Insurance Agent Forum

[Robert Barney]

This should act as yet another incentive for companies to hire employees; NOT:

Proposed law would require pay for sick workers | Health | Reuters

[Charpress]

Oh, wow. This is another example of lawmakers running amok trying to legislate everything under the sun. While a particular bill can usually be made to look important and timely on it's face, taken with all the other regulation it tends to make businesses want to just give up.

In this case the law covers 'infectious disease" -well, what the hell is that, exactly? "Hi, I'm calling in sick. I have an infectious disease."

Would not a cold be covered? Would it extend to a sinus infection? A sinus infection is probably not contagious, but you could find some support on the Internet to prove up a case that it can be.

The end result here is that any sick time is going to have to be paid for. The alternative is to get into a $10,000 pissing contest with an employee who says they are sick but you know damn well they have a hangover every Monday morning and call in sick at least half the time (been there). So, do you require a doctor's excuse? Even with that, do you take your chances with the Labor Board knowing they always side with the employee and that an appeal is almost always necessary?

Lawmakers tend to not think these things through. They go with whatever sounds good.

[Robert Barney]

Originally Posted by Charpress

The end result here is that any sick time is going to have to be paid for. The alternative is to get into a $10,000 pissing contest with an employee who says they are sick but you know damn well they have a hangover every Monday morning and call in sick at least half the time (been there). So, do you require a doctor's excuse?

I imagine it will require a doctor to verify the illness at some point, but the good news for the employee is that the employer will be required to pay for it - one way or the other.

Lawmakers tend to not think these things through. They go with whatever sounds good.

Oh you can be certain that the lawmakers (liberal Democrats) have thought this through. They know exactly what they are giving employees, and they know exactly what they are doing to employers. Employers are evil jerks who enslave employees and PROFIT from them - those evil profit mongers.

If the government could, it would just take your business away from you and hand it over to the employees.

Wait a minute, isn't that what they did with GM and Chrysler?

[healthagent]

As an employer there's an easy way to solve that problem; an employee trying to milk the system to get paid while out sick - fire 'em.

Almost all states are "at will" employment states meaning you don't have to give a reason for termination as long as it's not based on race, sex, etc....

So they call out sick to milk the system while you pay - just wait a few weeks, call 'em into the office; "we've decided to let you go."

[Robert Barney]

Originally Posted by healthagent

As an employer there's an easy way to solve that problem; an employee trying to milk the system to get paid while out sick - fire 'em.

Which is the next thing that the socialist Democrats will pass a law to stop.

[Charpress]

I would suspect that somewhere in this bill there is a prohibition against "retribution" firing. That is part and parcel of all employment legislation.

That will be another revolving door to the various labor boards and appeals to the courts from their rulings.

"He fired me because I called in sick 8 months ago, not because I stole from the petty cash drawer."

Seriously, I have a client who owns a lawn mowing service. One employee used the company truck, mowers, uniforms and gasoline and found his own customers on weekends -keeping the money for himself, of course.

He was fired and then applied for unemployment compensation. The employer objected saying he was "fired for cause" and should not get compensation. Unbelievably, the employer lost because they did not think this was "theft" or any "for cause" grounds. He had to appeal and plunk down about $3,000 in legal fees because it would make his unemployment contributions go up -pretty much forever.

I don't know how any small employer is going to make it in this country the way things are going. Just kiss a whole lot of jobs goodbye thanks in part to the legislative hack do-gooders.