Two good things from Mark Schmitt (but you wouldn’t expect anything less, right?). There’s an American Prospect Piece by him about the long-term effects of the congressional reforms of the 1950s and ’60s, and a post about jobs with no sick leave:
According to the brilliant analysts at the Institute for Women’s Policy Research, sixty-six million workers, or 54% of the workforce, does not get a single paid sick day after a full year on the job.That statistic, I think, is one of the best indicators of the two classes of the labor market, and how the divide is not so much about wages and income as about benefits and security. And those of us on the relatively secure side of the divide cannot really understand how different life is in a world where you don’t have any paid sick leave. I might think I understand what it is to earn low wages — $10,500/year, in my first job — but I’ve never had a job that didn’t offer sick days. Can’t even imagine it.
Jacob Hacker has a sort of preview of his next book in The New Republic, and I think he is most clearly saying the big thing that needs to be said about the economy: That the principal problem, the big thing that has changed, is not the number of jobs, the rate of growth, or income inequality. It’s the shift in risk from the government and corporations onto individuals. … [B]ut while some of us have been able to exchange the security of the past for greater economic opportunity, a majority of workers are absorbing more risk without accompanying reward.
We’ve mentioned this phenomenon before at CT, as has Daniel in some older posts about pension schemes.
First link appears to be broken.
Paid sick leave—which I don’t have yet, being in my first six months here—is good for employers, in that it keeps coworkers from getting sick because I’m stupid enough to come in with a 101 degree fever and a cough.
Schmitt’s ex-employer appears to take the “pure-economist” approach, without thinking: take the days and then see if you are an outlier. While they (accurately) treat it as a J-curve, the balancing factor that would have been needed would be a “why is this person in the office.”
The other factor should be if your coworkers believe you are endangering their health, but you don’t take it as a sick day, you get assessed for a “sick day equivalent.” That would at least give a more accurate view of the sick-day situation.
This other old post was perhaps a little more technical and less bitter.
>I’ve never had a job that didn?t
>offer sick days. Can’t even
>imagine it.
Ken is right that sick days are in an employer’s interest. But the absence of them is not a dramatic indication of a decline in working condition IMO.
Years ago I worked in the US and my employer switched to a sick-days-free scheme called “Paid time off”. It sucked, but not nearly as much as changes that have happened to the labor market in the last couple of years.
Give me job security and stock options that will be worth something - and then I won’t care about using vacation while I’m sick.
So much of Hacker’s argument (which is superb; everyone should read it) for understanding recent economic trends as “a massive transfer of financial risk from corporations and the government onto families and individuals,” and for seeking an “Economic Security Act” that would re-align our welfare priorities, puts one in mind of other recent arguments along these same lines. Cass Sunstein’s call for a second Bill of Rights to give working people more security admist all the “choices” the new economy has given them, Phillip Longman’s reminder about the costs of raising kids in insecurity, etc., etc. There’s a potential progressive consesnsus here, if anyone can put it all together.
If reassigning risk to individuals was accompanied by a reasonable increase in wages, a case, though not a good one, could be made for it. Wage stagnation coupled with decreases in benefits are killing wage earners and salaried alike.
I worked as a professional for years at a job which offered no sick days! And I’m a Republican can you believe it?
Of course I had seven ‘personal’ days in addition to my vacation days. The distinction between the two was that vacation days had to be authorized in advance while the ‘personal’ days did not. Which means they functioned much like sick days, except you were allowed to take them when you weren’t sick.
I wonder if things like that could have an impact on the statistics.
Which means they functioned much like sick days, except you were allowed to take them when you weren’t sick.
The other difference is that there were seven of them.
Well, yes I had more vacation days.
Hmm… I would speculate that of the 54% of the U.S. workforce who do not get paid sick leave, a huge majority also do not get paid personal days.
I’m all for security and paid sick leave. I’m just not sure why the employer should have to pay it.
If I own a McDonald’s that has 4 people working a shift, and one person gets sick, I have to pay someone else. Why should I pay for 5 workers when I’m only using four?
I feel like too often people jump from “This is a good thing” to “Therefore Person X should do it.”
Employers can determine on their own whether it’s in their own interest to give sick days. They don’t need me to say, “Do it. It’s in your own interest.” Best to make sick pay for the rest a government program, rather than a burden solely on employers.
