U.S. Sick Leave Policy Makes Nation More Vulnerable To Swine Flu

The United States lags behind developed nations in mandating paid sick leave for workers, a deficiency that makes the nation more vulnerable to contagious illnesses like swine flu, according to a study by the Center for Economic and Policy Research released Monday.

"We looked at 22 affluent countries -- the 22 that are the top 22 ranked in terms of the human development index -- except for the United States, every single other one has some form of paid sick days or paid sick leave and the majority have both," said the report's lead author, Jody Heymann of McGill University's Institute for Health and Social Policy, in an interview with the Huffington Post.

To bring the U.S. up to speed, Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) announced a bill that would allow workers to earn up to seven days of paid sick leave to recover from illness or care for a sick family member.

"Every worker should have paid sick days -- it is a matter of right and wrong. Being a working parent should not mean choosing between your job, taking care of yourself, and taking care of your family," said DeLauro in a statement. Noting that in the wake of the continuing swine flu outbreak many public officials have encouraged folks with symptoms to stay home, DeLauro added: "for many Americans, following this sound advice is impossible. Almost half of all private sector workers, 57 million, do not have a single paid sick day. These workers put their jobs on the line every time they take a day off."

DeLauro said in her statement that "presenteeism" -- when sick workers show up for work instead of staying home -- costs the national economy $180 billion annually in lost productivity, or $225 per employee per year.

The CEPR's report, titled "Contagion Nation: A Comparison of Paid Sick Day Policies in 22 Countries," found that the U.S. was the only one that did not have national or at least provincial policies providing paid sick leave for workers for short stretches of five days or long stretches of 50 days.

Heymann said DeLauro's bill will remedy the nation's ailing sick leave policy. The current setup, she said, is a hazard for everybody.

"You have to worry not only whether you have paid leave but whether the restaurant worker has paid leave," said Heymann, "or whether they went to work with gastroenteritis because they don't have paid leave."

HuffPost readers: Has illness ever put you in a difficult situation at work? Has a family member's illness ever put you in a bind? Share your stories -- email us at [e-mail].

Get HuffPost Politics On Facebook and Twitter!

Comments

[TiminVirginia]

I agree all employees should get paid sick leave. FMLA authorizes unpaid S/L.
BUT you must also have a way to prevent sick leave abuse. I run a County 9-1-1 Center. Our County policy is after the third consecutive day you must have a Dr. note. I had an employee who called in sick, then turned around and asked another employee to go out to dinner a half hour later. The second employee showed me the text message, leave it to say that first employee was fired. Sick leave abuse is theft.
But I also have a S/L incentive program. If an employee uses no S/L in a calender year, they get a free day off on Administrative leave. We usually get 3 out of 25 people who earn that free day each year.

When someone calls out sick here we must pay overtime for someone else to fill the chair. S/L cost our taxpayers money.

[meko]

The doctor's note thing only works when employees have medical insurance. Otherwise the prohibitive cost of a doctor's visit means they're just going to come into the office.

[RachelMc]

exactly. plus who goes to the doc for a simple cold?

[RandVictims]

You prevent sick leave abuse by creating a work environment that would not encourage employees to want to call off sick.

American people work waaaaayyyy too hard as it is while those at the top reap all the rewards. Top executives at my company take a **minimum** 3 "personal days off a month and use 6 or more weeks vacation a year (for six-seven figure salaries) while the average employees are consistently deterred from taking any vacation for fear of not being "loyal" or "productive" during an "employers market" (for barely 5 figures)

Management is your problem, not the workers.

[-0013]

That is outright nonsense. Your basic premise seems to be that top execs and lower rung employees should have the same amount of vacation time and be treated the same in general. The world needs ditchdiggers too.

[Disdain]

Of course management is always the problem and workers are perfect little angel who want to work hard all the time. What are you on? They are bad apples on both sides. As a result of that companies have no choice but to institute policy to protect themselves. Those that are badly managed will fail. Those that do well have a better working environment that rewards those who do well and phase out those who do not regardless of position or title.

[meko]

Determine what results you want and measure performance. Employees who know that they will perform badly when sick and would be better off staying home to get well, stay home. Those who are well will take the time to make up for whatever work needs to be done. That's what the good managers do.

[poizinniv]

Then give the workers some vacation time! Once in awhile everyone needs a "mental health" day. If you don't give them any, they will use sick days to get them. Humans are not machines, sometimes we need a break. Sorry if that doesn't add to your quarterly profits, but it's reality.

