Reply With Quote
Don't you just love authoritarianism?
From Politico
A couple of thoughts on this:
1. It is astounding to me that the Cons ution is now so malleable that no one questions whether it is even possible for the federal government to enact and enforce such an edict.
2. I currently give my employees two weeks of vacation a year - which increases to three after five years with the company (I have 30 employees). In ten years, when most of my current crop of employees are gone, will I still get credit for doing that, good will and loyalty from my employees - or will my congressman (and yes, I realize the act calls for 50+ only - but that will come down eventually)?
Alan Grayson to introduce Paid Vacation Act
Rep. Alan Grayson was standing in the middle of Disney World when it hit him: What Americans really need is a week of paid vacation.
So on Thursday, the Florida Democrat will introduce the Paid [COLOR=#004276 ! important][COLOR=#004276 ! important]Vacation[/color][/color] Act — legislation that would be the first to make paid [COLOR=#004276 ! important][COLOR=#004276 ! important]vacation[/color][/color] time a requirement under federal law.
The bill would require companies with more than 100 employees to offer a week of paid vacation for both full-time and part-time employees after they’ve put in a year on the job. Three years after the effective date of the law, those same companies would be required to provide two weeks of paid vacation, and companies with 50 or more employees would have to provide one week.
The idea: More vacation will stimulate the economy through fewer sick days, better productivity and happier employees.
“There’s a reason why Disney World is the happiest place on Earth: The people who go there are on vacation,” said Grayson, a freshman who counts Orlando as part of his home district. “Honestly, as much as I appreciate this job and as much as I enjoy it, the best days of my life are and always have been the days I’m on vacation.”
According to the Center for Economic and Policy Research, 28 million Americans — or about a quarter of the work force — don’t get any paid vacation. The center says that a lack of vacation causes stress and workplace burnout and that those evil twins cost the economy more than $300 billion each year.
One more if-you’re-reading-this-then-you’re-probably-not-on-vacation fact: The United States is dead last among 21 industrial countries when it comes to mandatory R&R.
France currently requires employers to provide 30 days of paid leave.
Not surprisingly, some in the [COLOR=#004276 ! important][COLOR=#004276 ! important]travel[/color][/color] industry are salivating over Grayson’s bill; Grayson spokesman Todd Jurkowski said the U.S. Tour Operators Association and the Adventure Travel Trade Association are both on board. Other tourism and labor groups are expected to sign on in the coming days.
The U.S. Travel Association has not yet endorsed the measure, but Senior Vice President Geoff Freeman says Congress does need to consider new ways to stimulate the vacation industry and travel economy.
So far, no group has come out in opposition of the bill. Nor has anyone announced opposition to roller coaster rides, cookouts on the beach or salt-water taffy on the boardwalk.
But with many Americans out of work and an economy in shambles, some say this may not be the best time to propose more time away from the office, especially on the boss’s dime.
The Society for Human Resource Management issued a statement Wednesday warning that “a one-size-fits-all, government-imposed mandate is not the answer.”
Because of the 50- and 100-employee thresholds, most small businesses wouldn’t be directly affected by the bill immediately. But the National Small Business Association warned of indirect consequences; companies might artificially hold their hiring at the 50-to-100-employee level to avoid the costs of paid vacation time.
The bill also could have a negative impact on manufacturers already bracing for higher costs that could be associated with the climate-change legislation working its way through the House.
One place where the bill wouldn’t have much of an effect: Capitol Hill.
Congressional staffers already get paid vacation, even if they don’t actually have time to take it. And members can take time off during recesses — as they will next week — albeit not as much as they once did.
While members once had much of the summer off, Congress will be in session this year virtually all of June and July. That leaves August, and Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) says that’s not really enough time to unwind.
“I’m off in the state for a full month catching up on all the things I’ve missed throughout the year, but you don’t have time for yourself,” she said. “You don’t have much time for your family. And after a while, you do start to get just tired.”
Grayson’s bill is part of a larger move by Democrats to improve employee and workplace standards. Earlier this month, Democrats introduced a bill that would make employers give mandatory sick time.
“The committee is looking at a number of proposals to help workers balance family responsibilities and work duties,” said House Education and Labor Committee spokesman Aaron Albright. “The fact is the United States is behind the rest of the world in ensuring that workplaces have paid leave policies. These policies not only benefit workers but also help the employers’ bottom line because of lower turnover and better job satisfaction.”
