Seeking the collective's opinions on this binding referendum...

I would have voted NO. How can it be a good idea to encourage businesses to move out of town?

I don’t know, what’s the national average for paid sick leave?

My gut says you’ll see more productivity if people are able to take personal leave—but I’m an optimist. I mean, 37signals has a 4 day work week.

I don’t know what the average is, but I’ve never had more than 6 days of paid sick time per year.

If people are allowed to stay home when they are sick, instead of coming to work and spreading the germs, overall productivity will go up.

Employers should be free to make that decision on their own. If a municipality mandates increased benefits costs, employers will move to other cities.

@cwilbur: I agree with the concept, but how can you be sure someone is sick at home and not out golfing? Even then they might claim they were mentally fatigued and needed a mental health day

@ Andrew: I applaud 37signals, but this was a decision they came to on their own…not one mandated.

I would have voted for it. My mom had worked for her company for 10 years before using any of her sick days and it gave her time when she needed a liver transplant. If she had not had those sick days she could have been let go or without pay if on leave. If she were let go she would have lost her insurance and not been able to get her transplant which cost millions of dollars and would now be dead or homeless. Businesses need to take care of their communities and then the communities will take care of them. That is how a business has success. If there is no job security or benefits at a business then the whole time people are working they are just looking forward to something better, like a job with benefits.

@Sueanne_Tremendous: you can’t. But overall, most people are honest, and the productivity gains you get from the honest people staying home when they’re legitimately sick will outweigh the productivity losses you get from the dishonest people going out golfing.

I work for a company where most people need to be forced to use all their vacation time before it rolls over. They just rejiggered their time off scheme so that we both get more time off and it all comes from the same pool, so that people who are rarely sick effectively get more vacation time. Practically speaking, this won’t change anything – people who only take 5 days of vacation a year when they have 10 available won’t suddenly start taking 15 days when they have 15 available. But the effect on morale has been amazing. (And it was high to begin with.)

Sounds like they are trying to mandate Federal employment standards; four hours accrual per 80 hour standard pay period.
If they choose to take advantage of 1 extra day off every 28 days, all power to them. Most, however, will never use ‘em, reference jess and cwilbur’s posts above.