Democrats think these benefits come for free
If you pay more in this way, why don't Democrats understand that this will reduce the amount that firms will otherwise pay workers?
U.S. employers who tell workers to stay home when they are sick will have to give them paid time off for up to five days under new federal legislation proposed on Tuesday.
The emergency law would cover pandemic H1N1 flu or any other infectious disease, said California Representative George Miller, a Democrat who chairs the House Education and Labor Committee and who introduced the bill. . . .
Labels: healthcare, Regulation
posted by John Lott at 1:41 PM
9 Comments:
George Miller is one of the dumbest economists in Congress. I am sure he cannot conceive that more costs and taxation of business means someone has to pay more for products or get less at the company.
His political life has never been that way, so why would the rest of the world operate differently?
As a legal immigrant from the third world, I must say: Such law is classic third world stuff. That's why a pile of mandates like this keeps 50% of the labor force in places like Brazil informal. You also see there tremendous informality levels in markets like housing (favelas), transportation, commerce, all due to overregulation. Want to read a fantastic overview of the subject, check 'The Other Path' by Hernando de Soto.
John, do you think they think it comes free, or do they want contagious people to stay home from work without fear of a short term loss of pay? Either way I disagree, but there has to be something of substance behind these views. They can't possibly be as dumb as they seem.
"Why don't Democrats understand that this will reduce the amount that firms will otherwise pay workers?"
Because they mistakenly assume it will come out of the profit line of the P&L.
I proposed George Miller for Moron of the day: http://govtricks.blogspot.com/2009/11/moron-of-day-george-miller-d-ca.html
To be honest, i don't think it's unjust. I mean, yes, the money has to come from somewhere, but on the other hand, if this is the company Telling you to stay home, not you choosing to...
Besides, if this really is going to be a pandemic like the Spanish Flu was, those 5 days of sick pay for the diseased workers would be less than the losses resulting from the loss of additional employees who were infected while the original one was trying to stick it out.
Raven, how do you consider this just? Because it might be beneficial in the long run? The government is forcing the employer to do this.
What if the employee blew threw all his sick days because he was out drinking? The employer has to pay him for days when he might be sick!? What if he is faking? Do we have to bring this before the courts? The whole thing is absurd. It leads to so many unintended consequences that you should dismiss it immediately.
"To be honest, i don't think it's unjust. I mean, yes, the money has to come from somewhere, but on the other hand, if this is the company Telling you to stay home, not you choosing to..."
Then let it count against the Unemployment Compensation waiting period...which I believe is still a week or two?
Maybe if these corporations can't pay a decent living wage they should not be incorporated?
Post a Comment
<< Home