View Mobile Site
 

Ask the Expert

Signal Photos

 

City needs to say ‘yes’ to sick pay for part-time employees

Posted: July 15, 2014 2:00 a.m.
Updated: July 15, 2014 2:00 a.m.
 

The Signal reported on July 10 (“Bill would mandate sick pay for part-time employees”) that the City Council voted to oppose Assembly Bill 1522 as the “...estimated financial impact to the city as a result of the bill could be as high as $180,000 per year.”

The article also states the city of Santa Clarita has an estimated 585 part-time seasonal employees who could be affected by this legislation.

The legislation in question would give part-time employees who worked 30 or more days in a calendar year some sick days. The bill would “limit an employee’s use of those paid sick days to 24 hours, or three days, in each calendar year. ...”

The city of Santa Clarita promotes itself as a good place to live and work. According to figures published in the Santa Clarita Valley Economic Development Corporation and College of the Canyons 2014 Economic & Real Estate Outlook, the Santa Clarita Valley’s more than 283,000 people (including the city’s population of more than 204,000) has a projected per capital income of over $67,000 for 2014.

Plus, the expected median home price is over $442,000.

It appears that this is a fairly affluent community — unless, that is, you have a part-time city job with no sick days.

It would cost each resident of the city less than $1 per year to give part-time employees time off to take care of an illness.

It would cost less than one ice cream cone, per person, per year.

We find it appalling that the City Council could oppose legislation that helps people who work for all of us.

We hope the council revisits this matter and elects to support it.

 

Comments

Commenting not available.
Commenting is not available.

 
 

Powered By
Morris Technology
Please wait ...