But in the workaholic world of Washington, not everyone is so impressed with the restorative — or stimulative — powers of time unplugged.
Asked Tuesday what he’d do with an extra week of paid vacation, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) said: “I’d keep the cash and spend the week working on the farm, with my BlackBerry and office files.
Last edited by 101A; 05-21-2009 at 09:07 AM.
Don't you just love authoritarianism?
same here.....and i provide them 5 sick days.
paid vacation is a time honored tradition based on the owners character and ability to select hardworking, loyal staff.
you get it if you earn it.
Seems like a stupid bill to me.
Right. Why must Uncle Sam step in to order what most employers already offer? And I do share your angst/frustration/resignation about what the Cons ution has become.
same reason Uncle Sam had to step in with a minimum wage law.
There are a lot of large corporations that are giving part timers full time hours but not allowing them any benefits that go with it.
I think it's a fine idea.
I agree it would be nice if everyone had benefits. However, you are advocating authoritarianism and socialism. That is anti-American!
To lead to yet higher union wages to pay off political supporters? To make cheaper, non-white labor more expensive and limit the employment opportunities for younger, non-white workers? Where's the majority of people who work for the minimum wage their entire working life?
Great, so then there will be fewer employment opportunities with those evil large corporations.There are a lot of large corporations that are giving part timers full time hours but not allowing them any benefits that go with it.
I think it's a fine idea.
I'm advocating equal benefits for equal work.
You can label it however you want.
I never quite got why you are supposed to get paid for not working.
You'll get credit for the second week.will I still get credit for doing that
didn't you vote for obama?
I'm not saying I disagree with any of that and it's pretty clear that current minimum wage laws are not working, whatever reasons we can all come up with.
I threw out minimum wage as an example of a need to introduce fair labor standards.
like what? cashiers or janitors? how will Walmart be able to scrap those jobs? It seems like they hardly have any right now as it is.Great, so then there will be fewer employment opportunities with those evil large corporations.
a part timer that puts in 2000+ work hours during the year should get the same vacation time as an established full time employee. I'm not sure how anyone can think different.
even the city of San Antonio was screwing over part timers and it took a somewhat newly formed union for city workers to raise a stink about it before they changed things.
If you want to argue that someone who works 1000 hours during the year shoudl get half that vac time, I would agree.
If you expect to increase the cost of labor, then expect less of it to be hired, and expect the cost of whatever the labor that businesses and governments can't shed to be passed along to the consumer and the taxpayer. And while we like to think of the evil rich capitalists sitting in their mansions having to give up a crumb, it's ultimately the rest of us who pay for these dogooder government incursions into the labor markets.
lol we get 4 weeks down here for annual leave....full-time perm only...
but full time perm is dieing down here, a majority of ppl are on contract.....
yeah, I might expect the price of goods to go up a bit, but I wouldn't expect less of it to be hired. I can't see any of the Waltons jumping in a checkstand to avoid giving an employee a week's vacation.
Of course, no company has ever asked for fewer employees to produce the same as a larger portion before.
Not everyone works for a Fortune 500 company in this country with some wealthy family at the helm. Increasing the cost of employment for companies with simply more than 100 employees is a recipe for yet more job losses, especially in this economic environment.
Disney World is the happiest place on earth because it's full of people doing well enough that they can afford to go to Disney World. Giving a week off to someone just making ends meet won't give them more money to spend during that time. Someone making minimum wage would suddenly have all the time they could want to sit around their house. It would be like taking a ride in an unemployment simulator.
Careful...talk like that will cause them to change the definition of "paid" vacation. No longer will it mean you continue to receive a salary but, also, you'll receive Obama bucks to go on a dream vacation...all paid for by, productive people.
As much as I disagree with Yoni on many things, I could theoretically see a future shifting of the goalposts such as this.
we are talking about 5 days paid leave for the following year.
I've worked retail before. It's not hard at all to adjust schedules in a 7 day work week to pick up the slack.
The amount of cost you are talking about when an employee takes a day off is really very little in the grand scheme of things.
.....because your average minimum wage earner would much rather be at work than sit around relaxing at home.
You've never been an employer, I see.
I think all that is being asked is that productive people that are considered part time get some vacation time.
Nice stretch.
In a world where we buy needles for heroin addicts and pay mortgages for dead beats...it's not such a stretch at all.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
