Canadian Money Forum banner
21 - 40 of 76 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,649 Posts
^ Well, government employees are always special with the Feds being more special than the provincial ones.

As for legislation on on paid sick leaves on employers (non-governmental), I believe it's up to each province. So for Ontario, I don't think Ford has the guts to impose it. So far I haven't even heard of a squeak on this topic from the Ontario government.
Okay 2 weeks paid sick leave is going to be another 2 weeks of paid vacation for most people. This is basically a 4% increase on labour expenses.

It's like they want inflation to be higher

I think 10 days of job protected leave is fine, but dumping all these costs on business just doesn't seem well thought out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,566 Posts
Discussion Starter · #22 ·
As outlined above there are many residual impacts of implementing such legislation. from a financial operations perspective cost increases for tax payers/consumers is a big one. Studies show that workplaces that have these type of benefits can see increased job satisfaction and productivity. I think the extent of which is determined by existing work place culture. I know of a couple in Alberta that do not have good benefits with their current employer that were already considering a move further west. This should help sweeten the deal for them. I know there are many factors to consider in relocating and it is a big decision. This however, will help attract some workers in sectors that do not already have sick leave.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,649 Posts
As outlined above there are many residual impacts of implementing such legislation. from a financial operations perspective cost increases for tax payers/consumers is a big one. Studies show that workplaces that have these type of benefits can see increased job satisfaction and productivity. I think the extent of which is determined by existing work place culture. I know of a couple in Alberta that do not have good benefits with their current employer that were already considering a move further west. This should help sweeten the deal for them. I know there are many factors to consider in relocating and it is a big decision. This however, will help attract some workers in sectors that do not already have sick leave.
I also agree that for many jobs this will result in positive impacts, and many companies have such policies.
Some companies have gone as far as unlimited PTO, but I don't think that will work for all companies and all employees.

I imagine that if Tim Hortons offered unlimited Paid Time Off, they'd have a lot of trouble running.

Netflix doesn't seem to have that problem.

I think it's good to set out safety requirements and basic working conditions and rights in law. But requiring so much paid time off under law is getting a bit troublesome. The legislated benefits are becoming an increasingly large portion of the employee cost.
This is part of why people are switching to "on demand" jobs.

What type of taxi company can handle all this overhead that Uber doesn't?
You hire a temporary driver for the Xmas rush, and they spend the time on "paid sick leave".

All this red tape and increased benefits HURTS LOW WAGE WORKERS. The high wage guys at Netflix already get these benefits.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
48 Posts
I also agree that for many jobs this will result in positive impacts, and many companies have such policies.
Some companies have gone as far as unlimited PTO, but I don't think that will work for all companies and all employees.

I imagine that if Tim Hortons offered unlimited Paid Time Off, they'd have a lot of trouble running.

Netflix doesn't seem to have that problem.
All are very wealthy big tech companies. How about we amalgamate all sorts of paid leaves into a single paid time off classification. Use it for whatever you want. It’s abusive for governments to pass on their fantasy plans down to businesses who don’t have unlimited taxing powers or borrow indefinitely like the govt does.

Asking small businesses to pay a high wage (which btw is what all employees focus on) and the have stat holidays, vacation pay, sick pay,match cpp and EI and higher municipal tax rates etc is all overreach.

Some employees are now asking to be classified as contractors to take home more and employers find it beneficial as well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,243 Posts
I think sick days should be provided by all employers, to a fairly high number (3 weeks+ I'd say), followed by whatever STD and LTD benefit plan may be provided (also by the company or through group insurance).

Hopefully the coronovirus will push the concept of sick time and staying home from work when ill to become the new normal. It's pretty sad that we're in the 21st century with finely honed economic machines via massive corporations, but poor workers who are sick and contagious need to slog it into their workplaces when they feel like death. That's pretty uncivilized - I think we can "do better" as the narcissistic, entitled left-wingers like to says.

If someone's sick all the time and using lots and lots of sick days, it's no different than if you have a dud employee for some other reason...Some people are more productive than others, it's a fact of life. The corporation needs to figure it out and budget accordingly for normal time away for illnesses for their workers.
To require all employers to fund 3+weeks of sick days, plus expensive STD and LTD plans, sounds ducky for employees, but I can think of a fair number of small operators who are already not clearing much who would find all that enforced largesse just too burdensome.

