Plan would mandate paid sick leave in Seattle

Seattle would become the fourth city in the nation to require all private employers to provide paid sick leave to workers under a proposal being advanced by a coalition of labor and community groups.

Advocates say such a law would improve public health by keeping sick parents or their children at home and not forcing workers to choose between getting paid and getting well.

Many small-business and restaurant owners oppose the idea, saying the costs could be staggering to operations with small profit margins and a large number of part-time employees.

"One Seattle restaurant owner estimated this would cost him between $65,000 and $175,000 a year. Where is that going to come from? Do I cut wages, raises, paid vacation days? What do I do?" asked Josh McDonald, director of local government affairs for the Washington Restaurant Association.

The result, he said, could be fewer jobs and fewer benefits.

No legislation has been introduced, but Seattle Councilmember Nick Licata is among those supporting the idea. He argues that mandatory paid sick leave would improve public health and worker productivity.

"We don't want workers to feel they have to go to work sick and possibly infect others or lose a full day's paycheck. I don't think employers do, either," Licata said.

He said he is still asking questions about the proposal and is aware that business owners are concerned about cost.

But, Licata said, four years after a leave law was enacted in San Francisco, a survey showed that "the vast majority of employers expressed satisfaction with the legislation. There didn't seem to be a negative economic impact relative to areas outside of the city."

San Francisco voters in 2006 approved mandatory paid sick days for all employers. Milwaukee and Washington, D.C., have enacted similar requirements since then.

An estimated 190,000 workers in Seattle receive no paid sick days, said Marilyn Watkins, policy director for the Economic Opportunity Institute, a nonprofit public-policy organization that has joined with more than 50 groups under the umbrella organization, Seattle Coalition for a Healthy Workforce, to support the proposal.

The coalition's proposal is modeled on the leave regulations in San Francisco and Milwaukee, and would grant five days of sick leave per year to employees at companies with fewer than 10 workers.

Employees at larger companies would receive nine days. The benefit would accrue at a rate of one hour per every 30 hours worked and couldn't be used until the worker had logged at least 90 days on the job.

A follow-up study on the San Francisco ordinance, released in February, found the typical worker there used three days of paid sick leave. One-fourth of workers took none. The report was conducted by the Institute for Women's Policy Research, based in Washington, D.C.

Because many of the jobs without sick-leave benefits are in service industries, the workers often have contact with the public, from preparing and serving food, to caring for the elderly and disabled, Watkins said. And the problem disproportionately affects low-income families.

Nationally, while 80 percent of children in middle-income families have a parent with access to paid sick leave, 36 percent of children in families making less than $44,000 per year have a parent with such benefits, according to an article in the Journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics.

Business leaders say they haven't been included in conversations about the proposed legislation.

George Allen, senior vice president for government relations for the Greater Seattle Chamber of Commerce, said his members are sympathetic to the need to have a safe and healthy workplace and to protect the health of customers.

But he said small businesses already are struggling from the effects of the recession.

"If the city truly wants to help the economic recovery," Allen said, "they have to be mindful of increased costs and increased regulations."

He also questioned whether the city should mandate provisions for employees of private businesses, many of whom work part time.

"This is really a state issue," Allen said. "It doesn't do well to create a patchwork of legislation that requires employers to change the rules depending on the city they do business in."

Lynn Thompson: 206-464-8305

or lthompson@seattletimes.com