Connecticut companies offer generous paid time off

Insert graphic here:
width: 175px
height: 64px

New survey finds mandated sick time would hurt many businesses

According to CBIA’s Time Off Survey, released in March, Connecticut employers offer generous paid time off to their employees. The survey also shows employers are advocates of employee wellness programs and believe it is important for workers to take time off for their own well-being.

However, the businesspeople surveyed oppose government-mandated sick time — something the state legislature is considering this year.

“A one-size-fits-all policy doesn’t work for everyone,” says Joe Brennan, CBIA senior vice president of public policy. “Companies need flexibility to determine which time-off policies work best for their workforce — some companies just can’t afford to provide the same level of benefits as other companies.”

For several years, state legislators have considered bills requiring employers to carry over employees’ unused vacation time or pay them a lump sum for unused time at the end of the year. Some lawmakers have also wanted to require employers to give employees a minimum of one hour of paid sick time for every 40 hours worked.

Paid-time-off mandates would be detrimental to the business operations and productivity of many businesses, especially those that rely on a part-time or seasonal workforce. In fact, by a ratio of 24-to-1, survey respondents said mandating paid sick leave would hurt their companies.

“It would add to administrative costs as well as labor costs,” says Christel Brooks, HR director for Tyler Technologies Inc. in Tolland. “Employers already have to offer competitive benefits and salaries to get and retain a good workforce. This is not an area for legislation. “We already have employees in a number of other states. If Connecticut law becomes too unfriendly to business, any company has the option to consolidate in offices outside Connecticut,” she adds.

“The legislature’s Labor Committee continues to advance proposals that would make it much harder and more costly to do business in Connecticut, especially during difficult economic times,” says Brennan. “These proposals would weaken employers’ ability to manage their employees and operations most effectively, and would make them less competitive in today’s marketplace.”

Legislation mandating paid time off is not even necessary, because Connecticut businesses already offer this type of benefit. And more than half (60%) of the CBIA survey respondents allow workers to carry over or be paid for their unused sick days at the end of the year.

Besides imposing financial hardships, mandatory lump-sum payments for unused sick time and vacation time would encourage workers not to take time off. Steven Pretto, vice president of operations at Goldenrod Corp. in Beacon Falls, says employees need to take a break from the daily demands of a fast-paced workplace. “Employees who don’t take vacation are likely to become fatigued or burned out, which in turn would lead to absenteeism or illness — both of which would be harmful to the performance of the company,” he says.

He adds that mandatory rollovers would be a devastating burden on employers. For example, he says an employee with three weeks’ vacation who only uses one week in 2008 would then have five weeks in 2009. “How will a company operate with a key employee not available for over a month in one year? If there are several employees doing the same thing, the company could have serious problems,” he says.

“Legislators must reject bills that would make it harder to operate a business in the state. Instead they should focus on the health of Connecticut’s economy and its ability to create and retain good jobs. They should call for new efforts to stimulate economic growth and job creation,” says CBIA’s Brennan.