Well thank you for that view, Richard. Now would you perhaps agree that this trend has been pretty bad for the working fellow in real life?
Like I said, I have no problem recognizing that the working fellow is getting worse off — depending on how narrowly we’re defining “working fellow.” There are certainly a fair number of working fellows in India and China who are much better off. They should count for something to.
But I have no problem saying that American working fellows are worse off.
I have no problem saying that American working fellows should be made better off.
My problem is in imposing the burden of making them better off on a class of people of which I am not a member.
My problem is in imposing the burden of making them better off on a class of people of which I am not a member.
Rising wages/benefits would represent an increase in the cost of doing business, which, for the most part, would be passed onto consumers of whom you are a member (most likely). So, your compassion for greedy fat cats seems to be somewhat misplaced. Cheer up Richard, man, this won’t reduce quality of their trophy wives or length of their yachts.
My employer (about 1200 people worldwide) eliminated accrued sick leave a decade ago. We still get paid when we take a sick day, they’re just not on the books so they’re not a liability. A doctor’s note is required for more than 5 consecutive ones because short term disability insurance kicks in at that point. This policy is valid for the few hourly employees as well.
So does my employer count as having no paid sick leave? This policy is certainly fair to the employees.
“I would speculate that of the 54% of the U.S. workforce who do not get paid sick leave, a huge majority also do not get paid personal days.”
Maybe so, but why in the world wouldn’t a report on sick leave cover the issue?
I’m not saying that you are wrong, I’m griping about poor statistics-gathering.
Rising wages/benefits would represent an increase in the cost of doing business, which, for the most part, would be passed onto consumers of whom you are a member (most likely).
Or, an incentive to move the job off-shore, where wage/benefit costs are lower.
The choices appear to be (1) tell employers do pay more if they want to hire Americans, and then whine when they choose to not hire Americans; or (2) pay the employees more ourselves (through, for example, the Earned Income Tax Credit) and keep the jobs here.
I know the “small business owner” is usually used as a frontman to get goodies for big business owners, but the fact is that lots and lots of employers only employ a small number of people.
Why should a guy with two employees who give each other the flu have to pay for four employees for the week that they are out? I am not saying that the employees shouldn’t get sick pay, but why the desire to make the employer pay for it?
But more simply, if the cost is really passed on to the consumer, so we are all paying for it indirectly, why the objection to us all paying for it directly?
Or, an incentive to move the job off-shore, where wage/benefit costs are lower.
McDonalds should offshore its employees ASAP. That’s a winning strategy.
But more simply, if the cost is really passed on to the consumer, so we are all paying for it indirectly, why the objection to us all paying for it directly?
Well said, dude. The chances are negligible of government handouts being misused by companies who report employees as being sick when in fact they are not, merely in order to lower operating costs.
Paying sick leave via a centralized bureacracy also ensures that individual companies will implement policies to maximize employee health and welfare, something that is unlikely to be realized if employers had to pay for such things out of their own pockets - and certainly not as efficiently.
The choice is simple, Richard: either you are, as a master of your own destiny, defending your own interests one way or another, getting good wages, good benefits, good working conditions, good pension plan, good education and good medical care.
Or you are a poor sap worrying about well-being of a small class of rich people (of which you are not a member), who are using your body pretty much like a rented car, saving a few bucks on oil change, because - who cares? when this one bites the dust they’ll rent another one.
All there is to it.
McDonalds should offshore its employees ASAP. That’s a winning strategy.
You scoff. Ha ha. You can’t outsource McDonald’s workers, you idiot! And yet. . . a Missouri McDonalds just outsourced its drive-through window to Colorado. Why not India?
Scary, no?
Yes, sick pay is surely not feasible through a centralized bureuacracy, just as no one would even consider paying Family Medical Leave from state resources. Ridiculous. DOA. Nothing to seriously contemplate here. Move along.
I blame the minimum wage. Benefits first became a major part of labor compensation during WWII when there was a ceiling on wage increases. There was no other way to increase compensation and attract employees. It stands to reason that a wage floor would cause employers to eliminate benefits because it’s the only way employers can reduce compensation.
I don’t really see the problem with not offering sick days. Some employers may see sick days as a way to prevent employees from coming in sick and infecting others, and some may see sick days as a tool for lazy employees to skip out on work. Either is reasonable. We should allow employers and employees to work that out for themselves.
