Paid sick leave in USA

Unfortunately too many people will not wind up using those sick days for actual illness-a hangover or "defective" alarm clock maybe. They'll schedule appointments, take 3-4 day weekends, go fishing, swimming, hunting, paint,fix etc. This is what I've seen with companies that offered them. It would be nice if someone is expelling fluids out of their body they would take off but that's not reality which was my criteria, especially the one requiring a bathroom. I would make it tougher to fire someone for illness. And companies should be incentivized to give employees more paid sick days and time off but it shouldn't be mandated. I've simply seen too much abuse over the years. And a lot of smaller companies simply can't afford. The small companies I worked allowed sickdays but no pay, unless it was running problem it was no problem as far as job security.

Anecdotal but I had jobs that if you were willing to accept discipline ie write ups and/or warnings you could double your "vacation" time. There were people that planned out their sick days every year. So the company clamped down on things like doctor's notes including lowering the required note from the 4th day to the 3rd and/or upon demand or no pay.
 

WhatInThe said:
Unfortunately too many people will not wind up using those sick days for actual illness-a hangover or "defective" alarm clock maybe. They'll schedule appointments, take 3-4 day weekends, go fishing, swimming, hunting, paint,fix etc. This is what I've seen with companies that offered them. It would be nice if someone is expelling fluids out of their body they would take off but that's not reality which was my criteria, especially the one requiring a bathroom. I would make it tougher to fire someone for illness. And companies should be incentivized to give employees more paid sick days and time off but it shouldn't be mandated. I've simply seen too much abuse over the years. And a lot of smaller companies simply can't afford. The small companies I worked allowed sickdays but no pay, unless it was running problem it was no problem as far as job security.

Anecdotal but I had jobs that if you were willing to accept discipline ie write ups and/or warnings you could double your "vacation" time. There were people that planned out their sick days every year. So the company clamped down on things like doctor's notes including lowering the required note from the 4th day to the 3rd and/or upon demand or no pay.
Click to expand...

Apparently everyone else in the world are much more trustworthy, and have a better work ethic than Americans.. because we are the ONLY country that does not have mandatory vaction and sick time.. Our Corporations have caught on to what a bunch of shiftless low lives we are and put a stop to our nonsense.... right?
 
QuickSilver said:
Yeah that goes on all the time with the lunch hour... Ha..more like 30 minutes) They call a meeting and tell you to bring your lunch.. oh sure... I'll be there! Ha... That's BS... We don't get paid for that lunch break... yet they want us to sit an listen to their crap...
Click to expand...

Your lunch break is not part of your paid time? You are a backward country with respect to industrial relations.

Our child care workers are guaranteed 30 mins uninterrupted time off for lunch and a 10 minute crib break for either morning or afternoon tea.
Because both are part of their paid hours (38 hrs per week) they are expected to remain on site during that time.
However, they are expected to stay back once a month for a staff meeting in their own time.
 
Every job I have held in the US, union or non union, my lunch half hour or hour was on my time. So I could start at 7am and be done at 15:30pm (3:30pm) if on a 30 minute lunch break, or 4pm if on a 1 hour lunch. We would also get a 10 or 15 minute potty break mid morning and mid afternoon. This is for the hourly rated folks.

Now later on, years of knowledge and experience and many of us would get raised to a non exempt pay status. Then the schedules were less concerned and much was expected to be done on schedule. We would be allowed/expected to work overtime to help meet the schedule and were paid higher base wages and if enough overtime was recorded we would see that also in our checks. Incidentals like schedule potty breaks were no longer needed as we used the restrooms as needed.

I preferred the scheduled clock hours for the routine but I also liked the non exempt setup for the higher wages and my freedom to work early and late in order to make schedules. While raising my family, money meant a lot.

Any time a meeting was mandatory it had to be posted to the clock, and not on lunch time per the ways the companies I worked for operated.
 
QuickSilver said:
Apparently everyone else in the world are much more trustworthy, and have a better work ethic than Americans.. because we are the ONLY country that does not have mandatory vaction and sick time.. Our Corporations have caught on to what a bunch of shiftless low lives we are and put a stop to our nonsense.... right?
Click to expand...

The premise, not a law demanding more sick and vacation days should come to America. The big corporations could probably handle it. The smaller companies or organizations not so much. I know unions that have a vacation fund in which the employee and employer contribute to and that's how they get they 'paid' days. But if they callout sick or take a couple of days it's coming out of that fund. But that's the sacrifice for a 30 dollar an hour job that has a tight schedule and budget as is.

