SB 2018-235: Ensuring Cancer Pay Act (Debating) (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 27, 2024, 07:55:23 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Government (Moderators: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee, Lumine)
  SB 2018-235: Ensuring Cancer Pay Act (Debating) (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: SB 2018-235: Ensuring Cancer Pay Act (Debating)  (Read 5249 times)
Former Senator Haslam2020
Haslam2020
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,345
United States


« on: June 21, 2018, 10:28:56 PM »

I certainly support the idea behind this bill, but I would like to see it go further if that is possible. Here we see that paid is guaranteed for workers with cancer, but there are other illnesses that might cause someone to be out of work for some periods of time. Why shouldn't they get paid?

Basically, I'm saying that while this bill is a step in the right direction, paid sick leave for everyone would be something even more amazing.

I may actually amend this bill soon to include that, thank you for that suggestion.

I do support the bill, although without wanting to be the heartless bastard here I do wonder about the potential impact in small businesses (considering, for example, that the employer of a small local business may struggle with having to pay a worker while he's undergoing treatment while having to hire another worker as, say, a replacement in the meantime).

I wonder if perhaps it wouldn't be wiser to enact some sort of program to help cover at least some part of the salary.

I’ll certainly look into that. Thanks for raising that point. I’m probably going to amend the bill to include other diseases as well, but I believe putting something in place where the worker out struggling with disease could get paid half when they’re sick, and half of what wasn’t given when or if they come back.

Logged
Former Senator Haslam2020
Haslam2020
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,345
United States


« Reply #1 on: June 24, 2018, 12:39:26 AM »

I offer the following amendment:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
Logged
Former Senator Haslam2020
Haslam2020
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,345
United States


« Reply #2 on: June 24, 2018, 09:39:37 PM »

I offer the following amendment:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

*A serious disease preventing work could qualify/be defined by the following:

Cancers
Cutaneous Diseases
Endocrine Diseases
Eye Diseases/Disorders
Ear Diseases/Disorders
Intestinal Diseases
Infectious Diseases
Communication Disorders
Genetic Disorders
Neurological Disorders
Voice Disorders
Vulvovaginal Disorders
Kidney/Liver Disorders
Heart Disorders
Mental Illness

(Having any disease from this category that seriously impairs the worker/leaves them unable to work shall be eligible for this act.)

Logged
Former Senator Haslam2020
Haslam2020
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,345
United States


« Reply #3 on: June 26, 2018, 07:55:53 AM »

Any concerns or comments?
Logged
Former Senator Haslam2020
Haslam2020
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,345
United States


« Reply #4 on: June 26, 2018, 11:03:18 PM »

Could the government give businesses a subsidy which is attached on those businesses covering the cost? If so, what would be the cost and how do we think this should be funded?

Yeah, I’m definitely not opposed to that. As we’re all aware, some businesses can’t cover this by themselves, so I’m not opposed to it helping being funded from current unemployment or subsidy programs. However, I’m leaning more towards creating a new subsidy.

Also, what will be the cost to businesses?

This’ll sound a bit off, but for example say... a man who work a desk job, makes 50,000 dollars a year, he’s just been diagnosed with cancer. I believe he should be entitled to his pay while on medical leave to combat the disease. However, I’m probably going to amend the bill yet again to include the new subsidy, and where funding can come from.
Logged
Former Senator Haslam2020
Haslam2020
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,345
United States


« Reply #5 on: June 26, 2018, 11:06:46 PM »

Also for the subsidy would it be best to do for all businesses or restrict for only small businesses?

Small. Big chains and corporations can pay the salaries of people who were already supposed to be paid. I believe a certain amount of revenue earned per year should dictate what classifies  as “small” in the bill. I’m open to suggestions.
Logged
Former Senator Haslam2020
Haslam2020
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,345
United States


« Reply #6 on: July 02, 2018, 06:49:26 PM »

An amendment will come within the next few days!
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.023 seconds with 12 queries.