Mandatory sick leave in Seattle a step closer to reality

SassyKat said on June 23, 2011 at 3:15 PM

I guess not many of you "whiners" have ever had to deal with having no sick leave. It means when you're diagnosed with cancer that during your chemotherapy treatments, you're at work puking into your trashcan because you can't afford to be off work. Or being rushed to the hospital and having to deal with all that time off with no pay. Because so many of us are living paycheck-to-paycheck now, you will be in danger of losing your car, your home, etc. So then we can go suck on the ouberment teet.

Hydrotrucker said on June 22, 2011 at 12:25 PM

Seriously! I would love to see the city focus on just one of the thousands of REAL problems they have before going off on yet another spending other people's money rampage. We have paid hundreds of thousands of dollars for roads and we're driving on roads that in many cases are gravel roads, (ever been to south park Nick?) the best of the roads in Washington state have so many potholes people are replacing rims & tires. Where is all the road money going? The city's answer to this problem has been "the pothole patrol" which consists of five guys doing the work of two. You city guys are real geniuses!

quidproquote said on June 22, 2011 at 8:06 AM

This is beyond a great idea. I've been there and had to make the choice of "I'm so sick I feel like I'm going to die but if I don't go to work i'm not going to be able to pay the bills" Which was even dumber since I worked at a food establishment but you have to go into work because not paying the bills isn't an option. It might not need to be required for every sort of business but for food handling businesses it absolutely should be a requirement to have some paid sick leave. The cooks the waiters and the bartender even the grocery handlers touch your food and when they are sick there is a good chance you will get sick too even if they wash their hands every time they touch something other than food.

pixelater said on June 22, 2011 at 6:58 AM

So if an employer has 250 employees and pays them $10 per hour, that amounts to $140,000.00 per year. Bump that to $15. per hour and you are suddenly over a quarter million not to mention payroll taxes, L&I, Fica and medical. *** If you have never run a business with employees you probably have no idea what the cost of being in business is.

freedomfrank said on June 22, 2011 at 6:09 AM

Say goodbye to even more business in Washington state. We're going to look like Detroit pretty soon. Nothing left but folks mudsucking off the guberment teet. Hope y'all enjoy poverty when all the good jobs are gone.

finster said on June 21, 2011 at 7:30 PM

Great. So now people in Seattle can still come to work sick and take nice days like today off because they have sick days.

agarmy said on June 21, 2011 at 5:40 PM

I personally think this is a good idea, considering I work in healthcare. I would rather have someone take their sick leave and stay out of the office if they are truly sick, than to fell as though they are forced to come in. This isn't an 'I feel like staying home for the hell of it' ticket, (wether or not it will be used for that) but it's more like 'If you are truly sick, then take the time' day. I have seen (and been in the position where) where people come in, with flu like symptoms or just absolutely feeling or looking awful, but they don't want to leave, because they are afraid of losing their jobs or their pay for that day. Its an extenuating circumstance. You can't help to get sick. I'm glad that if I really need to take that time, I don't have to worry about that anymore.

onceatimberbeast said on June 21, 2011 at 5:37 PM

lj1988 said on June 21, 2011 at 5:25 PM Obviously all of you complaining have never been infected by a contractor who has come to work sick because their contracting yadda yadda yadda Spoken like a lifelong government worker. I worked in the government just enough to know that the vast majority of them are clueless to the real world. Also, some of the lazies people I ever worked with. They'd regularly take sick days just because they were available. What does the world health organization have to do with this?

lj1988 said on June 21, 2011 at 5:25 PM

Obviously all of you complaining have never been infected by a contractor who has come to work sick because their contracting agency doesn't provide sick days. Stop whining about Nanny states and use your heads for once. Sometimes you have to step in and prevent the spread of infection because small companies won't do a thing unless forced as it's not financially beneficial to THEM. If you all had your way, the WHO would have never wiped out smallpox as it was "big govern'mnt."

pixelater said on June 21, 2011 at 4:58 PM

A cup of coffee just went up a buck. Offer sick days and I'll bet you will have more sick people.

onceatimberbeast said on June 21, 2011 at 4:46 PM

If I had a business in Seattle, I'd probably leave. In an economy where jobs are scarce, the city puts a measure like this together? There in a nut shell is how much the government knows about how hard it is to run a business. Well, is it better to have a job without sick days or be jobless?

exmarinersfan said on June 21, 2011 at 4:27 PM

Oh great, Nick the Nanny is at again, telling everyone how to live their lives in some perfect politically correct way that ensures fewer jobs and fewer companies in Seattle. Why don't you leave people alone Nick? These idiotic left coast urban policies are stupid and will help very few people. Yeah, sure, going to work sick is a bad thing to do and if you don't have health insurance blah, blah, blah leftist drivel. Dennis Kucinich would be animprovement over Licata.