An outline posted at www.flu.gov recommends
that employers “establish policies for employee compensation and sick-leave
absences unique to a pandemic.”
Such directives could boost momentum for
legislation requiring employers to provide paid sick days as preparations ramp
up for an outbreak of the H1N1 flu virus this fall.
Even with the government urging companies to keep sick workers at home, the
measure faces significant legislative obstacles.
But advocates are using the flu scare to promote the bill. Titled the Healthy
Families Act, it would enable workers to accrue one hour of paid sick leave for
every 30 hours they work up to a total of 56 hours, or seven days.
Providing days off is exactly what the government is asking companies to do
if their employees catch the flu. An outline posted at www.flu.gov recommends that employers “establish
policies for employee compensation and sick-leave absences unique to a
pandemic.”
Guidance from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention states,
“Regardless of the size of the business or the function or services that you
provide, all employers should plan now to allow and encourage sick workers to
stay home without fear of losing their jobs.”
Advocates of paid sick leave couldn’t have written it better themselves.
“What they said was tailor-made for passing the Healthy Families Act,” said
Lisa Maatz, director of public policy and government relations at the American
Association of University Women. “We’re taking advantage of that statement.”
Supporters also are making the case on Capitol Hill that the workers least
likely to have paid sick days are those in the food service, child care and
health care sectors.
“This new outbreak is highlighting the public health risk of so many people
not having job-protected paid sick days,” said Steffany Stern, policy
coordinator for the work and family team at the National Partnership for Women
and Families.
Stern said government flu guidance doesn’t reflect the reality of the
workplace. Many employees fear losing their jobs or income if they stay
home.
“They’re very fearful of taking time off without pay,” Stern said.
Opponents of the paid-sick-leave bill acknowledge that the public health
argument can be compelling. But they point to the economy as a reason not to
move forward with the bill, which they say would place a mandate on companies
trying to cope with the recession.
“You have to balance [flu concerns] against a pretty tenuous job situation,”
said Victoria Lipnic, an attorney and consultant and former assistant secretary
of labor for employment standards. “Is this the right time to impose what would
be an additional cost on them?”
The legislative calendar is another impediment. Health care and energy reform
as well as appropriations bills presumably would all come before paid sick days.
The measure has had a hearing in the House.
But action in the Senate may be
further delayed by a change in leadership at the Health Education Pensions and
Labor Committee, where Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, has taken over from Sen. Edward
Kennedy, D-Massachusetts, who died in August. Kennedy was the Senate champion of
the paid-sick-days bill.
As a practical matter, even if the measure were approved this fall, it would
likely take months for the Department of Labor to issue regulations to implement
the law.
“Paid sick leave is in no way the answer to the H1N1 scare,” said Lisa Horn,
manager of health care at the Society for Human Resource Management. “The
Healthy Families Act is the wrong approach at the wrong time.”
In her Capitol Hill meetings, Horn is stressing that the bill could present
problems for companies that already provide paid time off. It’s not clear
whether PTO days would meet the requirements of the sick-leave bill.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce says that more than three-quarters of employees
receive some form of paid leave. But advocates for the bill say that about half
of private-sector workers lack paid sick days.
SHRM is proposing a safe harbor from federal leave mandates for employers
that have paid-time-off programs.
Although talks about that idea have yet to begin in earnest, advocates say
that the current version of the paid-sick-days bill was modified from previous
iterations to meet corporate concerns. For instance, the time off is now accrued
and absences of more than three days require medical certification.
“We’ve been engaging with the business community and listening to what
they’re saying,” Stern said.
—Mark Schoeff Jr.
Stay
informed and connected. Get human resources news and HR features via
Workforce Management's Twitter feed
or
RSS feeds for mobile devices and news
readers