A House bill that would introduce paid time off is not sitting well with everyone in Vermont’s business community.
H.187, introduced last week, proposes to establish three days of paid leave for the next two years, eventually increasing to five days of leave.
The VRGA letter will be sent to members of House this week, Harrison said.
In the note, the association argues that employers should decide the benefits and paid leave policies of their workplaces based on their specific needs.
“As a one-size-fits-all approach, H.187 and any similar legislation would inevitably impose unwarranted expenses increasing the cost of employing Vermonters, and it would represent an inappropriate intrusion by government into employer decisions in managing their own businesses,” the letter says.
The association suggests that instead of trying “to impose an unfunded and inflexible mandate from Montpelier,” pro-leave advocates work with employers to educate them about earned leave policies and models.
“We have consistently heard from the vast majority of employers across sectors and across the state, both those with and those without paid leave policies, that they fundamentally oppose such proposals,” the association writes in the letter.
Testimony on the House bill has not yet begun.
However, lawmakers in the Senate have already heard testimony on a similar bill proposed by Sen. Philip Baruth, D-Chittenden, earlier in the session
In contrast to the somewhat scaled back House bill, S.15 proposes seven days, or 56 hours, of paid leave.
One of the witnesses testifying in late January before the Senate Committee on Economic Development, Housing and Affairs, Marc Sherman, the owner of the Stowe Mercantile & Boutique on Main Street in Stowe, is also the vice-chair of government relations for VRGA.
“I offer the most extensive compensation and benefits that I possibly can to my staff,” Sherman testified to lawmakers last month. “I believe most Vermont employers do as well.”
Sherman told the committee that his business already has a paid leave policy — after six months on the job, full-time employees get 40 hours of paid leave annually.
He told lawmakers that at his business, annual pay exceeds $27,000, and his employees receive $300 a month in health insurance contribution.
The mandatory paid time off bill proposed in the Senate, where he testified, Sherman said, would cost his business $5,519, he estimated.
“For my business I need $12,000 of new sales to cover this expense,” Sherman testified.
Of the association’s opposition to the bill, Sherman stated, “VRGA supports individual employers retaining the flexibility to offer the most extensive affordable benefits to meet the individual needs of their employees while maintaining a financially sound business.”
He outlined the major concerns the association has with the bill, including economic stresses on the retail sector and declining demographics, and said, “many businesses cannot afford any additional expenses at this time.”
In order to help retailers recover from the economic toll of the recession, VRGA is asking lawmakers to put a two-year moratorium on new taxes, fees and employer mandates.
The bills before the House and Senate both call for hours to be accrued for part-time workers as well as full-time workers, with advocates saying many part-time workers in Vermont are juggling multiple part-time jobs and are family breadwinners.
Advocates for the passage of the paid time off bill, including a coalition of organizations, the Vermont Earned Sick Days Campaign, working to pass the legislation, say that some 60,000 workers in Vermont do not have access to paid time off.
H.187, sponsored by Rep. Tristan Toleno, D-Brattleboro, represents the most significant compromise in the decade-long campaign to secure paid leave for employees who don’t have that benefit through their employer, advocates for the hoped-for law said last week.
Referred to as the “Healthy Workplaces Bill,” introduced Thursday, it balances the interests between workers’ rights groups and the business community.
Toleno’s bill proposes that employees be given a minimum of three days off a year for their own or a family member’s illness or health needs. The days could also be used in cases of sexual or domestic violence or stalking.
If passed, the legislation would establish a standard of three days of paid time off for the first two years it is in effect. That would step up to five days paid leave as of July 2017.
If Vermont passes the bill, it would become the fourth state in the nation, after California, Connecticut and Massachusetts, to enact such legislation.
For his part, Toleno, sponsor of the House bill, said Friday he believes the bill does address the concerns brought in by the business community last year.
Also against the bill being law is the Vermont Chamber of Commerce.
Kendal Melvin, government affairs specialist for the state chamber organization said Monday, “Recently, the picture has been painted that H.187 and S.15 are compromises between the business community and proponents of the bill.”
“However, the Vermont Chamber of Commerce and our members remain in strong opposition to mandating paid earned time off. Vermont employers currently offer paid time and/or paid sick leave policies at their own discretion and should be able to continue to do so,” Melvin said. “They best understand the benefit preferences of their employees and have a long history of maintaining the flexibility needed to meet their employees’ unique needs and situations.”
Melvin said, “As Vermont employers emerge from a devastating recession, they are burdened with the cumulative impact of a recently raised minimum wage, increases in government imposed fees, increases in unemployment insurance payments, rising property taxes, the pressure to create more jobs for Vermonters and now a proposed 0.7% payroll tax and mandated paid earned time off.”
