At first glance, one might conclude that requiring employers to provide nine days of paid sick leave to employees is good idea. After all, everyone gets sick, right? What's left out of the discussion by the City of Milwaukee Common Council - the latest municipality trying to impose its will on private business - is the cost to employers and the real impact this mandate will have on employees and their benefits.
The City of Milwaukee wants to mandate that private employers with 10 or more employees provide nine paid sick days (or 72 hours) a year to each and every worker. For employers with less than 10 employees (and for part-time employees), it's five paid sick days (or 40 hours).
Nine days - paid days - free days if you're not sick or just want a day off and prefer not to use vacation days. Sounds pretty good, doesn't it? But it's not free for the employer - the one who writes your paycheck and decides what level of benefits you will receive (i.e. vacation time, insurance plan and contributions, retirement, etc.) - and ultimately not free for employees.
For any employer, there is a finite amount of income that is earmarked for labor and fringe benefits. Just because the city mandates an increase in a certain fringe benefit like sick days, doesn't mean there is a magical pot of money that the employer can dip into to pay for that extra sick time.
The mandate will simply make the employer shift the same earmarked money around so that it can accommodate the new requirement. This new law will provide the employer with few options. These include reducing the number employees, reducing the number of vacation days, reducing the employer contribution of the employees health insurance plan, reducing the employer contribution of the employees retirement plan or they may simply eliminate vacation altogether and move to a PTO (personal time off) system, where you'll be given a block of days and whatever you use them for is your own business.
If you're sick, or your kids are sick, you'll have to dip into the same pool of paid days off as you would for vacation. So, instead of being offered two weeks of vacation and five sick days a year, you'll see something like 15 PTO days.
And let's not simply gloss over the fact that the city wants to impose this only on private business, not on the city itself. In fact, it wouldn't apply to ANY government entity. The analysis - done by the city - of the proposed ordinance states plainly: "The requirements of this ordinance apply to all employers within the city except the federal government, the state of Wisconsin, including any office, department, agency, authority, institution, association, society, or other body of the state, including the legislative, and judiciary, or county or local government."
So what's good for the goose is not necessarily good for the gander, it seems. If this were such a good idea, why then would the city not require itself and government institutions within Milwaukee to provide the same sick-leave policy? Could be because they did the math and hope you won't.
Brad Briney is president of the Independent Business Association of Wisconsin (IBAW), Wisconsin's oldest state based business association concentrating on issues facing small and independent businesses. Additional information is available at www.ibaw.com Briney is a commercial banker with JP Morgan Chase. The question about a city-mandated paid sick leave policy on private businesses will be asked in a binding citizen referendum on the ballot in the Nov. 4 election.
4 Comments
Brad, what you fail to realize is that the City of Milwaukee already has a, pardon the pun, "healthy" sick leave policy. It is negotiated through the union and provides a very needed benefit to its employees. And you right away assume that the benefit will be abused. You need to have more faith in people. Do a small bit of research into other countries that provide more sick leave and vacation time to their employees. They are healthier, happier and more productive.
Milw Town, first the "healthy" sick leave policy of the City of Milwaukee is abused; please take time to read a newspaper. Second, please name a country the mandates 9 sick days of leave for everyone. Third, why on God's green earth is our city government wasting my tax dollars on something that is not a priority of their charter. We need them locked in a room fixing our crime, schools and taxes. Once they have these under control they can work on telling responsible people how they must live their lives.
The proposed sick leave law will be just another disincentive to locate a business in the City of Milwaukee. The comment by Milw Town suggests that this benefit will not be abused- please get real. Do you have evidence it is not being abused by City of Milwaukee employees? Based on the history of union government employee abuse of traditional sick day benefits, my bet is that there is substantial abuse.
Real news would be when Milwaukee does something to make it easier to do business in the city. Government mandates such as this on top of high taxes, crime, and bad schools producing a low quality workforce put Milwaukee at a competitive disadvantage as a business location.
Milwaukee should be moving in the other direction, making it easier to do business in the city.
Some clarification is needed on this issue. It's inaccurate to attribute the sick leave legislation to the "City of Milwaukee." The sick-leave bill is the result of a grass-roots labor movement. It was more or less foisted upon the city by a group called 9to5, the National Association of Working Women. They're mounting similar efforts across the country.
9to5 submitted something like 40,000 signatures in favor. And, under Wisconsin's direct-legislation law, which gives citizens the power to force government bodies to consider new legislation, the council had to either approve the legislation outright or send it to a referendum. The aldermen wisely chose the latter.
Some on the council probably support the measure, but if you disagree with the idea, don't pin the tail on them. Just work to vote it down.