Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: gronieel2 who wrote (886106)	9/8/2015 4:40:05 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 1578978

The point is there wouldn't be a cost to the business person he would just pay a little less per hour (then he would have otherwise, not then he does not in most cases, you have smaller/slower raises more than you would have actual pay cuts). But then there wouldn't be any benefit to the employees either. I simplified the case by assuming the employees take the extra paid sick time, and have their base compensation (or more likely the increases in their base compensation) reduced by the amount of pay they would have forgone by taking that amount of time off unpaid. But of course even when available many paid sick days will go unused. Because of that the adjustment to the wages could be smaller. The end result isn't a transfer or more from the employer to the workers, but effectively a transfer from the worker who doesn't take sick time to the worker who does. With unpaid sick time and a slightly higher base wage the healthy and honest employee will make slightly more. The sick or cheating employee slightly less. Mandate the paid sick days and the base pay probably wont increase as much, the health and honest employee will make a little less then he otherwise would have while the sick or cheating employee will make slightly more. It won't make a huge difference, positive or negative, to almost anyone. Ignoring four factors (which I have so far but will consider next), the positive will roughly equal the negative. One of those factors would suggest that the bill would have a positive effect (if not necessarily a very large one). If people feel freer to take off when they are sick and possibly contagious you can get less spread of disease. The other factors go in the other direction. - More disruption when people take more days off unexpectedly. How much of a factor this is depends on the job, it can be almost nothing (either because there are plenty of largely interchangeable workers or because you won't get many more requests for days off from this job), to a modest loss, to in rare specific cases a serious concern. - More regulatory complexity, more rules to have to understand and follow, and document and enforce, more time and effort going to such issues. - A slight reduction in the freedom of contract and liberty generally.