Vote Set in D.C. on Mandating Paid Sick Leave

City Would Be 2nd With Law; Firms Warn of Benefit Cuts

The District could become the second U.S. city to require employers to provide paid sick leave to all workers, a move advocates say could protect employees from having to choose between keeping themselves healthy and keeping their job. Opponents say such a law could prompt businesses to reduce benefits and lay off workers.

The D.C. Council is scheduled to vote on the measure Jan. 8 after several months of negotiations.

Under the bill, large businesses, defined as having 51 employees or more, would have to provide up to seven days of paid leave. Small businesses -- those with 10 or fewer workers -- would have to offer up to three days. Two other categories of employers would fall in between, and part-time workers would get half the number of days.

Council member Carol Schwartz (R-At Large) worked with business and employee representatives on the bill, reducing an initial mandate of up to 10 days of paid leave for employers with six or more workers.

"It really is a good compromise that I worked hard to fashion," she said.

Schwartz will meet with business leaders Thursday to discuss the measure and address concerns.

A growing national movement is pushing for mandates on paid sick leave, especially for workers receiving low wages and working part time. Legislation is pending in eight states and in Congress.

About 48 percent of U.S. workers do not receive paid sick leave, including an estimated 210,000 people employed in the District, according to the Institute for Women's Policy Research, which lobbies for legislation on sick leave.

The D.C. measure falls short of a law on sick leave in San Francisco, which became a pioneer when 61 percent of voters approved a 2006 ballot initiative to require that employers of 10 or fewer workers provide five days of paid leave and that larger employers give nine days. The law went into effect in February.

"From our perspective, the implementation has been very smooth," said Greg Asay, a senior analyst with the San Francisco Office of Labor Standards Enforcement. "We spent a lot of time educating employers on the front end."

But the District proposal also applies paid leave to "safe days," meaning that workers could take time off for medical, legal or psychological reasons related to domestic violence or sexual abuse.

Opponents say they are concerned that such a law in the District could significantly hurt businesses. "The biggest problem we see at this point is that there has not been adequate effort to assess the costs of this to businesses," said Andrew Kline, general counsel to the Restaurant Association of Metropolitan Washington.