[meko]

The last thing I want is a 911 operator who has worked until they are unable to concentrate and do their jobs well. I don't want them exhausted, sick or burned out. I'm ok with higher taxes if it leads to better performance. So measure performance.

[TrueBleuAZ]

What good are sick day accruals if an employer disciplines an employee for using them. Such is the case of my employer, who otherwise is a great employer. Miss more than 3 days in a year and it's write-up time. Other employees come in "dripping" sick because they cannot afford to be disciplined, and the rest of the staff pays the price. It needs to be legally prohibitive for an employer to even allow an employee with manifest symptoms of a contagious nature to report for work. Until employers are made to suffer fines for their attendance policies, we are going to pay a great price in public health.

[Disdain]

If the number of sick days is outlined in your employee handbook they have no legal ground to fire you for using them are are putting themselves straight in the path of a lawsuit. Having said that, before accepting a position make sure that the companies benefits are clearly outlined and in agreement with what you want otherwise move on. It works both ways!

[SlimPickins79]

We get plenty of sick time here at University of Phoenix, but sadly we only get to use 20 hours of it in a 90 day period of time.

[llisa]

I hope it passes!

[jordan3189]

According to all the unions, we have them to thank for this. Thanks you worthless unions.

[whoknew---]

Okay, again how do you base your assertion that somehow it is the unions fault for the sick leave situation in the US has something to do with "worthless unions"

Apparently you are some kind expert in the field of expertise that claims something and has nothing to back it up.

[Grunty1]

In a way, he's right. The decline of unions IS why we are losing sick days in this country as companies screw the workers.

[Grunty1]

Jordan likes having the entire office getting sick, rather than just the one person.

Sounds like communism to me.

[poizinniv]

Um, who even has a union anymore? No one I know. They've broken them all and done away with them. No one fights for the workers' rights anymore. Companies can change their rules without challenge!

[illinoisan]

I guess I've got it good compared to many US workers. My company provides something like 6-8 paid sick days per year. The reason I don't know off-hand how many is because I've never come close to using them all.

The beauty is that we get paid for half of the sick days that we don't use. So, there's an incentive not to use them unnecessarily.

[jordan3189]

You must not be union, good for you.

[whoknew---]

How and Why do you base your determination that because of the criteria of his job sick leave policy that "You must not be union,"

Do you have links that support your claim?

geesh...

[poizinniv]

No one is, that's the problem!

[rbchilds]

Whether you have paid time for sick days or not is a company issue, in most states. A few states do have requirements for pay. On the federal level the FMLA allows you to request time off, without pay and without jeopardizing your job or benefits.

[bsc]

the point of the bill is to make it mandatory

[whoknew---]

Is this the link to what you are referring to?:

http://www.dol.gov/esa/whd/fmla/finalrule/whdfs28.pdf

[Grunty1]

[without pay ]

And there is the problem. Moist people cannot afford to not get paid, and so they will go into work anyways, with far below normal productivity and infect the rest of the business, reducing it across the board.

[RachelMc]

moist ppl...lol...

[Mnemanth]

We get PTO days, accrued at about 2 days per month. That covers holidays, sick days, stressed out and want some extra sleep days, vacation days, everything.
You want a day off? You're paying for it here.

[AZterritory]

Many many school districts in Arizona this spring stopped providing substitute teachers, left few other options than to come in and teach, infect everyone or divide the kids up into other classrooms if you opt to stay home and be ill. (Not a way to be popular with colleagues.) And parents continue to send sick kids to school, the gift that keeps on giving.

[meko]

No doubt when it came time to consider property taxes, the parents preferred the cost saving measure of no sick days. I guess they prefer sick children.

[marxmarv]

Of course! That's FMLA, baby.

[meko]

When I worked for a small business and my boss was against sick days because he felt it was morally wrong to pay employees who weren't at their desks, I always made a point of doing everything I could to get my germs on his coffee cup and into his office. That was always when I showed him how to do things on my computer.

After all, he could always judge when he could take a day off. And once he was sick, I could at least nap at my desk. Employees have to do what they have to do to take care of themselves. If germ warfare is what it takes, that's what it takes.

[Rickfors]

Good for you!

[Disdain]

The poster child for the ideal worker!

[meko]

I was at my desk, I was at his desk. He valued employees who showed up.

