Slog

News & Arts

The Stranger Suggests

Critics' Best Bets
Music Arts & Food


Line Out

Music & the City
at Night

Tuesday, August 9, 2011

State Economists Refute "Doomsday Predictions" That Paid Sick Leave Will Hurt Seattle Businesses

Posted by on Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 9:44 AM

Last Friday, a dozen economists from around the state submitted a letter (.pdf) to the Seattle City Council, throwing their weight behind legislation that would give all Seattle workers access to paid sick leave. Now let's put aside arguments for a moment that keeping 40 percent of Seattle's workforce from taking paid sick time off is both a public health and social justice issue.

Here's what economists have to say about how this legislation will affect the business side of things:

"You will no doubt hear doomsday predictions from business lobbyists who oppose this measure," the letter states. "However, the real-life experience of firms that provide sick leave and a growing body of academic research show beyond any doubt that the costs of providing paid sick days are extremely small. The benefits—for employees, employers, and the public—are substantial. We urge you to pay close attention to evidence and data, not unfounded speculation about the impact this legislation will have on our economy."

The data they cite includes a new study from the Economic Policy Institute, which concludes that the loss of a few days’ pay for a low-wage worker can equal one month’s worth of groceries—which is why workers are willing to work sick and risk infecting their peers. The letter continues: "According to the same study, among workers who currently have access to five paid sick days, the industry-weighted average number of days taken is 2.41 days; if employees used this average number of paid sick days, the total cost would be 0.19 percent of sales."

Paid sick leave reduces the number of emergency room visits. It reduces employee turnover, thereby cutting the cost of replacing and retraining workers. And council member Nick Licata, who's sponsoring the legislation, notes that, "Seattle’s proposal includes feedback from key stakeholders and business leaders and is infused best practices from Milwaukee, San Francisco and Washington, D.C., cities that have already enacted similar legislation."

The council's Housing, Human Services, Health, and Culture Committee will discuss and vote on the paid sick leave ordinance tomorrow at 2:00 p.m. Let's pass this goddamn thing already.

 

Comments (8) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
seandr 1
The costs are always small when it's someone else's money.

If paid sick leave is the right thing to do, then let's do it. But at least have the decency to acknowledge that you are requiring restaurant owners to foot the bill, and that the money involved may be significant depending on the particulars of a given business.
Posted by seandr on August 9, 2011 at 9:54 AM
gloomy gus 2
Ooh, that's faaabulous work right there. It's not just that they're economists, it's that they're academics - not industry paid shill economists for hire. Super impressive. Suck on it, Chamber o' Commerce.
Posted by gloomy gus on August 9, 2011 at 9:55 AM
3
Simple compromise: paid sick days starts on the second day.

That will at least keep the pot heads and fuck ups who infest these jobs like weeds from scamming small business owners.
Posted by Limousine Liberal on August 9, 2011 at 9:55 AM
4
" it's that they're academics"

Yes, so they've basically never had a real job in their lives.

Posted by Limousine Liberal on August 9, 2011 at 9:57 AM
Kinison 5
And if you have a horible job with high turnover, its really going to suck for the worker as every other week someone quits, but first uses up whatever sick/vacation time they have before they quit over email/im/phone.
Posted by Kinison http://www.holgatehawks.com on August 9, 2011 at 10:39 AM
6
#3: wait, so if you hire potheads and fuckups, you shouldn't hafta pay the price for your incompetent hiring practices?
Posted by quasigentrified on August 9, 2011 at 11:54 AM
7
"so if you hire potheads and fuckups, you shouldn't hafta pay the price for your incompetent hiring practices?"

Yes, but someone has to employ The Stranger's readers....
Posted by Limousine Liberal on August 9, 2011 at 1:03 PM
COMTE 8
@1:

Except that it's not "someone else's money", is it? It's the customers' money. One of the arguments anti-ordinance hacks have been using to try to drum up opposition is the "oooh, these terrible, horrible, no-good, very expensive costs will simply be passed along by the employer to the consumer" ploy. But, if the costs are really that negligible, then either the employer will be able to absorb them with very little negative impact to their bottom line, or, if they DO pass them along, it will be such a small increase that consumers will barely notice the difference. Either way, it shoots down that particular argument, if nothing else.
Posted by COMTE http://www.chriscomte.com on August 9, 2011 at 2:15 PM

Add a comment

Advertisement
 

Want great deals and a chance to win tickets to the best shows in Seattle? Join The Stranger Presents email list!


All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact Info | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy