Sunday, September 26, 2010

"Progressives" looking to hurt small businesses

From the Times Ledger:

Two Queens city councilmen took to the streets Tuesday morning to get support from parents over a bill that would mandate small businesses to give their employees paid sick leave.

Councilmen James Sanders (D-Laurelton) and Danny Dromm (D-Jackson Heights) joined members of the Paid Sick Leave Coalition outside schools in the borough to push for the passing of Intro 97-2010. The bill would mandate that businesses with 19 or fewer employees offer at least five paid sick days, while bigger companies would have to give a minimum of nine days.

Sanders, who spoke with parents outside PS 132 on 218th Street in Springfield Gardens, said the bill would be beneficial for New Yorkers not only economically but also in terms of health.

There is no federal or state law that requires companies to provide their employees with paid sick leave, but Washington, D.C., and San Francisco have laws that provide for this work amenity. An October 2009 study by the Institute for Women’s Policy Research found that 1.2 million New Yorkers, roughly 42 percent of the population, do not get paid sick leave.

The bill is currently slated for a vote in the Council after Council Speaker Christine Quinn (D-Manhattan) tabled it in the summer.

Dromm also promoted the bill at an event outside PS 69 on 37th Avenue in Corona.


Oh how nice. You guys think that the average baker or florist has 5 extra days pay laying around for each employee? We will be seeing more unemployment if this bill passes.

The good news is it will sink Christine Quinn's mayoral campaign if she doesn't get indicted first.

64 comments:

Anonymous said...

If this passes, there will be mass layoffs of employees that currently work in small stores, offices and businesses. There will many businesses that shut down and others that will go bankrupt if they remain open.

This is not a responsible and reasonable cause to grow employment, rather destroy employment.

georgetheatheist said...

What a jerk. Everyone knows an employee needs 6 paid sick days.

"...a separation of state and economics, in the same way and for the same reasons as the separation of state and church." - Ayn Rand, The Virtue of Selfishness, The Objectivist Ethics, p. 33

Anonymous said...

That is the same losing argument that is used every time a new law protecting workers is introduced. If we listened to your argument, Crap, we would still be working seven days a week, there would be no minimum wage, and children under the age of 14 would be working in sweatshops and operating dangerous machines instead of spending their days in school. Paid sick days is a good thing.

Anonymous said...

I think the idea is to promote the tweeded illegals - since they are off the books you can still comply cause the only people left on the books are your family members!

Anonymous said...

People still do work 7 days a week and minimum wage is optional in many places and this is the workers' preference, not the employers. How about more choice and fewer laws?

In NYS, employers have never been mandated to offer benefits. Time off is a benefit, not a right.

Sarah said...

The presumption of every “do good, great feeling, it's the right thing to do law” is that the worker is to stupid and the employee to evil to work this out, that you need the government to step in and "Protect You". Here's how it works: if you are a good employee your boss will want to keep you. If he sees you come to work time after time with a cold or a sore throat he will know that you are really sick when you call in and cant come to work. He will pay you because he does not want to lose you. And if he doesn't, then you and your reputation as a good employee can find a new job that will appreciate you. What this law does is mandate 6 days of paid vacation for the employee that really doesn’t give a shit. Thus rewarding that behavior and encouraging it. That’s the progressive dream: intrusion of government in every aspect of out lives. With intrusion comes control.

By the way "I can see November from my house"

Bayside Boy said...

yeah wow, mandating paid sick days, next thing they're gonna want is to keep good honest business men from having kids work in mines and factories; what bastards the gov't are.

This bill could end up helping small businesses. Paid sick leave acts as a powerful incentive for workers. It could help businesses attract better employees. Employees with such benefits are less likely to steal from their job, more likely to work hard at their job, and more likely to have a positive opinion of their employer.

But all those things are hurtful to small businesses. So please lets all bash the gov't right up until they send you a social security or medicare check.

Anonymous said...

Speaking of social security and medicare, the small business owner will be paying more of that as well under this bill.

Stan said...

Say you are a small business owner, like a baker. You have 5 employees. One of them calls in sick. Under this bill, you are penalized for your employee calling in sick because now you have to pay for someone who doesn't show up for work as well as the replacement employee you call to come in. That's not going to hurt? Also, the employee who doesn't find a need to use his sick days throughout the year will find a reason come December when the holidays roll around - exactly when you need him most.

Bad idea.

Anonymous said...

These council morons really think that struggling small businesses can afford to pay out a month of sick days in this economy? Jesus Christ. Have any of them ever had real jobs?

Anonymous said...

If an employer is going to go under because of sick days, they were bound to fail anyway because they're playing it too close to the edge and not managing their money well. Why should the employee suffer because the employer is not managing his business well?

Here's what freelancers and other people with no sick leave do when they get sick: they don't want to miss work since they won't get paid, so they come in and make all the other employees sick and then the business owner suffers even more as all of his employees very very slowly struggle through their work. Instead of paying for one employee to simply stay home, he suffers a dramatic hit as his entire work force slows down, but he can't bring anyone in since technically all of his employees are in for the day. I have seen it happen many times, where an entire workforce gets sick because someone didn't want to sacrifice their pay. Sick leave benefits the employer because it provides an incentive for the employee to stay home and thus protects the productivity of the rest of the work force. One of the best managers I ever met always said, "You don't want to flog your horses" - these people ARE your business, they do the work, so you need to treat them with respect, and you'll find your business flourishing.

Assuming that all people are lazy and so sick leave is bad very cynical view of human beings, and frankly I think it says more about your personal work ethic and who you personally are (given a situation where no traits are identified, human beings almost always ascribe the traits they see in themselves to others).

Stan said...

Uh, no, pal. I have seen it happen countless times before, because I managed these employees. This is basically mandating a benefit that is not necessary and will hurt not only employers but employees who will find their hours cut to make up for this.

And freelancers and independent contractors are not going to benefit from this, so I don't see what your point about them coming in and making everyone sick is.

Anonymous said...

most of American citizen workers have paid a contribution from each paycheck (by law) to social security and then to medicare.

only you illegals and freeloaders get it with no incomes.
everything is in cash and off the books.go back to your third world progressive losing nations ,where you get united nations handouts,(mostly from the U.S.)

Anonymous said...

Cutting into an employer's bottom line prevents them from extending hours and adding jobs.

Stupid, stupid, stupid.

Anonymous said...

Progressives have learned to work the system and are now tweeders - always an angle to make money.

georgetheatheist said...

"So please let's all bash the gov't right up until they send you a social security and medicare check."

Social security is a Ponzi scheme that's going to make Madoff's look like small potatoes. It's a house of cards waiting to collapse.

Get yours while the going is good.

Anonymous said...

Here's how it works: if you are a good employee your boss will want to keep you. If he sees you come to work time after time with a cold or a sore throat he will know that you are really sick when you call in and cant come to work. He will pay you because he does not want to lose you. And if he doesn't, then you and your reputation as a good employee can find a new job that will appreciate you.

That is your theory, that is not how it works. And I like how your theory already has the good employee coming to work sick with sore throats and colds, as this is not 'really' sick. They are coming in sick because they cannot afford to not get paid, and in some cases money is not even the issue, bosses simply will not allow employees to take a sick day, even an unpaid one.

Bosses (for the most part) do not do the right thing for their employees voluntarily. That is why we have labor laws and collective bargaining.

What is not addressed in the article is how this bill would apply to part time employees. What is considered a sick 'day' for someone who does not work a consistent schedule or consistent hours. If this bill is intended to apply only to full time employees, it will only push more full time employees to part-timers.

Queens Crapper said...

Here is the text of the bill.

Intro 97-2010

Anonymous said...

Looks like accrual of 1 hour for every thirty worked.
So it will cost the employer of a $10/hr employee $310 for 30 hours worked instead of $300. That $10 ($0.33/hr) will most certainly bankrupt all small businesses, and we will have to go back to hunting and gathering.
Seriously, no employer wants to pay more, but .33 an hour is not a ridiculous amount of money.
I know, if you have 10 employees, then that is 3.30/hr. Oh the horrors!
If those 10 employees work 8 hours a day the cost is $26.40. If less than $30 a day is going to put a 10 person operation under, then the business is screwed to begin with.

And if you call someone else in to cover the sick employees shift, you are NOT paying double. The covering employee gets paid what you would have been paying the sick employee in the first place.

Anonymous said...

BTW, for a minimum wage employee the cost is only $0.24/hr.
Better call the brinks truck.

Anonymous said...

And you can carry over unused sick time. Which makes me wonder if this is really for people who get sick, or a way to give people vacation.

Queens Crapper said...

"If those 10 employees work 8 hours a day the cost is $26.40."

You do realize that adds up to $6864 a year, right? That's not small potatoes for a small business. But then again, it's obvious you are not a small business owner.

Anonymous said...

Carrying it over is a way to not penalize people for not using their sick time.
It also prevents lots of sick calls in December from people who do not want to lose accrued sick time.
It might be better for businesses if they can pay for unused sick time at the end of the year rather than having it carry over.

Anonymous said...

Don't they understand that we are in a recession? People are out of work. If this passes, more people will be unemployed. I think the city council needs a lesson in economics. The council should get the drug dealers off the streets and work to make our neighborhoods livable again. The council should be disbanded. What are they good for? Absolutely Nothing! Say it again....

Anonymous said...

You do realize that adds up to $6864 a year, right?

Yes crappy, but when you run a 10 person business, you are not (should not be) making a working mans salary. We're not talking about $6864 out of 50 or 60k. The number of employees indicates the scale of the business, and the larger the scale, the more money that business should be earning. For a 20 person business the cost would be $13,728, but you can also expect a (properly run) 20 person business to make significantly more money than a 10 person business.
You also have to take into account, most businesses will find a way to pass this cost on, and frankly, you don't need large price increases to make up $26 a day. It's actually a small number compared to the amount of money the city rapes from small businesses every day.

Anonymous said...

It's a 3.3% increase on the cost of labor. It's not an outrageous increase.

Anonymous said...

In other words, employers are capitalist pigs who deserve to have their profits cut. So what if it costs a business thousands of dollars? So what if it affects expansion and hinders job creation? So what if full timers will become part timers? So what if part timers will get less hours?

Anonymous said...

Ah, more "feel good" legislation. Maybe the morons at the council should work on job creation for a change instead of sending more people to the unemployment line.

Anonymous said...

BTW crappy, the workers this is most likely affecting are people making minimum wage to $10 an hour, many on a part time basis. The working POOR who live in those illegal apartments you hate so much (or overcrowded in legal apts) because they cannot afford proper housing at these unlivable wages. God forbid they get just a little extra at the expense of their employer.
And no, I am not a small business owner myself, but know people who are on a personal level. They live in nice houses (owned), drive nice cars, and provide well for their families. They work hard and are entitled to reap the benefits of their rewards. But don't give me this bullshit that they cant afford a few extra dollars for the people who sweat to do the jobs. These poor small business owners might have to resort to extremes, like *gasp* only get a 5 series instead of a 7 series BMW. Or *gasp* not own that boat or weekend sports car.

Anonymous said...

In other words, employers are capitalist pigs who deserve to have their profits cut.

No, it's about the peasants getting just a TINY bit more.

Anonymous said...

First it's evil corporate America, then it's evil small business America. Who's next? We need the middle class in order to sustain this country. They need more incentives, not more taxes, which is what this is.

Anonymous said...

"These poor small business owners might have to resort to extremes, like *gasp* only get a 5 series instead of a 7 series BMW. Or *gasp* not own that boat or weekend sports car."

So the sellers of vehicles should suffer? How much more do you want to kill this economy?

Anonymous said...

This looks like an incentive to force the hiring of more illegals. The pols don't care if they get ripped off and they usually don't report when they do. And then the pols can run around justifying amnesty by saying that they are doing the jobs Americans won't do.

Anonymous said...

Fuck the working poor. You people should tell them that. When you go to buy your bagel, or buy something at the local store, or have someone come to work on your house or car, or go out to dinner, instead of being polite and faking being nice, tell the person serving you that you don't think they are worth more than the minimum, that they don't deserve sick days, or raises, or health insurance, and that they have some nerve to try and take money out of their bosses pocket. Tell them they should be happy with what the boss gives them, because that's all they deserve for being simple working people. Tell them FUCK YOU to their face, because that's what many of you are basically saying here.

georgetheatheist said...

"Go to the ant, thou sluggard; consider her ways and be wise." - Proverbs 6:6

"...this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat." - 2 Thessalonians 3:10

James Sanders. Heretic.

Anonymous said...

And as your eating that bagel made and served by the low wage working poor just think that he probably woke up not feeling so well today, and all morning has been sneezing all over the bagel dough, cream cheese and coffee. He would have stayed home, but he couldn't afford to!

Anonymous said...

What bagel shop employs legal workers? Illegals are not covered under this. They don't even make minimum wage.

Anonymous said...

Since Ronald Regan was President, we have been hearing about supporting business with tax cuts and other economic incentives so that the wealth would trickle down. It's been 40 years and I haven't felt a trickle yet.

Anonymous said...

"you don't think they are worth more than the minimum, that they don't deserve sick days, or raises, or health insurance"

Let me explain something to you. In this country, if you have an unskilled job, you are not entitled to anything. Not sick days, not raises and not health insurance. This is part of what motivates people to better themselves. If you want these things, learn a skill or go to college. Then employers can compete against each other to hire you and will offer you these things. Legislating them as mandatory is NOT what freedom is about.

Anonymous said...

The working poor (and rich) sneeze all over the bagels, cream cheese, and coffee even when they are well.

Sign in restroom: Employees must wash their hands when using facilities.

Anonymous said...

The working poor (and rich) sneeze all over the bagels, cream cheese, and coffee even when they are well.

Sign in restroom: Employees must wash their hands when using facilities.

Anonymous said...

I think it is basic human decency to give a few sick days so a person doesn't have to worry about making rent if they miss a couple of days work because they are sick.

georgetheatheist said...

"It's been 40 years and I haven't felt a trickle yet."

That's because YOU haven't put your nose to the grindstone. Too many sick days, pal?

Anonymous said...

This is a good idea. If you are a customer and you go to the store and the guy making your food is sick he is going to be coughing and sneezing all over your food and the store, and you will get sick. However if the worker who is sick now can stay home when sick, there is a smaller chance of getting sick.

Will it be abused, yes but the benefits outweigh the negatives.

Bayside Boy said...

"Let me explain something to you. In this country, if you have an unskilled job, you are not entitled to anything.(blah blah blah, i grew up in middle class comfort... blah blah blah, ranting about how much poor people suck) Legislating them as mandatory is NOT what freedom is about."


- Wow. This may be the single most offensive thing ever posted on this site, including Babs' attacks on the English language.

Forget for a moment that maybe not everyone has had the same advantages that you have and consider solely the benefit of a stable working class that doesn't have to depend on charity to live a decent and respectable life.

Anonymous said...

Good, I am glad you are offended by it. Guess what pal? I worked my ass off for many years and EARNED the things I have. I worked in all type of low-level, low-paid jobs for many hours, saved up, put myself through school and made a better life for myself and my family. Stop looking for someone to give you a break and you'll make your own breaks just like I did. There is no reason for the government to pander to the lowest common denominator.

Anonymous said...

"consider solely the benefit of a stable working class that doesn't have to depend on charity to live a decent and respectable life."

Paying people for not showing up to work is charity.

Anonymous said...

The City Council should mind their own business and stay out of private enterprise. This is a ploy to put all the illegals to work and force out citizens.

Anonymous said...

Let me explain something to you. In this country, if you have an unskilled job, you are not entitled to anything.