Managers determine how they want their businesses to run. Employees respond to rewards. It wasn't for me to tell him how to run his business. He got what he wanted - someone at the desk, sick or well, M-F. It's not as if I was going to be able to will a virus away.

[gallimaufry03]

The poster child for the ideal boss!

[booksnmoreforyou]

Thing is, you could probably do most of what you do at work from your home.

[meko]

I could have done my work from home, and given the errors I tend to make when I have a fever, it might have made more sense to do it after I was well. But bad managers don't measure results, they measure face time.

[RandVictims]

THAT is "innovation". Nice work.

CEOs, executives go to special seminars, workshops to learn how to better exploit, abuse and cheat their employees - but somehow it's "taboo" for the employees to do the same?

Since Congress doesn't want us workers to have the right to bargain for a level playing field, it is our patriotic duty to screw over employers who screw us over.

[lysistrata]

As always, penny wise and pound foolish. If all businesses operate under same conditions how can it hurt small business? How can other advanced nations keep up their standard of living above developing countries and we can not? They pay for sick leave and annual leave and family leave and maternity leave and health care for all (top of the line and choice of physicians and hospitals) retirement and unemployment compensation, one should think they can't compete with the US, yet they can. It is Chrysler and GM going belly up.

[thomblake]

> It is Chrysler and GM going belly up.

Bad example. They're universally union shops that do have benefits like sick leave and health care.

[marxmarv]

So how do European countries do it, union shops and all?

Answer: A fairer allocation of wealth.

[DryIce]

Having guaranteed paid sick days alone won't solve the problem. My company offers 20/year, but we can be terminated if 3 are used (not consecutively, mind you) without a doctor's note.

Between the difficulty of getting an appointment on short notice and the co-pay that lower-paid employees are hesitant to pay for advice such as "go home and sleep" it makes the notion of actually using them laughable.

[meko]

This is why it is so important for sick employees to spend as much face time with their bosses and policy makers as possible.

I recommend throwing up on them if you can manage it.

[Disdain]

Or you can stay home and if you are a valuable employee they'll bend over backwards to keep you happy.

[rbchilds]

3 days off due to illness, return with a doctor's note, seems reasonable and is customary. I have worked for union shops and this has always been the case.

[meko]

It's reasonable when you have health coverage (as you generally do in a union shop). It's not when you are paying for the doctor out of pocket. If I have a choice between coming in sick and paying $100, I'm going to vomit on my boss so I can be sent home.

[Grunty1]

In a row, yes, but you notice that DryIce says "not consecutively".

[Gidster]

Sick days eat into the company's bottom line, therefore it must be bad.

Many people would lose their jobs to stay home with a fever, I guess the appearance of productivity is more important than employee health.....

[douhwa]

socialist countries are healthier. republicans hate health because if people were healthy and not bogged down by medical bills, they might go get an education and no longer support the GOP.

[Disdain]

I think what you mean is that they will no longer support the democrat? Republicans is a party for the rich remember?

[meko]

Education doesn't necessarily make you rich. The latest Pew study demonstrated that 21% of those who do not attend college, but who are born to parents in the top earning quintile, end up in the top earning quintile. Those born in the bottom quintile who graduated from college only had a 19% probability of ending in the top quintile.

The most likely way of being wealthy is to have the sense to be born to the right parents. The next most likely way is to marry well. Education and hard work place third.

[gallimaufry03]

No I think what he means is that once you get an education you realize how messed up republican thinking is.

[BradKnSF]

Most of this country is founded on ideals that DO NOT value people. The only thing that is important is the ALMIGHTY PROFIT!!! Allowing people to stay home when ill would cut into that profit by causing the employer to have to pay more for the product that is being sold, even in those cases where they are not paying the employee who is out. The justification trotted out is always "it's going to hurt small business", or "that's going to make cars more expensive". Always Always Always it's about PROFITS.

It is in fact OUR NATION that is sick!!! We are infected with archaic ideals that have persisted for centuries and are only modified by huge battles. The 40 hour work week, and child labor laws are two such battles, but the war against people in those times is nothing like that which is waged by the republicans in modern times. The fact that we have been fighting so long for heathcare, higher mpg standards, cleaner air, etc... really illustrates the basic failure of the vision republicans have for our nation. I should actually say that their success is our failure. We need to unite for change that makes sense.

[gallimaufry03]

The MARKET is GOD!