This seems to tie into one of the more perceptive analyses I’ve read of the current (and past) transformations of the state. It’s in a fairly long tome called The Shield fo Achilles by Phillip Bobbitt. It looks at the past 500 years of history, first going over the interplay between changes in military strategy and changes in internal politics. And second looking at the evolution of the international community.
Anyway, the authot identifies 4 or 5 major transformations in the nature of the state, from Princely States to Kingly State to State Nations to Nation States and now, currently, towards market states.
He sees exactly that trend—that the state is geting out of trying to maximize the well-being of all its members and moving towards a mode of trying to maximize opportunity. Which comes at the cost of increased risks and inequality.
It’s an interesting analysis, although he takes the coming market state as a fait accompli rather than looking at ways to avoid it or ameliorate its consequences.
That also assumes that opporunity is actually being maximized. As opposed to increased risk and inequality being explained away by alleging increased opportunity.
À Gauche
Jeremy Alder
Amaravati
Anggarrgoon
Audhumlan Conspiracy
H.E. Baber
Philip Blosser
Paul Broderick
Matt Brown
Diana Buccafurni
Brandon Butler
Keith Burgess-Jackson
Certain Doubts
David Chalmers
Noam Chomsky
The Conservative Philosopher
Desert Landscapes
Denis Dutton
David Efird
Karl Elliott
David Estlund
Experimental Philosophy
Fake Barn County
Kai von Fintel
Russell Arben Fox
Garden of Forking Paths
Roger Gathman
Michael Green
Scott Hagaman
Helen Habermann
David Hildebrand
John Holbo
Christopher Grau
Jonathan Ichikawa
Tom Irish
Michelle Jenkins
Adam Kotsko
Barry Lam
Language Hat
Language Log
Christian Lee
Brian Leiter
Stephen Lenhart
Clayton Littlejohn
Roderick T. Long
Joshua Macy
Mad Grad
Jonathan Martin
Matthew McGrattan
Marc Moffett
Geoffrey Nunberg
Orange Philosophy
Philosophy Carnival
Philosophy, et cetera
Philosophy of Art
Douglas Portmore
Philosophy from the 617 (moribund)
Jeremy Pierce
Punishment Theory
Geoff Pynn
Timothy Quigley (moribund?)
Conor Roddy
Sappho's Breathing
Anders Schoubye
Wolfgang Schwartz
Scribo
Michael Sevel
Tom Stoneham (moribund)
Adam Swenson
Peter Suber
Eddie Thomas
Joe Ulatowski
Bruce Umbaugh
What is the name ...
Matt Weiner
Will Wilkinson
Jessica Wilson
Young Hegelian
Richard Zach
Psychology
Donyell Coleman
Deborah Frisch
Milt Rosenberg
Tom Stafford
Law
Ann Althouse
Stephen Bainbridge
Jack Balkin
Douglass A. Berman
Francesca Bignami
BlunkettWatch
Jack Bogdanski
Paul L. Caron
Conglomerate
Jeff Cooper
Disability Law
Displacement of Concepts
Wayne Eastman
Eric Fink
Victor Fleischer (on hiatus)
Peter Friedman
Michael Froomkin
Bernard Hibbitts
Walter Hutchens
InstaPundit
Andis Kaulins
Lawmeme
Edward Lee
Karl-Friedrich Lenz
Larry Lessig
Mirror of Justice
Eric Muller
Nathan Oman
Opinio Juris
John Palfrey
Ken Parish
Punishment Theory
Larry Ribstein
The Right Coast
D. Gordon Smith
Lawrence Solum
Peter Tillers
Transatlantic Assembly
Lawrence Velvel
David Wagner
Kim Weatherall
Yale Constitution Society
Tun Yin
History
Blogenspiel
Timothy Burke
Rebunk
Naomi Chana
Chapati Mystery
Cliopatria
Juan Cole
Cranky Professor
Greg Daly
James Davila
Sherman Dorn
Michael Drout
Frog in a Well
Frogs and Ravens
Early Modern Notes
Evan Garcia
George Mason History bloggers
Ghost in the Machine
Rebecca Goetz
Invisible Adjunct (inactive)
Jason Kuznicki
Konrad Mitchell Lawson
Danny Loss
Liberty and Power
Danny Loss
Ether MacAllum Stewart
Pam Mack
Heather Mathews
James Meadway
Medieval Studies
H.D. Miller
Caleb McDaniel
Marc Mulholland
Received Ideas
Renaissance Weblog
Nathaniel Robinson
Jacob Remes (moribund?)