That's exactly the kind of attitude that will keep America strong. Watch out though, there's a troublemaker named Lincoln looking to change things.

Anonymous said...

Once again, comparing low wage workers to slaves from the 19th century means no one is going to take you seriously.

Anonymous said...

If you want these things, learn a skill or go to college.

Millions of Americans go to college. Many of them end up in severe debt, and some end up working at some of the lower level jobs we are talking about.

Not enough good jobs are out there, as the corporations have sent them overseas and squeezed the remaining workers to do more for less to fatten the bottom line.

Skills are becoming harder and harder to apply, as WE DONT MAKE ANYTHING HERE ANYMORE. Good working jobs are becoming more scarce, as we are happy to outsource our good jobs overseas. Our consumer choices are a major factor shaping the realities or our economic problems.
The other major factor? The attitudes displayed here. That unskilled labor and services, which are essential to enabling the lifestyle that we enjoy, are beneath us and so are the people that do these jobs. They are not entitled to decent treatment because they are beneath us. And we don't want immigrants doing these jobs because they are taking them away from perfectly worthless and undeserving Americans.

We don't care about the working people in this country, and many of the comments here highlight that.
You don't want people to earn a decent living, and you don't want to pay their welfare, and you don't want the county to become a 3rd world slum. Well, we're running out of options.

Anonymous said...

Once again, comparing low wage workers to slaves from the 19th century means no one is going to take you seriously.

I wasn't comparing low wage workers to slaves, I was comparing the posters sentiments to that of slave owners.

Queens Crapper said...

"That unskilled labor and services, which are essential to enabling the lifestyle that we enjoy, are beneath us and so are the people that do these jobs. They are not entitled to decent treatment because they are beneath us. And we don't want immigrants doing these jobs because they are taking them away from perfectly worthless and undeserving Americans."

I think you are missing the point of what many of the commenters are saying. First of all, most of us have worked these types of jobs at some point in our lives and do not think that those who do now are beneath us. Either we did it to pay for school, or when we just got out of school, or for some of us it's part-time work. We survived so far without paid sick time. The simple rule is that when you show up for work, you get paid.

For many, the American Dream consists of working for one's self. In many jobs, you apprentice for someone and then go out on your own to start your own business when you have learned all aspects of the trade. No one should mess with that. If you don't have that motivation, fine, but don't begrudge those who do.

Most of us also understand that legislation aimed at helping "the common man" often does just the opposite. The vast majority of council members have never been business owners, just hacks. Therefore they fail to understand that hurting small business people is not good for the economy. Paid sick time is a benefit that an employer should not be forced to give. They are not forced to give any other benefit - not holiday pay, not vacation, not insurance, not severance pay. Framing this as "if you don't give sick time, you are an abusive, greedy slave driver" is not going to win them any points. Check out where our rulemakers come from. These people have no business making business rules when they don't understand how business works.

Bayside Boy said...

Crapper, I appreciate the idea that low-end jobs have been a building block for many people towards better things. But while a good rags-to-riches story is always fun to hear, its not exactly commonplace.

It's wonderful that some people have had success, but the sheer audacity of george and some anonymous people saying that a lack of hard work is all that is keeping someone from enjoying the same lifestyle they do is not only naive but downright disingenuous.
This is no longer the whatever decade some of you grew up in (do I hear 50's) or even the earlier part of this decade where advancement was plentiful and jobs were flush. Many people in these low-paying jobs don't have the opportunity for advancement due to the economic conditions, not any lack of hard work. Therefore low-paying jobs are being looked at to fulfill the same needs as higher-paying ones.

And again for george the libertarian or the "keep-the-poor-away" anon's; this society is what gave you the opportunity to succeed, time to pay society back. If you don't like it, tough sh*t, move anyplace else.

Anonymous said...

Interesting correlation I have noticed - the slugs that call in sick are the slugs that dont really work. Now they are lobbying for pay.

I know there are extenuating circumstances for people in certain situations, but unions protect the lazy at the expense of the workers.

