Sick day payouts are almost non-existent for private sector employees, said John Metcalf, director of human resource policy for Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce.
From this article in the MJS.
I have not done an in-depth study on this, but here is my personal experience:
Both of the full-time hourly employers that I have worked for in the private sector have allowed sick-day payouts. The difference being that they were in the same year.
If I was alotted 5 sick days in 2006, and only took 1 - I was payed out the remaining 4 in cash at the end of the year.
I do not have this benefit now. After I switched from an hourly position to a salary position, the perk was removed. However (and this is the key here...) it was replaced with a different benefit.
That way I did not lose in total compensation, I actually improved.
That is the rub in this discussion. If we take this benefit away, and we want to keep good people in place, what are we going to replace it with?
The American way is supposed to be fair pay for fair work. We offered these employees a position with defined benefits and wages that made up a compensation package. We cannot change those rules part-way through employment and after years of service.
It is unfair, it is un-American.
2 comments:
That is why you draw a line in the sand and don't offer the benefits to new hires. Nobody said that it should be "taken away" from current employees.
How is that different from leaving the benefit in place and cutting starting salaries? It seems kind of silly to focus on a single benefit rather than the package.
This reminds me of, no shit I have seen this twice, employers that switch their payroll from every other week to twice a month thinking that no one would notice that two pay periods/year just disappeared.
If you cut the package, people will notice. Regardless of where you cut it.
Post a Comment