I've had jobs or was involved in certain projects where I was nervous taking vacation. Not so much my job wouldn't be there upon return but what someone might do with the job good or bad or something happens and I'm not there to answer for it. I always tried clean loose ends prior, no surprises was always my motto. I might not get let go on the spot but most work places have a list that includes the first to be canned if need be and who they would keep no questions asked.

In someway I agree the premise or concept of more vacation and sick days needs to be explored.
 
Productivity depends on workers not being burnt out, which is why recreation leave is essential and it should be taken.
Wise employers will see that it is taken each year.
 
Dame Warrigal said:
Productivity depends on workers not being burnt out, which is why recreation leave is essential and it should be taken.
Wise employers will see that it is taken each year.
Click to expand...

The thing is, employers do not care whether you are burnt out or not. If you quit doing your job to their satisfaction (or they decide you are a pain in the butt for whatever reason), they will just can you and hire the next guy in line. Employers do not give a hoot about the health or welfare of the employee.
 
Extended vacation times were a result of length of employment in most places I worked, as I remember. First, incomplete year, days by when started, first full year would be one week. Than after 2 years two weeks vacation. After 10 years it became 3 weeks vacation time. I believe that after 15 years it became 4 weeks and after 20 years it became 5 weeks vacation. We were told to use 2 weeks, if available, each year and the remainder could then be banked for a future time but if a certain amount had been banked, then all days over that amount had to be taken each year. On retirement, or leaving, the amount of vacation time in the bank would be paid in cash. In my experience, 40 hours would be considered a full week of work in the US. I think that is still the measurement for full employment in the US and there is a lower number of 30 hours or less is considered to be part time work. On part time classification many regular employees benefits do not apply.

These increments would not be the same for all employers as that depended on the company policy or the union agreements.
 
On part time classification many regular employees benefits do not apply.
Click to expand...
Permanent part time employees over here receive the same entitlements as full time workers on a pro rata basis.
Casual employees do not receive these entitlements but do receive a % age loading on the hourly rate to compensate for them.
 
In the US, each part time job is between the employer and the employee. In many areas now that is about all that is available and part time becomes the way many must work. Pro rated means they get less, no matter how it is figured. That is also covered in our tax laws and state regulations so businesses do pay according to rules and laws. In the US most laws are from bottom up, city or state rules, so our federal laws become the result of many local laws rather than some supposed genius at the federal level making the laws.
 
Dame Warrigal said:
Permanent part time employees over here receive the same entitlements as full time workers on a pro rata basis.
Casual employees do not receive these entitlements but do receive a % age loading on the hourly rate to compensate for them.
Click to expand...

That's how it should be... BUT here, for some reason, as you can see by some responses.. Americans don't want anyone to have much.. particularly in the way of entitlements and benefits.. There is a general brainwashing that Corporatations are somehow in control and Americans are dependent on their benevolence... Rather than understanding Corporations could NOT exist without workers either, they agree with their general mistreatment and unfairness.

I think this all started when our Congress fought against Roosevelt when he first proposed Universal healthcare in the early 1900's.. bowing to the wishes and greed of large insurance companies... Our healthcare was forever tied to our employers and private insurance...which of course gives them additional power over workers.. Just another barrel to hold over our collective heads. People are then dependent on this protection for their familes..and put up with all sorts of abuse to keep it.

Unions began to develope and gain power.. and some power DID shift to labor giving workers the ability to negotiate wages and benefits..... BUT.. as we have discussed... the GOP has fought tooth and nail to "bust" unions... to return nearly ALL of the power to Employers.. People here ARE treated much worse than in Europe and other countries... and what is insane.. is that many Americans keep voting to keep it that way.. ANYTHING that benefits people is seen as Socialist.... or communist... or whatever.. and one political party does it's best to keep it that way.. OF course... because it's the large donations to campaign funds coming from special interests that keeps them in office.

Seems to me that the "Stockholm syndrome applies here..

Stockholm syndrome, or capture-bonding, is a psychological phenomenon in which hostages express empathy and sympathy and have positive feelings toward their captors, sometimes to the point of defending and identifying with the captors. These feelings are generally considered irrational in light of the danger or risk endured by the victims, who essentially mistake a lack of abuse from their captors for an act of kindness.[SUP][1][/SUP][SUP][2][/SUP] The FBI's Hostage Barricade Database System shows that roughly 8% of victims show evidence of Stockholm syndrome.[SUP][3]
Click to expand...


What else can explain how SOME people continue to defend the mistreatment and unfairness of Employers while insulting and complaining about fellow Americans instead.. It's irrational, but look at some of these responses.. WHAT else can explain it? [/SUP]
 
QuickSilver said:
That's how it should be... BUT here, for some reason, as you can see by some responses.. Americans don't want anyone to have much.. particularly in the way of entitlements and benefits.. There is a general brainwashing that Corporatations are somehow in control and Americans are dependent on their benevolence... Rather than understanding Corporations could NOT exist without workers either, they agree with their general mistreatment and unfairness.