Christopher Sheil
Red Ted
Time Travelling Is Easy
Brian Ulrich
Shana Worthen
Computers/media/communication
Lauren Andreacchi (moribund)
Eric Behrens
Joseph Bosco
Danah Boyd
David Brake
Collin Brooke
Maximilian Dornseif (moribund)
Jeff Erickson
Ed Felten
Lance Fortnow
Louise Ferguson
Anne Galloway
Jason Gallo
Josh Greenberg
Alex Halavais
Sariel Har-Peled
Tracy Kennedy
Tim Lambert
Liz Lawley
Michael O'Foghlu
Jose Luis Orihuela (moribund)
Alex Pang
Sebastian Paquet
Fernando Pereira
Pink Bunny of Battle
Ranting Professors
Jay Rosen
Ken Rufo
Douglas Rushkoff
Vika Safrin
Rob Schaap (Blogorrhoea)
Frank Schaap
Robert A. Stewart
Suresh Venkatasubramanian
Ray Trygstad
Jill Walker
Phil Windley
Siva Vaidahyanathan
Anthropology
Kerim Friedman
Alex Golub
Martijn de Koning
Nicholas Packwood
Geography
Stentor Danielson
Benjamin Heumann
Scott Whitlock
Education
Edward Bilodeau
Jenny D.
Richard Kahn
Progressive Teachers
Kelvin Thompson (defunct?)
Mark Byron
Business administration
Michael Watkins (moribund)
Literature, language, culture
Mike Arnzen
Brandon Barr
Michael Berube
The Blogora
Colin Brayton
John Bruce
Miriam Burstein
Chris Cagle
Jean Chu
Hans Coppens
Tyler Curtain
Cultural Revolution
Terry Dean
Joseph Duemer
Flaschenpost
Kathleen Fitzpatrick
Jonathan Goodwin
Rachael Groner
Alison Hale
Household Opera
Dennis Jerz
Jason Jones
Miriam Jones
Matthew Kirschenbaum
Steven Krause
Lilliputian Lilith
Catherine Liu
John Lovas
Gerald Lucas
Making Contact
Barry Mauer
Erin O'Connor
Print Culture
Clancy Ratcliff
Matthias Rip
A.G. Rud
Amardeep Singh
Steve Shaviro
Thanks ... Zombie
Vera Tobin
Chuck Tryon
University Diaries
Classics
Michael Hendry
David Meadows
Religion
AKM Adam
Ryan Overbey
Telford Work (moribund)
Library Science
Norma Bruce
Music
Kyle Gann
ionarts
Tim Rutherford-Johnson
Greg Sandow
Scott Spiegelberg
Biology/Medicine
Pradeep Atluri
Bloviator
Anthony Cox
Susan Ferrari (moribund)
Amy Greenwood
La Di Da
John M. Lynch
Charles Murtaugh (moribund)
Paul Z. Myers
Respectful of Otters
Josh Rosenau
Universal Acid
Amity Wilczek (moribund)
Theodore Wong (moribund)
Physics/Applied Physics
Trish Amuntrud
Sean Carroll
Jacques Distler
Stephen Hsu
Irascible Professor
Andrew Jaffe
Michael Nielsen
Chad Orzel
String Coffee Table
Math/Statistics
Dead Parrots
Andrew Gelman
Christopher Genovese
Moment, Linger on
Jason Rosenhouse
Vlorbik
Peter Woit
Complex Systems
Petter Holme
Luis Rocha
Cosma Shalizi
Bill Tozier
Chemistry
"Keneth Miles"
Engineering
Zack Amjal
Chris Hall
University Administration
Frank Admissions (moribund?)
Architecture/Urban development
City Comforts (urban planning)
Unfolio
Panchromatica
Earth Sciences
Our Take
Who Knows?
Bitch Ph.D.
Just Tenured
Playing School
Professor Goose
This Academic Life
Other sources of information
Arts and Letters Daily
Boston Review
Imprints
Political Theory Daily Review
Science and Technology Daily Review