5 ms·

I'm still baffled every now and then about the US. That paid sick time is even a thing to discuss and that the workplace sets those rules is another of those mo

I'm still baffled every now and then about the US. That paid sick time is even a thing to discuss and that the workplace sets those rules is another of those moments. Can anyone chime in in defense of this? Is there a side to this I'm not seeing?

droopyEyelids 3y ago
The USA is extremely hostile to unions, and labor has virtually no ability to negotiate with capital. For example, last Thursday the Supreme Court just ruled that unions can be sued for losses caused by striking https://archive.is/0bYhe https://archive.is/0bYhe But that is just the last pieces of labor's power getting washed away in the USA. Already things like sympathy strikes, which give labor actual power in Europe, are completely illegal.
- twoodfin 3y ago
  “Losses caused by striking” is a funny way to describe the holding of the case, which was about cement truck drivers deliberately timing their strike to maximize the risk of damage to the trucks and at a minimum spoil their loads. The decision was 8-1.
  - hgsgm 3y ago
    Or management deliberately times the cement mixing to block the strike. Everyone seems to miss that the Court did not rule on the merits of the case. They rules on a procedural question. They ruled that the suit can go forward because intentional damage was within the realm of possibility. Jackson dissented because she believed that NLRB has priority jurisdiction before other lawsuit venues. No one on HN knows who is "right".
- fnordpiglet 3y ago
  The context is : Instead, the employer contended in a lawsuit, “the drivers prompted the creation of the perishable product” and then waited until the concrete was inside the trucks before walking off the job. The bar being set is intentionality in destroying property even through spoilage by setting up a situation to cause the spoilage intentionally. It’s a fairly minor erosion if it is at all.
alistairSH 3y ago
Defense? “The market at work” (ignoring labor isn’t a perfect market and being an over-controlling asshole isn’t required to make a profit). The US is just anti-labor and in love with cheap consumables. Combined, we end up with a massive case of haves and have-nots. Vacation, sick leave, retirement accounts, medical care. It’s great if you’re rich (as damn near everybody on this forum is). My brother in law is an auto mechanic here in the US. My uncle as well, but in Scotland. While they’re overall income is pretty close (solidly middle class) the amount of financial stress in the US is MUCH MUCH higher. It’s so short-sighted. I’d happily pay another $30k/year or more in taxes for nationalized medical, lower college costs and other things most Europeans have.
- Reubend 3y ago
  If you make enough money that you would be happy "happy" paying an extra $30,000 per year, then you're either a very generous person or an outlier. Most Americans wouldn't want to pay that much extra even if they could afford to.
  - rqtwteye 3y ago
    “ Most Americans wouldn't want to pay that much extra even if they could afford to.” And then they pay that extra through costs for imprisonment, homelessness and other stuff. And for healthcare the US pays almost twice as much per capita than other countries. It’s just dumb.
- kortilla 3y ago
  > I’d happily pay another $30k/year or more in taxes for nationalized medical, lower college costs and other things most Europeans have. The average household income in the US is around 80k. That’s like 55k after taxes. Are you proposing they give up another 30k of that?
  - wffurr 3y ago
    I seriously doubt GP’s income is average. They did not make any claims about the average households tax burden either, only their own.
UncleMeat 3y ago
There is no other side. The problem is lack of legislation. My sister is a physical therapist. She has a doctorate. Her work fundamentally involves being close to other people and touching them. This is one of those fields that 10-20 years ago everybody said would be booming and highly lucrative. Her sick time is counted against her vacation time. We live in a country completely captured by corporations.
- kayodelycaon 3y ago
  Yup. I have a disability and any time off I take because I’m sick is time I can’t take to have a vacation. If I can sit up in a chair, I log in and stay near my computer to attend meetings and answer emails. Even then, the majority of my time goes to being sick.
  - genocidicbunny 3y ago
    How does that work if you don't have any vacation time saved? Negative balance on vacation time, or you just don't get the time off? In either of those cases, I would be scheduling a 1-on-1 with whoever is closest to being able to change that policy, in the smallest meeting room I can find, sitting right next to them, and then letting whatever symptoms of my illness take over. Gastric problems causing diarrhea or vomit? Congrats, I'm going to either literally poop in your lap, or vomit in your face. I'm coughing up phlegm? Sorry, here's a towel to wipe off your face. Something's bleeding? You might want to go get yourself tested for STDs and whatnot, gods know what depths I've been plumbing in my spare time. Severe pain such that I can barely sit? Your face looks nice and squishy to use as a stress ball.