I am no labour market economist, but I have to wonder whether that will just provide more potential employers with incentive not to hire employees, but to engage only freelancers/independent contractors. Yes, I know that government can look behind the labels to make its own determination as to the nature of the relationship, but I am not sure that will help in many cases and, even where it does, it will simply cause some small fish to throw in the towel.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,053 Posts
Precisely.
Employers look at total compensation package or cost of hiring an employee
Salary is only one component of it, and in some cases not even a majority.
If there is higher cost of hiring because of higher paid time off, then either wages go down, other benefits go up, or inflation goes up.
Just look at the effect of inflation on wages in US:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,729 Posts
The EI program already includes sick pay, so why not expand it to cover any day that an employee is off, vacation, unemployment, sick, stat holiday, bereavement etc ?

We could debate the contribution level for employers and employees, but it seems to me to be a simple solution.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
371 Posts
The EI program already includes sick pay, so why not expand it to cover any day that an employee is off, vacation, unemployment, sick, stat holiday, bereavement etc ?

We could debate the contribution level for employers and employees, but it seems to me to be a simple solution.
Why? Because EI is for when you're unemployed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,303 Posts
My employer falls under the new federal 10 paid sick days legislation, but luckily (or unluckily?) I almost never get sick, so the direct benefit to me is zero.

Unfortunately, it's "use 'em or lose 'em", so naturally a lot people will be in the "use 'em" camp. As a supervisor, I expect to see an increase of employees calling in sick. That just makes my job more difficult, particularly in regards to scheduling.

One of my previous employers offered 5 paid sick days, which, if unused, were paid out in a lump sum at the end of the year. That was nice because employees didn't feel they were losing anything by not using them.

On the subject of paid time off in general, Canada ranks quite low compared to other OECD nations. I've had friends in Europe who reacted with disbelief when I told them I only got 10 days of paid vacation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22,279 Posts
Has anyone thought about the impact 10 paid sick days will have on small businesses?
Sure. Your employees won't be sick as dogs, so they will be healthier, happier and more productive.

Obviously there's a middle ground here, but my point is that it's really not good for a business when everyone is sick. In Canadian winters, people in a workplace can be chronically sick, just passing the same bugs around, endlessly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,729 Posts
Why? Because EI is for when you're unemployed.
When people are sick or off work for any reason, they aren't employed.

EI already pays sick pay, so the only change would be to start benefits on the first day. EI currently pays up to 15 weeks of sick pay benefits.

Employers and employees already pay into the EI, so why not expand the program ? They both benefit from it, so they can both contribute and fund it.

Critics said the CPP couldn't be expanded for years, but the Liberals managed to do it quite easily and the world hasn't fallen apart.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
48 Posts
Sure. Your employees won't be sick as dogs, so they will be healthier, happier and more productive.

Obviously there's a middle ground here, but my point is that it's really not good for a business when everyone is sick. In Canadian winters, people in a workplace can be chronically sick, just passing the same bugs around, endlessly.
Sure, and all the other ones will take it off anyways bc it’s extra vacation days for them. Call it what it is, 10 extra vacation days. Oh and it’s all on the back of the business. So here we go, 7 weeks of vacation. Now we’re just like Europe! Cuz you know how great things are there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,999 Posts
^ I think by " ... aren't employed" meaning to be "not working" and he's referencing in his post above on that to being "long term sickness (or more than your employer's sick days leave policy". If you're sick for than 10 days or after the expiration of your employer's generous sick days leave, then what? Still working? Technically by law still employed but once your EI runs out ... still employed (with luck or if you're related to your employer or the boss is your buddy), then what?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
371 Posts
^ I think by " ... aren't employed" meaning to be "not working" and he's referencing in his post above on that to being "long term sickness (or more than your employer's sick days leave policy". If you're sick for than 10 days or after the expiration of your employer's generous sick days leave, then what? Still working? Technically by law still employed but once your EI runs out ... still employed (with luck or if you're related to your employer or the boss is your buddy), then what?
sags said if they're off "for any reason" they're unemployed. He also said (above that comment) that it should apply for any particular day that an employee might be off. Nothing was said about 10 exceeding days, that's a different scenario.

You're arguing with me for something that wasn't even stated.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,729 Posts
If an employee is "employed" while at home sick, what is your issue with paying them their wages then....since you know, they are still employed ?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Beaver101

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,999 Posts
sags said if they're off "for any reason" they're unemployed. He also said (above that comment) that it should apply for any particular day that an employee might be off. Nothing was said about 10 exceeding days, that's a different scenario.

You're arguing with me for something that wasn't even stated.
... why am I arguing with you? Let sags clarify his statement then.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,999 Posts
Yet you're the one who tried to clarify their statement (incorrectly) instead of staying out of it. Your comment added nothing of value.
... then why don't you stay out of my responses to other posters then? Adding lots of value with the conspiracy theories injections, right. Nice try.
 
21 - 40 of 76 Posts
Top