Actually, as a public policy measure, this makes sense. Mildly ill workers who take days off are less likely to get sicker (and miss many more days of work, which costs businesses money), moreover, they're less likely to spread illnesses to other employees. In an ideal world, however, this is something that employers do for themselves, not a legislative fiat.
Agreed. From a financial standpoint paid sickleave makes sense. Not offering this benefit often means that sick workers will come to work ill simply because they can't afford to take a day off without pay. They spread their illness to other workers, which reduces company productivity as they, in turn, take days off or work at a slower pace while fighting illness. Sick workers are also far more likely to be injured on the job, potentially exposing the employer to additional comp claims or personal injury suits resulting in increased insurance premiums.
Numerous studies by both business and labor groups have shown that NOT offering sick leave costs companies more in the long run than offering it.
Still, I don't like the idea of this being mandated. If companies are dumb enough to ignore the studies and operate with sick employees, then they should have that right.
This has been run up the flag pole forever. It's BS. The mildly ill are only too infirm for work, go to the mall see how many show up there.
Why should the company have to pay for this by mandate...shouldn't this be a bargained for exchange? Why should the government stick its nose in here? Bad, bad, bad...