Duh, employers. Let sick workers stay home

    Posted August 19th, 2009 by Katie Bethell

    On Tuesday the Centers for Disease Control released its new toolkit, Preparing for the Flu: A Communication Toolkit for Businesses and Employers, which includes recommendations from the CDC, and a letter cosigned by the Secretaries of Commerce, Health and Human Services, and Labor.

    Their advice? Plan ahead and “encourage sick workers to stay home without penalty.” You’d think this would go without saying, right? What employer would want someone with the swine flu to show up at work?

    As it turns out, lots of them.

    Today, nearly 1/2 of the workforce doesn’t have paid sick days. And, to make matters worse, the people who are most likely to interact with the public, like restaurant employees, hotel staff, and home health providers are the least likely to have paid sick days (roughly 74% in these industries have no paid sick days at all). When illness strikes, people without paid sick days have a tough choice: go to work sick and put their own health and their coworkers at risk, or stay home to recover and lose pay — and maybe even their jobs.

    The CDC does right to tell employers that by not having paid sick days, they are putting both their businesses and public health at risk. Commerce Secretary Locke says it himself: “If an employee stays home sick, it’s not only the best thing for that employee’s health, but also his co-workers and the productivity of the company.”

    But while educating the public that they should stay home if they get sick is important, education alone isn’t enough. The CDC and the Secretaries of Commerce, Health and Human Services, and Labor should publicly support the Healthy Families Act (H.R.2460/S.1152). This bill, introduced in the House by Rep. Rosa DeLauro and in the Senate by Senator Edward M. Kennedy, simply ensures that employers allow all workers to earn a minimum of 7 paid sick days per year.

    Without a law in place that sets a standard for earning paid sick days, we will never achieve the kind of economic and public health safety net that we need to combat outbreaks like the H1N1 virus. We’ve encountered flu pandemics before, and we certainly will again, but businesses have not, on their own, adopted paid sick days policies despite the clear case for their benefit to businesses and the public alike.

    It’s not rocket science. The simple standard proposed by the Healthy Families Act is necessary for addressing this, and future, public health and economic needs. It’s time for our leaders to speak out, and help bring our laws up to speed with common-sense public health practices.

    Posted Under: S: Sick Days, Paid

    6 Comments

    November 23, 2009 at 11:20 am by Course

    Great help. Thank you.

    [Reply]

    September 26, 2009 at 10:22 am by Trish

    I don’t really mean if the employee themselves is sick, but the problem is the sick days will be used when the employee’s child is unable to attend school due to the flu.

    [Reply]

    September 26, 2009 at 10:19 am by Trish

    Please try to remember that for every employee that calls in sick, someone else has to do that person’s job. That might mean more work for someone who is already there, but in today’s world the workers are already stretched by layoffs and the need to do more work than ever before. So, now you have to call someone else in to cover. If you pay the sick employee and then someone to come in, your staffing costs just doubled. Do it for the week that the school wants the child to stay out.
    If you are already struggling, how long can you afford to pay extra staff before you have to start swinging the layoff axe again?

    [Reply]

    August 28, 2009 at 11:45 pm by jeanne

    hello,
    I would like to comment in regards to the swine flu vaccines and school age children. I am adamantly against any mandatory vaccination program and/or intimidation of the school administrators to forced our kids to get vaccinated. Be prepared to know how to response
    if this happens.

    Does anyone share this view?

    Thanks!

    Jeanne B.

    [Reply]

    August 22, 2009 at 9:32 am by Shirley Genn

    I totally agree that employers should be required to provide sick leave, but I need to have specific
    information about the details for implementation.
    I have to understand the guidelines and how they
    fairly differentiate in theur requirements for
    employers who have varying resources available
    and how their requirements would reflect their
    financial status.

    [Reply]

    August 21, 2009 at 3:35 pm by J Maher

    Good points. Milwaukee has recently required employers to provide sick leave, called the Milwaukee Sick Leave Ordnance.

    [Reply]

    Leave a Comment

    Your name is required
    An Email address is required

    Notify me of follow-up comments via e-mail