I think this all started when our Congress fought against Roosevelt when he first proposed Universal healthcare in the early 1900's.. bowing to the wishes and greed of large insurance companies... Our healthcare was forever tied to our employers and private insurance...which of course gives them additional power over workers.. Just another barrel to hold over our collective heads. People are then dependent on this protection for their familes..and put up with all sorts of abuse to keep it.

Unions began to develope and gain power.. and some power DID shift to labor giving workers the ability to negotiate wages and benefits..... BUT.. as we have discussed... the GOP has fought tooth and nail to "bust" unions... to return nearly ALL of the power to Employers.. People here ARE treated much worse than in Europe and other countries... and what is insane.. is that many Americans keep voting to keep it that way.. ANYTHING that benefits people is seen as Socialist.... or communist... or whatever.. and one political party does it's best to keep it that way.. OF course... because it's the large donations to campaign funds coming from special interests that keeps them in office.

Seems to me that the "Stockholm syndrome applies here..



What else can explain how SOME people continue to defend the mistreatment and unfairness of Employers while insulting and complaining about fellow Americans instead.. It's irrational, but look at some of these responses.. WHAT else can explain it? [/SUP][/B]
Click to expand...

Having worked union and non union, "union" is not the fix all or one stop solution for employee treatment. There is definitely 'a' need for unions, they have their place in the US economy. An employee should have representation of some kind if for no other reason most management decisions or documents an employee signs are run by their lawyers. There are safety issues but those pesky insurance have helped insert safety standards into the work place to limit costs/liability.
And with all the required and provided safety programs one of the biggest problems with lets say the iron workers/union workers is not strapping in especially at the lower but still high elevations(I've talked to OHSA and insurance people about this, the iron workers are 'notorious' for not using their provided harnesses and straps) At the same time I've seen management violate the contract on purpose making the employee file a grievance for every little thing. Point being it still comes down to the individuals involved. Nothing is set in stone.

Ok lets say the fast food workers get unionized and higher pay. Lets say the company even keeps them full-time. Now to get promoted, transferred, or even a different shift there are not only management rules but union policy ie seniority. Point is you can get bogged down in a union environment in a heartbeat. And that 15 dollar an job flipping burgers won't be the same 10 years later. I know tradesman who needed additional training & certifications to get many of the jobs the union had contracts with but there was a five year waiting list. In the meantime layoff/no work time was increasing. He had to go pay for the training himself as did others. He also had to turn down overtime when he was working to go to school. The same union recently told him retire early with 80% of your benefits because they had trouble finding their members work. Also told him don't work in a non union shop even part-time or we will pull your retirement.

Unions have their place but a mandated fixture in the workplace is not one of them.
 
hmmmm... I disagree... Do you not see a correlation between the stagnation and sometimes decline in wages to the elimination of many unions over the last 30 years?

I'm not saying that unions cannot get too powerful.. or make unattainable demands, but they are necessary IMO.. The American worker is paying the prive for the war against them.
 
One of the problems with the major companies of the US is that they now get much of their products built in foreign countries where rules and regulations and wages are much smaller than in the US. Companies must prepare and protect their existence for the thousands of stockholders that own those companies. Businesses that fail to provide profits for the stockholders will lose their investors and go out of business. Then no wages or benefits for the employees at all. As of now, so much pressure put on the business world of the US that constantly increasing wages and benefits means they will go out of business, as many have done. This is not a place when we want the government in there with false funding and such as that just creates an ever expanding failure mode, that will eventually fail anyway.

We, in the US, now have a false economy when first time employees working part time schedules can get large hourly wages and benefits too. What will the prices at the burger stands do now? They will go up to where many folks can no longer go there for a lunch and drink. Just another step in the inevitable cost of living rise that will again demand that even higher wages must occur.

My first job, while in high school paid 25 cents and hour. My first job out of high school, construction labor, paid $1.40 per hour. My first industrial job paid $1 per hour but included some basic medical coverage and some vacation earnings. Now we hear of $15 per hour for a burger job?

Our national debt is already at $18 trillion and still climbing up. Rather scary to hear that some folks think we need more wages and benefits to exist. I remember back when if out of work we would take anything. We could not just sit back and wait for something good to happen. That seems to be the solution these days. Sit and wait and hope, till all the local, state, and federal hand outs finally are gone.

I don't see companies as our enemy at all. If they can hold their positions and make some profits too, their stock holders will remain and the company will prosper and be able to pay the wages and benefits with no problems. We then all are better off.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top