    - eulers_secret 3y ago
      LOL! Do you live in the USA? They'll just turn down the meeting request, tell your supervisor what you've done and you'll suffer either real punishment or be unofficially 'punished'. You may even be fired because of "at-will" employment: Anyone can be fired for (almost) any reason at any time. Generally you just don't get time off, or maybe you can take the time off without pay (if they're extra generous). Such is life in the USA, there is no response: You will do what the owners of capital say, or you will go hungry. That's all there is to it.
zdragnar 3y ago
The US federal government is not like other national governments. Any powers not enumerated in the condition rest with the state governments. As an example, murder is generally not a crime under federal law [0] despite generally being considered Bad. Over the years, for better and worse, the interpretation of what powers the federal government are given had expanded dramatically. Even so, compelling paid sick leave at the federal level would need to rely on the interstate commerce clause. I'm all for paid sick leave, personally, but doing it in a way that actually passes conditional muster and isn't overturned by a court isn't as easy as saying "this is a good thing, why don't we do it?" [0] https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/blog/murder/is-murder-a-federal-crime-7-ways-it-can-be/ https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/blog/murder/is-murder-a-federal...
- hgsgm 3y ago
  1. That doesn't answer the obvious question of why states don't have these laws.
  - qwerasdf5 3y ago
    They do.
    - sp332 3y ago
      Well, some do.
toast0 3y ago
I'll take the devil's advocate here. Why should the employer pay for work that isn't being done? If you rent a car and it doesn't work, would you pay for it? If you rent an apartment and its unfit for habitation, would you pay for it? If you go to the store to buy a product and it's not there, would you pay for it? It's different if the illness is work related, of course. And it's beneficial to society if people can be sick without worrying about losing income, but is that enough to make employers pay for it? And it also doesn't seem like equal pay for equal work if worker A is sick 2 days a year and worker B is sick 20 days a year, they do about the same amount of work on days they attend and get paid the same amount anually.
- lumost 3y ago
  To have a functioning modern society - there must be some equality of outcome. This ensures that - Taking a business risk doesn’t leave you destitute. - Getting unlucky due to health/climate/career doesn’t leave you on the streets. You can either pay for such equality of outcome programs in taxes or by workplace policies. Provided the policy is economically reasonable and all employers are obliged to it - taxes or policy don’t matter much.
  - scarface_74 3y ago
    Why should society pay for your business risk when you get all of the upside? And there is already unemployment insurance. Whether it is enough and the fact that it doesn’t cover contract workers is a different issue.
    - pfannkuchen 3y ago
      Well generally business success comes with higher taxes, so you don’t really get all of the upside. Whether those taxes are used for anything sensible is a different matter…
      - lumost 3y ago
        We also have bankruptcy protection, LLCs, trusts and homesteads to protect downside. Followed by unemployment insurance and various forms of welfare depending on the severity of the situation. Risks are good for society, we have buffer to absorb them provided you aren’t betting the farm with BoA. In which case, we really should have tighter regulations to stop people from betting the farm with BoA.
mindslight 3y ago
The fungible benefit of money plus the freedom to take whatever time off you'd like without pay is more flexible than an assortment of non-fungible paid days off that are designated for very specific uses, with an employer getting up in your business to police your use of them. Of course this relies on being paid enough to be able to forgo some earnings, and not being financialized so hard such that a paycheck has been spent before it's even earned. So it can't scale in popularity due to the economic feedback loop designed to keep real wages low, and the financial system primarily based on debt.
PopAlongKid 3y ago
California has mandated paid sick leave https://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/California-Paid-Sick-Leave.html https://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/California-Paid-Sick-Leave.html
hedora 3y ago
Post slavery, a lot of states in the south wanted former slaves to continue to work for free. Tipping waiters, porters, etc became common at that time, so customers could decide if the business would pay black employees or not. Proposed bans on tipping actually went through the courts, with some southern states ruling to ban it. Eventually, the supreme court stepped in, and ensured tipping would be legal. Anyway, modern labor laws evolved from that mess, so it's not surprising at all that paid time off is discretionary in some states.

