This is a solid ordinance the way it is written and we should pass it now. If anything, try it for 3 years and then analyze it and improve it if needed. The criticisms of it are playing to conservative concerns, not 'business' concerns. Let's get on with it.

At Candidate Survivor, they were asked "Would you vote for paid sick leave TODAY?" and all the incumbents said yes. Were we being pandered to? Clark and Harrell had better come through and vote yes on this bill.

Ridiculous antics from the chamber of commerce this year. I thought nothing would top their endorsement of I-1053 last year.

It is shameful that Bruce Harrell claims to be the Council Member speaking for us people of color in Seattle, and yet he sides with big business on an issue like paid sick days that disproportionately impacts minority workers.

Didn't know Seattle had so many DINOs on the City Council - and elections are right around the corner

R.I.P. Dow Industrial

http://youtu.be/W5D07c0dJuQ

How in the fuck can Harrell's statement be taken as a waffle? His statement clearly shows he is supportive. We need to consider the source here though. Madrid is clearly in the Meacham camp. They have a Hugo House connection. Meacham needs to get publicity somewhere I guess.

So wierd that Clark voted to pass the legislation to Council and Harrell said legislation would be passed, and they still keep getting rapped for not supporting sick leave. I'm confused, is the Stranger so biased that they can't see when someone they see as an opponent is actually doing the work they advocated? Cienna might want to pull her head out of her ass long enough to realize that she is actually criticizing people who have already committed to moving sick leave forward.

Waffling asshat is a great phrase, fun to use, but let's review:
1. I seconded the motion to approve the legislation.
2. I voted for it today.
3. I've consistently said I support passage.

Yes, I've raised a question about why to treat employees of large restaurant groups differently than smaller restaurants when it comes to shift swap opportunities.These employees depend on tips just like the employees of other restaurants. Raising a question about fairness for the companies and the employees shouldn't be seen as heretical. Condemning people for raising questions and tarring them as "pro-business" is cheap and a disservice.

you are correct on both counts cm clark. waffling asshat is fun to say and your questions are not heretical,

thank you for your second and your vote!

@11 From what I understand the current ordinance doesn't stop anyone, regardless of size of employer, from swapping shifts. Employees at large companies just don't lose a sick day for swapping.

So employees at large restaurants who rely on tips actually are much better off under the current ord. than employees at smaller restaurants, presumably because their employers can afford it.

Am I misreading something?

@7 OH NO, IT'S DEAD AND IT WILL NEVER COME BACK WE'RE DOOOOOOOOOMED

This concept is ridiculous on its face. Employees who just don't want to work can and will call in "sick" (and expect to be paid). But what's to prevent the employer from removing said employee from the schedule, effectively terminating him or her?

If the city wants to mandate health insurance (and that's what paid sick days amount to), then the city should fund the program, not put the burden on the owners of small businesses.

@16 Where/in what industry do you work? Or are you a small business owner (and do you not remember life before being a small business owner)? I'm genuinely curious, because your viewpoint is so alien to me.

*Every* full-time job I've ever had has had paid sick days, and many of the part-time ones, too. If you work in a white-collar field, it's just standard. And I simply can't understand why what's standard in my career path (copywriter, teacher, radio DJ—I never said it was a straight path) can;t be offered to blue collar workers, or how that's going to ruin small businesses.

On the contrary, I see what happens when people who *have* sick days don't use them—sickness travels through my floor like lightning whenever someone is "too busy to stay home sick," leaving the rest of us ill and productivity shot. That costs way more than our salary for that day.

(And there's a BIG difference between health insurance and a few measly sick days, and you know that. One is about coverage for illness and accidents; the other is about being able to pay for your groceries and keeping you from infecting others. Seriously, argue fair.)

And yes, as a writer, I'm ashamed of my typos—but c'mon, people, I got work to do!

@16 Paid sick days does not equal health insurance. Health insurance = health insurance. Or maybe you've never had the luxury of having a job that provides neither.

This bill would give people who have been working for a small business FULL TIME for 1 year 40 hours of paid sick time. That's 5 days that are earned by the employee.

What ridiculous on it's face is saying employees shouldn't stay home when they're sick. If you're sick and you gotta make rent, you're working. Unless you don't have to. I'm sick of people who have sick days, probably including yourself, telling people that don't they don't deserve a few days off when they're sick.

And as far as retaliation goes, what's to stop an employer right now from removing said employee from the schedule? Nothing. The ordinance would make retaliation against an employee for calling in sick illegal.

I like unpaid sick leave. So when I'm half-assed sick or not feeling well, I can take a day off and not feel like I'm cheating the company out of money.

A lot of small business owners have a thought process like this: they worked really, really REALLY hard guys, like 120+ hours a week, and they had to take out a second mortgage on their home and resort to eating their kids' pets just to get their business up and running, yeah, and they certainly never got a sick day while doing all that, so anyone who DOESN'T have the guff to start their own business just doesn't have the cajones to have a REAL work ethic and are all sissy whiners, that's why they're employees and not employers. So they can just come to work and like it when they're sick, they're lucky to have a job and it's all thanks to MEEEEEE, how bout that?

@16: Hi Cornichon, a.k.a. Ronald Holden, food writer for Crosscut. You'd think a food critic such as yourself would appreciate not having people sneeze in your salad. But hey, maybe to you it tastes better that way. Whatevs.

Why should work study employees get the shaft? Aren't they people who get sick like the rest of us?