Editor’s note: This commentary is by Michele Kropp, who is COO/CMO of Gringo Kitchens in Manchester.
[Y]esterday, I got up at the crack of dawn so I could have the privilege of having my voice heard in support of paid sick days legislation, H.187.
I went into the committee room armed with pretty awesome statistics. For example, our manufacturing company, Gringo Kitchens, employees seven people. Of those seven, only one used all the earned sick pay – 56 hours. He lost a parent and had to take care of family. On the other extreme, another employee used only eight hours. Sick pay cost us a total of $3,700 in 2014 and we were not overcome by employees taking sick days just because they could. We care for our employees and want to be able to provide the best we can. In return, we get loyalty, increased production, high morale and require less contribution from the state to care for individuals.
As I was driving up to Montpelier, I was trying to frame my words, as I am not the best orator in the world. I started to realize that the basis for debate seems to revolve around nothing more than money. What about the people? If I can’t keep people gainfully employed, there is no one to make the products we produce. No one to cook or serve the food we sell. If employees are coming in sick, what’s to prevent them from infecting the food? What’s to keep them from getting more employees sick? Or getting guests sick? All of a sudden, I have more people out, less productivity and potential product that might get someone sick. Thirty-seven hundred dollars is much less than the amount all of that would cost. It also costs much less than it would to constantly replace and train new employees.
As I was sitting in the meeting waiting for my turn to testify, I listened to the Lake Champlain Chamber of Commerce forward the following arguments. The Chamber’s lobbyist argued that employers want to be able to be flexible and offer their employees the right mix of benefits for them, that many small companies have employees that prefer a 401(k) plan over sick pay and companies can only afford to do one or the other, that the state of Vermont is comprised of many small businesses feeling financial pressures, and that the minimum wage increase was a great step so now we should allow employers to settle in and we should not burden them further so that they can continue to keep all of their employees in jobs.
Heck, it sounded as if there were tons of employers offering a smorgasbord of benefit options to their employees! Well, maybe we live in a different world in southern Vermont than in the Burlington area, but I don’t know of many, if any restaurants offering 401(k)s to their kitchen staff or servers. What about the larger employers like the ski resorts? If you’re a seasonal worker (the case with so many in Southern Vermont – they go from the mountain in the winter to down the mountain in the summer), you get sick, you don’t get paid. No vacations, no sick pay, definitely no 401(k) plan and even worse, they continue to fight even paying unemployment. Further, if I asked an employee that is making just over minimum wage – say $10-$11 per hour – which would you rather have, a 401(k) or sick pay, I believe 100 percent would choose sick pay. Seriously, what person trying to live on $10 an hour can afford to contribute to a 401(k)? They are just trying to afford heat, gas to get to work, child care. They can’t afford a sick day. They can’t afford to take care of a sick child or a dying parent. That one day could mean the difference between having rent or not.
Passing the minimum wage was a good step for working Vermonters. According to the state of Vermont Joint Fiscal Office, the average living wage for a single person with employer assisted health care is $16.37 an hour. Minimum wage was raised to $9.15 per hour, 56 percent lower than living wage! As the ninth highest state for cost of living (Federal Cost of Living Index put out by the Bureau of Statistics), the minimum wage is still lower than at least two other states with a lower cost of living. And, in fact, all the states with no minimum wage have amongst the highest unemployment rates. Vermont has one of the lowest unemployment rates (3.9 percent) and one of the higher minimum wages.
Well, maybe we live in a different world in southern Vermont than in the Burlington area, but I don’t know of many, if any restaurants offering 401(k)s to their kitchen staff or servers.
So, when we talk about pressures on the small businesses, when do we talk about pressures on the individual? The state of Vermont ultimately has to take care of an individual when they get sick and don’t have health care, when they can’t afford food or heat. When do we realize that the real result of removing the pressures from the small businesses is code for allowing what amounts to mini Walmarts that do the bare minimum, knowing that the struggling employees can go the state for help? Job creators can also be welfare creators.
That, in turn means higher taxes for all of us. It means less revenue since people can afford less.
It also means that fewer people can afford to live here so businesses have less options when hiring employees. We can’t attract business to Vermont without a healthy workforce.
We are supposed to be a state with a better way of life, a healthier lifestyle. This should be inclusive of all Vermont’s citizens, not just the rich. And we can’t grow businesses and wealth on the backs of those that can’t afford to enjoy all that Vermont is.
Out of 22 wealthy countries, the U.S. is the ONLY country that does not offer sick pay to its employees. Statistics prove it out — not offering sick pay or even a minimum wage does NOT help unemployment.
I strongly urge all those legislators sitting on the fence to, once again, show that Vermont is in the forefront of doing what is right and to vote for H.187, a bill which provides access to paid sick days for all Vermonters.
