Lamont Not Sold On Paid Sick Days For Small Businesses
by Christine Stuart | Feb 9, 2010 8:23pm
(4) Comments | Commenting has expired
Posted to: Election 2010, Labor
Ned Lamont, the Greenwich cable executive, who is exploring a run for governor recently said he would not support a bill that requires businesses to pay its employees sick time. The statement drew immediate criticism from labor unions and one of his Democratic opponents.
Former Stamford Mayor Dan Malloy said Monday that Lamont, “doesn’t get it.”
“There are certain basic rights that should be afforded to any working person in Connecticut, and paid sick leave is certainly among them,” Malloy said. “It’s wrong that we would penalize workers – salaried or on hourly wage – for being ill.”
Kurt Westby state director of 32BJ SEIU, the union that represents 5,000 janitors and food service workers, said the reality is “Too many workers are forced to choose between going to work sick or losing a pay day.”
The end result is that “too many working men and women put off seeing a doctor or taking their kids to one because they can’t take off from work,“ Westby said Monday. “Not only is this situation bad for sick workers and their families, but it puts other workers and the public at risk of contracting infectious illnesses.”
But Lamont, who runs a small business with less than 50 employees, isn’t sold on the idea.
Joe Abbey, Lamont’s campaign manager, said Tuesday that his candidate is only opposed to the idea for businesses with fewer than 50 employees.
“It’s just so hard for them to compete,” Abbey said. “We should leave this to the free market.”
Abbey said Lamont is concerned a bill that requires paid sick leave would put Connecticut’s small businesses at a competitive disadvantage.
In a phone interview Tuesday evening Abbey said Lamont would make an exception for businesses involved in the public safety and public health fields. And if the federal government adopted U.S. Rep. Rosa DeLauro’s paid sick day legislation then that too changes the equation and creates a level playing field.
Lamont’s own company Lamont Digital Systems does offer paid sick leave to its employees, but Abbey didn’t know exactly how much paid leave is offered.
This year’s paid sick day bill raised by the legislature’s Labor Committee only applies to businesses with 50 or more employees.
Similar bills have been raised a couple years in a row now and each has received a fair amount of debate. Last year’s debate in the House lasted nine hours before it passed 88 to 58. The vote was not along party lines. Last year it died on the Senate calendar and the year before that it died on the House calendar. This year’s bill is a Senate bill.
Proponents of the bill often argue that employees would have to earn the sick time and that it just wouldn’t be given to them.
(4) Comments
posted by: workingfamily | February 10, 2010 10:49am
Way to have your campaign manager back pedal for you, Ned, and try and wiggle out of an issue you are clearly wrong on.
Abbey says you are opposed to it only for business with fewer than 50 employees - but you also said you oppose the legislation which is ONLY for business with more than 50 employees.
“This year, no one has accused him of being a radical. Lamont disagrees with the legislature’s Democratic majority over a labor and business issue that is likely to face the next governor: a bill to require that private businesses offer paid sick days. It has passed both chambers, but not in the same year.”
From the CTMirror
You said you oppose the legislation (which at this point only applies to business over 50 anyway, so what is it, Ned?
Clearly just trying to play to the center, and shed his ‘liberal’ label. Not going to work, this kind of political ambition is disgusting.
posted by: Ctkeith | February 10, 2010 12:23pm
Paid sick leave is NOT a basic right of any working person as any member of any of the construction unions in Ct will tell you since they get no paid sick days.
This is an area our legislature has absolutely no reason or compelling interest to get involved in.
posted by: James D | February 10, 2010 2:02pm
“Abbey said Lamont is concerned a bill that requires paid sick leave would put Connecticut’s small businesses at a competitive disadvantage.”
He’s right. In the overseas sweatshops where most American corporate millionaires are busily shipping our jobs, the workers don’t get paid sick days. Or vacation days. Or safe workplaces. Or any benefits at all.
Guess we’ll just have to start treating our workers here like pieces of meat, if we want to “stay competitive” and “compete on the global market” and “make Connecticut business-friendly” and every other tired euphemism for screwing-over workers in the name of profits. (Sorry, I meant, “To create more jobs!” My bad. You see—ANY corporate excess can be justified these days with that hoary “We just want to create more jobs” BS line!)
You go, guy!
posted by: Smworld1 | February 10, 2010 4:58pm
I once interviewed with a small company in Rocky Hill, the owner told me that they didn’t have paid sick time because he didn’t trust his employees to use it when sick. This was for an office position, but what if it had been for anyone who handles food? Why can’t companies just go to a “Paid time off” policy and let the employees who have earned the time use it for sick or vacation time. And people wonder why college grads don’t want to stay and work here.