droopyEyelids 3y ago

The USA is extremely hostile to unions, and labor has virtually no ability to negotiate with capital. For example, last Thursday the Supreme Court just ruled that unions can be sued for losses caused by striking https://archive.is/0bYhe https://archive.is/0bYhe But that is just the last pieces of labor's power getting washed away in the USA. Already things like sympathy strikes, which give labor actual power in Europe, are completely illegal.

twoodfin 3y ago
“Losses caused by striking” is a funny way to describe the holding of the case, which was about cement truck drivers deliberately timing their strike to maximize the risk of damage to the trucks and at a minimum spoil their loads. The decision was 8-1.
- hgsgm 3y ago
  Or management deliberately times the cement mixing to block the strike. Everyone seems to miss that the Court did not rule on the merits of the case. They rules on a procedural question. They ruled that the suit can go forward because intentional damage was within the realm of possibility. Jackson dissented because she believed that NLRB has priority jurisdiction before other lawsuit venues. No one on HN knows who is "right".
fnordpiglet 3y ago
The context is : Instead, the employer contended in a lawsuit, “the drivers prompted the creation of the perishable product” and then waited until the concrete was inside the trucks before walking off the job. The bar being set is intentionality in destroying property even through spoilage by setting up a situation to cause the spoilage intentionally. It’s a fairly minor erosion if it is at all.

alistairSH 3y ago

Defense? “The market at work” (ignoring labor isn’t a perfect market and being an over-controlling asshole isn’t required to make a profit). The US is just anti-labor and in love with cheap consumables. Combined, we end up with a massive case of haves and have-nots. Vacation, sick leave, retirement accounts, medical care. It’s great if you’re rich (as damn near everybody on this forum is). My brother in law is an auto mechanic here in the US. My uncle as well, but in Scotland. While they’re overall income is pretty close (solidly middle class) the amount of financial stress in the US is MUCH MUCH higher. It’s so short-sighted. I’d happily pay another $30k/year or more in taxes for nationalized medical, lower college costs and other things most Europeans have.

Reubend 3y ago
If you make enough money that you would be happy "happy" paying an extra $30,000 per year, then you're either a very generous person or an outlier. Most Americans wouldn't want to pay that much extra even if they could afford to.
- rqtwteye 3y ago
  “ Most Americans wouldn't want to pay that much extra even if they could afford to.” And then they pay that extra through costs for imprisonment, homelessness and other stuff. And for healthcare the US pays almost twice as much per capita than other countries. It’s just dumb.
kortilla 3y ago
> I’d happily pay another $30k/year or more in taxes for nationalized medical, lower college costs and other things most Europeans have. The average household income in the US is around 80k. That’s like 55k after taxes. Are you proposing they give up another 30k of that?
- wffurr 3y ago
  I seriously doubt GP’s income is average. They did not make any claims about the average households tax burden either, only their own.

UncleMeat 3y ago

There is no other side. The problem is lack of legislation. My sister is a physical therapist. She has a doctorate. Her work fundamentally involves being close to other people and touching them. This is one of those fields that 10-20 years ago everybody said would be booming and highly lucrative. Her sick time is counted against her vacation time. We live in a country completely captured by corporations.

kayodelycaon 3y ago
Yup. I have a disability and any time off I take because I’m sick is time I can’t take to have a vacation. If I can sit up in a chair, I log in and stay near my computer to attend meetings and answer emails. Even then, the majority of my time goes to being sick.
- genocidicbunny 3y ago
  How does that work if you don't have any vacation time saved? Negative balance on vacation time, or you just don't get the time off? In either of those cases, I would be scheduling a 1-on-1 with whoever is closest to being able to change that policy, in the smallest meeting room I can find, sitting right next to them, and then letting whatever symptoms of my illness take over. Gastric problems causing diarrhea or vomit? Congrats, I'm going to either literally poop in your lap, or vomit in your face. I'm coughing up phlegm? Sorry, here's a towel to wipe off your face. Something's bleeding? You might want to go get yourself tested for STDs and whatnot, gods know what depths I've been plumbing in my spare time. Severe pain such that I can barely sit? Your face looks nice and squishy to use as a stress ball.
  - eulers_secret 3y ago
    LOL! Do you live in the USA? They'll just turn down the meeting request, tell your supervisor what you've done and you'll suffer either real punishment or be unofficially 'punished'. You may even be fired because of "at-will" employment: Anyone can be fired for (almost) any reason at any time. Generally you just don't get time off, or maybe you can take the time off without pay (if they're extra generous). Such is life in the USA, there is no response: You will do what the owners of capital say, or you will go hungry. That's all there is to it.