Anonymous said...

I just don't see how sick pay is going to help elevate those in low paying jobs. All this will do it cut into the profits of the business owner, which in turn hurts the workers more than helps them.

Anonymous said...

The working poor are not helped not picking the pocket of the employers of the working poor and the consumers. This is not a matter of "equity" but simply an another stupid mandated benefit that ultimately the consumer is going to pay for. This isn't coming for "free".

georgetheatheist said...

"time to pay society back."

Commissar, where's the line for the Gulag?

Anonymous said...

Want a good job, move to China, India or Costa Rica I hear America is hiring there.

CntrySigns said...

What happened to, you work you get paid, you don't work you don't get paid attitude? Simple as that.
I am a small business owner thats been here for 40 years. I would love to hire help so maybe I could have a day off once in a while, but I can't. I'm here 6 days a week 12 hours a day sick or not.
We bring in less money now than we did 30 years ago because people have stopped shopping at small Mom & Pop shoppes and instead decided that they save more money by getting into a car and driving an hour or 2 to a wally-world or other big box store. How stupid to waste all that time and money to save a buck and then complain that your local shops are closing, they don't have the selection you want or can't hire you and give you health benefits and sick time.

Sarah said...

The Liberty Song

Come, join hand in hand, brave Americans all,
And rouse your bold hearts at fair Liberty's call;
No tyrannous acts shall suppress your just claim,
Or stain with dishonor America's name.

In Freedom we're born and in Freedom we'll live.
Our purses are ready. Steady, friends, steady;
Not as slaves, but as Freemen our money we'll give.
Our worthy forefathers, let's give them a cheer,

To climates unknown did courageously steer;
Thro' oceans to deserts for Freedom they came,
And dying, bequeath'd us their freedom and fame.

The tree their own hands had to Liberty rear'd,
They lived to behold growing strong and revered;
With transport they cried, Now our wishes we gain,
For our children shall gather the fruits of our pain.

Then join hand in hand, brave Americans all,
By uniting we stand, by dividing we fall;
In so righteous a cause let us hope to succeed,
For heaven approves of each generous deed.

In Freedom we're born and in Freedom we'll live.
Our purses are ready. Steady, friends, steady;
Not as slaves, but as Freemen our money we'll give.

The tune is the English air, Heart of Oak. These American words were written by John Dickinson and published in 1768. Dickinson was one of leaders of the American Revolution, a famous lawyer and Governor of Delaware and Pennsylvania, life long friend and correspondent of Jefferson. In Jefferson's words, "He was so honest a man and so able .

Anonymous said...

They need to really stop the nonsense. When will they stop attacking the backbone of this economy? If it weren't for the small businesses that are already choking due to Government Burden (taxes) there would be no programs, revenue, and jobs for these useless incompetents.

Alfredo

Anonymous said...

"I am a small business owner thats been here for 40 years. I would love to hire help so maybe I could have a day off once in a while, but I can't. I'm here 6 days a week 12 hours a day sick or not.
We bring in less money now than we did 30 years ago because people have stopped shopping at small Mom & Pop shoppes and instead decided that they save more money by getting into a car and driving an hour or 2 to a wally-world or other big box store. How stupid to waste all that time and money to save a buck and then complain that your local shops are closing, they don't have the selection you want or can't hire you and give you health benefits and sick time."


And whose fault is it that a) you couldn't come up with a good business plan that would afford you days off eventually instead of risking getting everyone around you sick? and b) in your particular business, you couldn't see the writing on the wall and come up with a suitable reaction to big box store development?

Sorry to be picking on you but if it is ALL blue collars workers' faults that they couldn't get on a path to rise above working their asses off in a shop or small business, then surely it must be ALL the small business owners' faults if they are not clever enough to develop so that they can afford sick days for themselves and their workers.

Anonymous said...

Man, the crazy white entitlement is just wafting off of the commenters in here. Queens in the most diverse borough in the city, but you wouldn't know it from the libertarian meritocratic whitewashed thinking here.