council to make. If my employees work hard they rarely see less than 40 hours on their check even if they work a bit less. Again, that's the employer's decision.

As Poodle Smolt said, if you don't like where you're working or the benefits that are offered do something else.

I had an employee who was young and dumb. He had a kid they couldn't afford to have in the first place. He asked me one day why my wife and I didn't have children and I told him we were saving our money and wife was working towards her Masters Degree so we could take care of a child or two when the time came. His response to me was "why can't the state just pay for it?" You can take it from there.

Everyone should have 3-5 day's sick leave per year.But it shouldn't be a law that makes it happen.Go get a flu shot,then head out on the OP this winter for some metal in 30-40 degree weather and don't worry about being or getting sick.Just sayin.Good luck,
SZ

Remember when the Family Leave Act was going to cost companies billions?

Well, it didn't. It was all just a bunch of sniveling about nothing.

Businesses and their owners just like to cry like little bitches about everything - just like their employees do.

+1

If the canard that businesses could self-regulate were true, city councils wouldn't have to force them to do what's ethical and moral.

I knew I could depend on you.

Good for them.

Republicans with a warm heart................whodathunkit?

96 hours? WTF is sick for 12 days a year?

My company pays you half-time for sick leave. That is a motivation not to abuse the policy, even though some still do. I think employees would abuse the privilege for sure if they paid full rate.

What does any of this have to do with the Seattle City Council writing policy for your company?

If you have more than 5 employees do you want to be responsible for 2 weeks of "sick leave" per employee when you are barely getting by. This isn't about big corporations. It's about small companies with very small margins trying to get by in very difficult times. I'm guessin you know nothint about that. Only an assumption on my part.

And an idiotic one at that.

But way to live up to expectations.

Dan, before you get on your step ladder to talk to another adult read what I said before.




This isn't the exeption these days. It's more common than you may think.

I'm guessin' another assumption you're making is that if you allow 2 weeks paid sick leave per employee, each and every employee is going to take all 14 days.

Sure, some may, but that's a reflection of management and the environment the leadership team espouses.

Most won't abuse it. The best employees ask for nothing until it's needed and when it is the best employers will take care of them.



But, the question is the same. Why is it the Seattle City Council's job to legislate this? Doesn't even seem to be within their legal right.


Are y'all happy with CAO?