zdragnar 3y ago

The US federal government is not like other national governments. Any powers not enumerated in the condition rest with the state governments. As an example, murder is generally not a crime under federal law [0] despite generally being considered Bad. Over the years, for better and worse, the interpretation of what powers the federal government are given had expanded dramatically. Even so, compelling paid sick leave at the federal level would need to rely on the interstate commerce clause. I'm all for paid sick leave, personally, but doing it in a way that actually passes conditional muster and isn't overturned by a court isn't as easy as saying "this is a good thing, why don't we do it?" [0] https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/blog/murder/is-murder-a-federal-crime-7-ways-it-can-be/ https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/blog/murder/is-murder-a-federal...

hgsgm 3y ago
1. That doesn't answer the obvious question of why states don't have these laws.
- qwerasdf5 3y ago
  They do.
  - sp332 3y ago
    Well, some do.

toast0 3y ago

I'll take the devil's advocate here. Why should the employer pay for work that isn't being done? If you rent a car and it doesn't work, would you pay for it? If you rent an apartment and its unfit for habitation, would you pay for it? If you go to the store to buy a product and it's not there, would you pay for it? It's different if the illness is work related, of course. And it's beneficial to society if people can be sick without worrying about losing income, but is that enough to make employers pay for it? And it also doesn't seem like equal pay for equal work if worker A is sick 2 days a year and worker B is sick 20 days a year, they do about the same amount of work on days they attend and get paid the same amount anually.

lumost 3y ago
To have a functioning modern society - there must be some equality of outcome. This ensures that - Taking a business risk doesn’t leave you destitute. - Getting unlucky due to health/climate/career doesn’t leave you on the streets. You can either pay for such equality of outcome programs in taxes or by workplace policies. Provided the policy is economically reasonable and all employers are obliged to it - taxes or policy don’t matter much.
- scarface_74 3y ago
  Why should society pay for your business risk when you get all of the upside? And there is already unemployment insurance. Whether it is enough and the fact that it doesn’t cover contract workers is a different issue.
  - pfannkuchen 3y ago
    Well generally business success comes with higher taxes, so you don’t really get all of the upside. Whether those taxes are used for anything sensible is a different matter…
    - lumost 3y ago
      We also have bankruptcy protection, LLCs, trusts and homesteads to protect downside. Followed by unemployment insurance and various forms of welfare depending on the severity of the situation. Risks are good for society, we have buffer to absorb them provided you aren’t betting the farm with BoA. In which case, we really should have tighter regulations to stop people from betting the farm with BoA.

mindslight 3y ago

The fungible benefit of money plus the freedom to take whatever time off you'd like without pay is more flexible than an assortment of non-fungible paid days off that are designated for very specific uses, with an employer getting up in your business to police your use of them. Of course this relies on being paid enough to be able to forgo some earnings, and not being financialized so hard such that a paycheck has been spent before it's even earned. So it can't scale in popularity due to the economic feedback loop designed to keep real wages low, and the financial system primarily based on debt.

PopAlongKid 3y ago

California has mandated paid sick leave https://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/California-Paid-Sick-Leave.html https://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/California-Paid-Sick-Leave.html

hedora 3y ago

Post slavery, a lot of states in the south wanted former slaves to continue to work for free. Tipping waiters, porters, etc became common at that time, so customers could decide if the business would pay black employees or not. Proposed bans on tipping actually went through the courts, with some southern states ruling to ban it. Eventually, the supreme court stepped in, and ensured tipping would be legal. Anyway, modern labor laws evolved from that mess, so it's not surprising at all that paid time off is discretionary in some states.